Rooney tiptoes around Arians dismissal in interview

Rooney tiptoes around Arians dismissal in interview
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


Steelers president Art Rooney II offered a slightly different version about Bruce Arians' departure than the official announcement by the team last week that the offensive coordinator had retired.

In a video interview on the team's website, Steelers.com, Rooney answers a question about reports and comments made by Arians that he retired only after Rooney refused to renew his contract. The Post-Gazette reported that coach Mike Tomlin told Arians he wanted him back and that Arians wanted to return.

"I think the questions of how we got here are not really relevant," Rooney said. "Mike has begun the search for our next offensive coordinator and he'll do a good job finding the right person. We'll go through the process and interview the right candidates. We're looking to improve on offense and have sommebody possibly to be in place for a number of years.

"Bruce had talked about retirement for a few years now. I think it was time for a change, and we're looking forward to moving on."



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12025/1205966-100.stm?cmpid=steelers.xml#ixzz1kVrI7zEa

Cliff's notes, AR2 is full of it

supytalpeht wrote:

Cliff's notes, AR2 is full of it

Bruce! Holy shit when did you become a member??

supytalpeht wrote:

Cliff's notes, AR2 is full of it

Time to bury the Arians talk. Like Whiz before him they both are gone just under different circumstances. We can talk fondly of him in the years to come , or not.

riccosuavez wrote:

Time to bury the Arians talk. Like Whiz before him they both are gone just under different circumstances. We can talk fondly of him in the years to come , or not.

Steelers owner Rooney: Arians' instability prompted change
By Mark Kaboly, PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Thursday, January 26, 2012


Alluding to long-term stability, Steelers president Art Rooney II said, "I think it was time for a change" when talking about the sudden departure of offensive coordinator Bruce Arians.

In an interview on the team's website Wednesday, Rooney gave at least one reason why Arians won't be back next year — instability.

"Bruce talked about retiring for a number of years now," Rooney said. "We are looking to improve on offense and to have somebody in place for a number of years. We are looking forward to moving on."

Arians said earlier in the week that he had no choice but to retire after the team did not offer him a contract, and that he had been contacted already by a number of teams about coaching next year.

That was stark contrast to late last week when the Steelers sent out a news release saying that Arians retired after five years with the team as the offensive coordinator that resulted in two Super Bowl appearances.

The Steelers' offense finished 12th in total offense (372.3 yards per game) and 21st in points per game (20.3) last year.



Read more: Steelers owner Rooney: Arians' instability prompted change - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_778410.html#ixzz1kYPBkmEe

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Does the highlighted phrase even make sense? If he was contacted by a "number of teams" already about possible coaching jobs, then why did he have "no choice but to retire"?

Translation, BA is full of it.

Buddha Bus wrote:

Does the highlighted phrase even make sense? If he was contacted by a "number of teams" already about possible coaching jobs, then why did he have "no choice but to retire"?

Cliff notes, BA is full of it.

Don't forget that he "applied" for every head coaching vacancy last year and didn't get a single interview. And now all of a sudden a bunch of teams are interested in his services? I think BA is full of BS.

Quote :

Does the highlighted phrase even make sense? If he was contacted by a "number of teams" already about possible coaching jobs, then why did he have "no choice but to retire"?

Maybe because they didn't come until after he leaving. Or do you just enjoy acting like arizona?

doesn't the Cardinals need a OC?

supytalpeht wrote:

Or do you just enjoy acting like arizona?

Not sure exactly what "acting like Arizona" means, but if he's had these offers, then why say you are retired? Then take one of the positions. For that matter, why "retire" at all if you wanted to continue coaching? Why wouldn't you wait a little while to see if the offers do come in? Teams may not have been offering him a job if they thought he was coming back to the Steelers, which is exactly what Arians and Tomlin said shortly after the season until Rooney stepped in. After the "retirement" or firing (however you want to view it), wouldn't you assume that there would be more possibility of a forthcoming offer since you are now unquestionably available? It sounds just as much like BS as the shit AR2 is peddling, if not more.

