Dreadful Steelers defense ‘unacceptable’ in loss to Chiefs |

Dreadful Steelers defense ‘unacceptable’ in loss to Chiefs

Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Chiefs receiver Tyreek Hill scores past the Steelers’ Sean Davis and Artie Burns during the fourth quarter Sunday, Sept. 16, 2018, at Heinz Field.
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce celebrates a first down during the third quarter against the Steelers Sunday, Sept. 16, 2018, at Heinz Field.

In what was a quiet and somber Heinz Field locker room, the Pittsburgh Steelers defensive player who has been in the NFL the longest put his arm around the team’s defensive contributor who has been around the least.

Cornerback Joe Haden was one part offering words of encouragement, one part discussing technique and one part offering tips on improving communication with teammates in his chat with rookie safety Terrell Edmunds.

In a nutshell, that short conversation touched on everything that contributed to what went wrong in the Steelers defense’s dreadful showing during a 42-37 loss to the Kansas City Chiefs on Sunday.

• The absence of Haden, the team’s best cornerback, hurt against what is one of the NFL’s best passing offenses

• Apparent communication issues couldn’t have helped, either, against a team that likes to move quickly

• The secondary allowed more touchdown passes (six) than incompletions (five); no defensive back recorded a statistical pass-defense, let alone an interception

“To keep asking that out of our offense, every single time to go the length of the field, is unacceptable,” defensive captain Cameron Heyward said. “And I just look forward to fixing that.”

The outcomes say the Steelers (0-1-1) are winless through two games this season; the lack of defensive production says the team has allowed an average of 38 points in the four meaningful home games it has played since the December 2017 spinal injury to linebacker Ryan Shazier.

On Sunday, the Steelers allowed touchdown drives on each of the first three drives of each half. It allowed a quarterback who was making his third career start, Patrick Mahomes, to carry a perfect passer rating throughout most of the afternoon. (He would finish with an almost-perfect 154.8 after going 23 for 28 for 326 yards).

“I don’t want to give him too much credit, when we don’t play well,” safety Sean Davis said. “I’m not gonna hate on him; just I can’t really give an honest assessment (of Mahomes) when we didn’t play (our best) against him.”

The only plays the defense made were in the fourth quarter: a safety on a Kansas City run from its own 1 and a forced fumble by the front seven (forced by end Heyward and recovered by linebacker Anthony Chickillo) on a short pass.

“(Mahomes) is a good player,” Edmunds said, “but we just didn’t make the plays we were supposed to make.”

While Cameron Sutton started in place of Haden at left cornerback, he was replaced in that role by Coty Sensabaugh before the end of a first quarter. On at least one of the plays Sutton was beaten, though, the mistake was as much mental as it was physical.

It wasn’t the only apparent mental gaffe from the secondary. Multiple times, players were sprinting onto the field and just getting into position as the ball was being snapped. Other times, a 12 th man was running off the field just in time to avoid a flag.

Part of the confusion could be attributed to the abundance of new packages the Steelers are trying to assimilate into their defensive scheme. Mahomes said the Chiefs were aware the Steelers were showing lots of looks.

“We’ve just got to make more plays, and we’ve got to play better,” linebacker Vince Williams said. “That’s really it.”

Chris Adamski is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chris at [email protected] or
via Twitter @C_AdamskiTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.