Oakland Raiders at Pittsburgh Steelers: "We will unleash HELL" - Mike Tomlin

by Raymond St. Martin (Saint) on Dec 5, 2009 11:53 AM PST Comment 3 comments

When I read the words below by Mike Tomlin, I got fired up: (Mid you I had just woken up this morning and went from ZERO to 60 in about 2.2 seconds)

"We will unleash hell here in December because we have to. We won't go in a shell. We'll go into attack mode, because that's what's required." - Pittsburgh Post Gazette

I mean that is some "Ol' Skool" Football right there. It is also the sign of a Champion that will settle for NOTHING less.

LaMarr Woodley asked Mike Tomlin for an explanation and here is what he said: (From PFT)

"I asked [Tomlin] that today in practice," Woodley said, "what he meant by that. He said, 'We're not going to sit back and get hit in the mouth. We're not going to be surprised by anything. We're going to do the attacking. We're going to throw the first punch. That's what that means. We're bringing it.' He smiled about it [when I asked], but I wanted to know what did he mean by that, and he told me what it was."

Of course, my second thought was, "Why did'nt the Raiders go into Hell Unleashing Mode 4 weeks ago?".

I mean, there is a time and place for everything and I'd think that Hell Unleashing mode would be appropriate after getting punched in the face by Denver or the Jets. Then again, Tom Cable, prefers the Stay Puff Marsh Mellow Approach: (In referrence to the team's passing game against Dallas)

"When you look at it on film, it's literally a foot here, a foot there from being a heck of a throw and a great completion," Cable said Friday. "So, if you look at that, that's something that will just naturally get better and better.

"But that's an exciting part of our team, because you can see it coming now."

0 recs | Comment 3 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yeah, I'm done with his blind optimism when what I'd prefer is a Belichick like response

It seems like even when New England wins by three touchdowns, it’s the same stoic response, loaded with cliches, and it’s as if he’s disappointed about the throws being off by a foot or two on the missed opportunities.

No matter how you slice it, they’re missed opportunities, and he’s a douchebag of a coach for giving us that kind of nonsense, week in, and week out.

Will we be ready to punched in the mouth, this Sunday? Prepared for whatever the Steelers have for us? I’m still not sure how fair it is, but I’m beginning to shift more and more of the blame on the Sta-Puft Marshmallow man as time goes by. It takes a rare personality to have any success whatsoever under Davis, and it appears Tom lacks that.

It only compounds my disgust when he continues to shovel that bs after dismal attempts by the Raiders, especially one’s we probably should have at least been competitive. This league has no love for guys who think you actually have that much time to get better. It has to happen yesterday in the NFL.

by brhynno on Dec 5, 2009 6:23 PM PST reply actions

You guys need to give Cable a break

Your problem isn’t the head coach – it starts at the top, with the owner Can you imagine if Tomlin said such a thing, and didn’t have the talent on the field or the authority from the Rooneys to back it up? He would be laughed at, then laughed at even more after his team got demolished during the next game. Think of the mocking headlines after such a bold statement was followed by the expected collapse that everyone saw coming. Being the coach of the Raiders is a thankless job, and it sounds like Cable is just trying to put the best face on what he’s given to work with, which isn’t a lot.

by Weirtonite on Dec 6, 2009 8:33 AM PST reply actions

There is some merrit to that:

maybe he wanted different players and Al stuck him with Mitchell and Bey. Who knows? He sure does act like he wants everything that Al does, and maybe that is what has kept him employed?

It is all about coming together as a team. At the end of the day, the team is all we have. - T. Branch 10-14-09

by Raymond St. Martin (Saint) on Dec 6, 2009 9:32 AM PST up reply actions