Buddha Bus wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

Or do you just enjoy acting like arizona?

Not sure exactly what "acting like Arizona" means, but if he's had these offers, then why say you are retired? Then take one of the positions. For that matter, why "retire" at all if you wanted to continue coaching? Why wouldn't you wait a little while to see if the offers do come in? Teams may not have been offering him a job if they thought he was coming back to the Steelers, which is exactly what Arians and Tomlin said shortly after the season until Rooney stepped in. After the "retirement" or firing (however you want to view it), wouldn't you assume that there would be more possibility of a forthcoming offer since you are now unquestionably available? It sounds just as much like BS as the shit AR2 is peddling, if not more.

He gives or is forced to give a retirement/resignation letter and after it's announced he's contacted. How is that so hard to understand? He also said that only one was intriguing or interesting to him. It's entirely possible that he didn't want to relocate, have to deal with learning new personalities, there are a myriad of reasons. Why is it that everything has to be some freaking conspiracy. Nevermind I know the answer to that it's the mantra of the firearians crowd.

supytalpeht wrote:

Buddha Bus wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

Or do you just enjoy acting like arizona?

Not sure exactly what "acting like Arizona" means, but if he's had these offers, then why say you are retired? Then take one of the positions. For that matter, why "retire" at all if you wanted to continue coaching? Why wouldn't you wait a little while to see if the offers do come in? Teams may not have been offering him a job if they thought he was coming back to the Steelers, which is exactly what Arians and Tomlin said shortly after the season until Rooney stepped in. After the "retirement" or firing (however you want to view it), wouldn't you assume that there would be more possibility of a forthcoming offer since you are now unquestionably available? It sounds just as much like BS as the shit AR2 is peddling, if not more.

He gives or is forced to give a retirement/resignation letter and after it's announced he's contacted. How is that so hard to understand? He also said that only one was intriguing or interesting to him. It's entirely possible that he didn't want to relocate, have to deal with learning new personalities, there are a myriad of reasons. Why is it that everything has to be some freaking conspiracy.

Was he forced at gunpoint? He didn't HAVE to "retire". He could have chosen to just not be renewed and let it be known he was available or just said he didn't want to return for another year with Pittsburgh, since his contract was up, and wanted to explore other opportunities. Unless his life was threatened, he can't be "forced" into anything.

If he didn't want to do any of the things you claim may have been a reason for not exploring those other options, that's fine. Accept that your contract wasn't renewed and bow out gracefully. No need to try to stir up controversy in the media because you have sour grapes that the team decided to go in a different direction.

And what "conspiracy" are you talking about? I haven't alluded one bit about anything like that. Just that that specific statement smells of bullshit, you know.... just like you pointed out with AR2?

When you're contract isn't renewed you have one of two choices submit a retirement/resignation letter or be fired. He did the professiional thing and submitted a letter to his boss and his boss issued a statement. I would venture to guess that if AR2 hadn't lied through his teeth then we never would have heard another word of it. But, instead we have a HC coach stating he wants Arians back, Arians stating he wants to return, and then AR2 lying about it being Tomlin's decision and then forcing him to retire or firing him which ever you prefer.

supytalpeht wrote:

When you're contract isn't renewed you have one of two choices submit a retirement/resignation letter or be fired. He did the professiional thing and submitted a letter to his boss and his boss issued a statement. I would venture to guess that if AR2 hadn't lied through his teeth then we never would have heard another word of it. But, instead we have a HC coach stating he wants Arians back, Arians stating he wants to return, and then AR2 lying about it being Tomlin's decision and then forcing him to retire or firing him which ever you prefer.

I re-read the article and I don't see a "lie". Please enlighten me as to where exactly he lied. It seems he just wanted to be classy about it and not get into specifically how it was handled. Bruce was the one who chose that route.

As far as him having to submit papers, you may be right. I was under the impression that his contract was only a one-year deal signed last season and it was up. Why would someone have to submit retirement papers if the team decided to go in a different direction? I may not fully understand that aspect, but I would have just figured they'd say "we are going a different route and thanks for the service" and Bruce is free to move on. I can see Bruce getting upset at not being renewed and the Rooneys giving him the option of saving face if he didn't want another coaching job elsewhere and allowing him to "retire". That is a classy move in my eyes. I'm sorry if I don't fully understand the process of how that all works though.

Oh, and since you want to bring up "mantras", the Arians Apologist crowd goes on and on about "players not executing" and "Ben's stupidity or bad decisions" which seems to imply that possibly these players need to go instead. Since Bruce has had 5 years to rein this stuff in or correct it, and hasn't, I have a question. Exactly how many players' heads on pikes out in front of Heinz Field would it take before accepting the fact that you could possibly be wrong?

Arians has been running the offensive show for long enough to have corrected this stuff by now or shown progress, but I just don't see it and apparently, neither do the Rooneys. We can't fire the whole damned offense, but we can at least try to change the leadership to see if it helps. It's cheaper and easier than throwing the whole unit to the wolves and starting over. I would be inclined to have given that mode of thought a little bit of credence if we had a proven OC with a track record of consistent offense that he brought to the team, but Arians didn't have that type of pedigree and hasn't done enough to dispel the notion that he CAN be that guy. If I'm wrong about his previous track record before coming here, fill me in.

Buddha Bus wrote:

Oh, and since you want to bring up "mantras", the Arians Apologist crowd goes on and on about "players not executing" and "Ben's stupidity or bad decisions" which seems to imply that possibly these players need to go instead. Since Bruce has had 5 years to rein this stuff in or correct it, and hasn't, I have a question. Exactly how many players' heads on pikes out in front of Heinz Field would it take before accepting the fact that you could possibly be wrong?

Arians has been running the offensive show for long enough to have corrected this stuff by now or shown progress, but I just don't see it and apparently, neither do the Rooneys. We can't fire the whole damned offense, but we can at least try to change the leadership to see if it helps. It's cheaper and easier than throwing the whole unit to the wolves and starting over. I would be inclined to have given that mode of thought a little bit of credence if we had a proven OC with a track record of consistent offense that he brought to the team, but Arians didn't have that type of pedigree and hasn't done enough to dispel the notion that he CAN be that guy. If I'm wrong about his previous track record before coming here, fill me in.

2 Superbowls, 2 AFC Championships, back to back 12-4 records, a qb passing for 4,000 yards for multiple seasons, x number of wr's with 1,000 yard seasons is a pretty damn good track record. Particularly when you take into account that the Steelers gave him the task of converting from a run oriented offense to a pass oriented offense and did so with an offensive line in total freaking shambles. People love to point out our 21st in points scored, but ignored how well we did after solidifying left tackle. We were top five in the league in rz and points scored until Ben's injury. With all the issues on our line our RB's still had their highest per carry average in 10 years. But, you're right Arians sucks. Weren't you one of the people that said you don't care if we lose as long as Arians is gone?

supytalpeht wrote:

2 Superbowls, 2 AFC Championships, back to back 12-4 records, a qb passing for 4,000 yards for multiple seasons, x number of wr's with 1,000 yard seasons is a pretty damn good track record. Particularly when you take into account that the Steelers gave him the task of converting from a run oriented offense to a pass oriented offense and did so with an offensive line in total freaking shambles. People love to point out our 21st in points scored, but ignored how well we did after solidifying left tackle. We were top five in the league in rz and points scored until Ben's injury. With all the issues on our line our RB's still had their highest per carry average in 10 years. But, you're right Arians sucks. Weren't you one of the people that said you don't care if we lose as long as Arians is gone?

I meant a proven track record BEFORE he came here. I could also make a case that the defense was more responsible for the championship and record accomplishments than the offense a great deal of the time. I also could say the players on offense may have did enough to win in spite of Arians, but we could be here all day arguing that. The bottom line is there was no consistency and you can't convince me that one left tackle is all that stood between Arians and god-like status. We have enough offensive weapons at our disposal to be crushing teams and in the top 10 in league offenses, no doubt, but we don't. Somebody has to be held accountable for the struggles and Bruce finally was.

I did say I wouldn't be surprised or entirely upset at the prospect of having some growing pains next season on offense as long as it meant there was a change at OC. If there is an adjustment period for a year and we have a losing season, but find an identity and move forward with a different philosophy and show progress over the course of the season, I'm all for it. I'm not saying the new OC is going to come in and work miracles, but he has to tweak things and try a different approach, something I didn't see from Arians. It was his and Ben's way or no way. I just don't want to see this offense we have continue to stagnate and tread water with what we have right now. It's a waste of talent. That's what I meant when I said I didn't care if we lost for a season as long as Arians was gone.

I know one thing, we're going to find out in the next couple of seasons whether Arians sucked or he was offensive genius martyr as you seem to think.

Buddha Bus wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

2 Superbowls, 2 AFC Championships, back to back 12-4 records, a qb passing for 4,000 yards for multiple seasons, x number of wr's with 1,000 yard seasons is a pretty damn good track record. Particularly when you take into account that the Steelers gave him the task of converting from a run oriented offense to a pass oriented offense and did so with an offensive line in total freaking shambles. People love to point out our 21st in points scored, but ignored how well we did after solidifying left tackle. We were top five in the league in rz and points scored until Ben's injury. With all the issues on our line our RB's still had their highest per carry average in 10 years. But, you're right Arians sucks. Weren't you one of the people that said you don't care if we lose as long as Arians is gone?

I meant a proven track record BEFORE he came here. I could also make a case that the defense was more responsible for the championship and record accomplishments than the offense a great deal of the time. I also could say the players on offense may have did enough to win in spite of Arians, but we could be here all day arguing that. The bottom line is there was no consistency and you can't convince me that one left tackle is all that stood between Arians and god-like status. We have enough offensive weapons at our disposal to be crushing teams and in the top 10 in league offenses, no doubt, but we don't. Somebody has to be held accountable for the struggles and Bruce finally was.

I did say I wouldn't be surprised or entirely upset at the prospect of having some growing pains next season on offense as long as it meant there was a change at OC. If there is an adjustment period for a year and we have a losing season, but find an identity and move forward with a different philosophy and show progress over the course of the season, I'm all for it. I'm not saying the new OC is going to come in and work miracles, but he has to tweak things and try a different approach, something I didn't see from Arians. It was his and Ben's way or no way. I just don't want to see this offense we have continue to stagnate and tread water with what we have right now. It's a waste of talent. That's what I meant when I said I didn't care if we lost for a season as long as Arians was gone.

I know one thing, we're going to find out in the next couple of seasons whether Arians sucked or he was offensive genius martyr as you seem to think.

No we weren't solely a left tackle away. Riddle me this. Why were we poor offensively for hte first 4 weeks of the season, in the top 5 of the league for the next 8, and then poor for the final 4? Take off your fire arians glasses, be objective and you'll see there's far more going on then Arians sucks we only ranked 21st in points scored. How can you possibly say we'll have proof in the next few years? Players will come,players will go, players will develop, players will regress... You can't sit there and say see we won without Arians he was the problem.

supytalpeht wrote:

Buddha Bus wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

2 Superbowls, 2 AFC Championships, back to back 12-4 records, a qb passing for 4,000 yards for multiple seasons, x number of wr's with 1,000 yard seasons is a pretty damn good track record. Particularly when you take into account that the Steelers gave him the task of converting from a run oriented offense to a pass oriented offense and did so with an offensive line in total freaking shambles. People love to point out our 21st in points scored, but ignored how well we did after solidifying left tackle. We were top five in the league in rz and points scored until Ben's injury. With all the issues on our line our RB's still had their highest per carry average in 10 years. But, you're right Arians sucks. Weren't you one of the people that said you don't care if we lose as long as Arians is gone?

I meant a proven track record BEFORE he came here. I could also make a case that the defense was more responsible for the championship and record accomplishments than the offense a great deal of the time. I also could say the players on offense may have did enough to win in spite of Arians, but we could be here all day arguing that. The bottom line is there was no consistency and you can't convince me that one left tackle is all that stood between Arians and god-like status. We have enough offensive weapons at our disposal to be crushing teams and in the top 10 in league offenses, no doubt, but we don't. Somebody has to be held accountable for the struggles and Bruce finally was.

I did say I wouldn't be surprised or entirely upset at the prospect of having some growing pains next season on offense as long as it meant there was a change at OC. If there is an adjustment period for a year and we have a losing season, but find an identity and move forward with a different philosophy and show progress over the course of the season, I'm all for it. I'm not saying the new OC is going to come in and work miracles, but he has to tweak things and try a different approach, something I didn't see from Arians. It was his and Ben's way or no way. I just don't want to see this offense we have continue to stagnate and tread water with what we have right now. It's a waste of talent. That's what I meant when I said I didn't care if we lost for a season as long as Arians was gone.

I know one thing, we're going to find out in the next couple of seasons whether Arians sucked or he was offensive genius martyr as you seem to think.

No we weren't solely a left tackle away. Riddle me this. Why were we poor offensively for hte first 4 weeks of the season, in the top 5 of the league for the next 8, and then poor for the final 4? Take off your fire arians glasses, be objective and you'll see there's far more going on then Arians sucks we only ranked 21st in points scored. How can you possibly say we'll have proof in the next few years? Players will come,players will go, players will develop, players will regress... You can't sit there and say see we won without Arians he was the problem.

And you can't say someone else couldn't have done better than him the past 5 years either. It's all opinion and conjecture. I just know myself, a lot of other fans, and apparently the Rooneys weren't satisfied with the results. I may not be able to say he was the problem, but I'm fairly certain (in my opinion) he wasn't going to be the solution either.

I agree that Starks coming back was good for us compared to the abortion that was Jonathan Scott, but Starks was here the previous 4 seasons when we still had some of the same offensive struggles.

Supy, I'm not sure how many times I and others have to explain to you that we don't solely blame Arians. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary all throughout this board and if YOU took off your Arians loving beer goggles long enough to actually read that blame has been spread around to Ben, Mendy, Tomlin, the lack of a true fullback, and the o-line as well, maybe you'd stop with this tunnel-vision you seem to have concerning our opinion on the matter. This accusatory BS of things that aren't being said or are being twisted into something more than they are is ridiculous.

I'll give you the advice a lot of Arians apologists liked to dish out. The FO knows better than you so deal with it. He's gone and ain't comin' back and that is reality. I'm really not sure why you insist on being so snarky about it now that it's done. We can only hope it's the right decision and move forward and only time will tell. Sit back and enjoy the ride and stop taking it so personally. Once again, this is just a discussion forum where people are free to exchange ideas and opinions and yours isn't any more right than ours just because you say so.

supytalpeht wrote:

When you're contract isn't renewed you have one of two choices submit a retirement/resignation letter or be fired.

Huh? In most cases, if a company chooses not to renew an employee's contract, but the relationship was amicable, they give the employee an option to either resign or retire (more applicable to older workers obviously). This way, the perception is that the employee left of his/her free will and wasn't "fired."

Once a contract expires, you don't have to do anything. The contract is dead, and the employee is no longer contractually obligated to do anything for the employer. If the company chooses not to renew the contract, you're already fired. By allowing an employee to resign or retire, it puts the employee in a better light as opposed to having been "fired."