Should the Steelers even have a training camp?

The Pittsburgh Steelers training camp is a hallowed and time honored tradition of sports lore. Even though the angry, hot summer sun beats down on the rolling hills of Latrobe, for a few weeks, it still populates with faithful exuberance that such countrysides of bucolic USA rarely see. From camp arrivals, to “Seven Shots,” to ‘Friday Night Lights’, tremendous anticipation of a successful season begins to build among black and gold fans. This is assured almost regardless of the current perception of the team’s realistic chances that their final game will be played a half of a year in the future in the bitter cold of early February.

Fair warning- because the above truths are found to be self evident by any and all residents of Western Pennsylvania as well as all Steeler fans far and wide, this article is nothing short of sacrilegious. That’s okay. Tar and feathering in the comment section below is a tradition of its own!

When the season was expanded to 17 games just 4 years ago, the players union and most of the players initial statements were vehemently against it from the perspective of player safety. At the time, they probably unwisely thought they had a fair shot of derailing it. The truth is the billions of dollars the NFL and the team owners possess as well as the ever growing popularity of American Football really can’t be challenged for long. The 17 game reality settled in pretty quick. In exchange, players negotiated for both better financial remuneration, and the pre-season was shortened to just three games. In addition, there was a heightened emphasis on player conditioning and player safety vs physical contact during training camp as a part of the new CBA.

It’s a mere 4 years later and the current CBA doesn’t expire until 2031, yet several recent interviews and national coverage articles have highlighted the momentum to amend the current CBA and to, once again, expand the season to 18 games as soon as next year. This time around, the tone from the players has been markedly different. It seems most have accepted that there’s little that can be done to thwart the implementation of this proposal, and their focus is now on further curbing the off season program. Our own QB, Aaron Rodgers (then a member of the Jets), said last year “There are many schools of thought on how a training camp should be run.” He then opined on how a more intense camp experience can get a team better ready to compete but that the more “callus” and “grinding” aspects can have the opposite effect, too. While he seemed to personally lean into the more challenging aspects of camp, he acknowledged the biggest thing to establish is camaraderie and chemistry more so than physicality.  Many other players have expressed various versions of the same sentiments.

It’s important to note most NFL players have been playing the game of football since they were in elementary school, meaning a veteran of 7 or 8 seasons has been learning the game and already dealing with a portion of its physical demands for the last two decades of their lives. It didn’t ‘spring up’ for them when they first signed an NFL contract or even when they committed to college. And, during the offseason, it’s easy to track virtually every NFL player no matter where they were drafted (or undrafted) or what team they play for professionally training somewhere. This is such a concrete truth that when a young player without solid footing does come to camp out of shape, they are often quickly cut from the team. And, when a veteran does the same, it’s big news. This all points to both the known consequences of not coming in already physically prepared- as well as the rarity of it among today’s players.

But these recent interviews got me thinking. Actually, truth be told, it’s something I’ve been thinking about for a long while- long before the current CBA and season expansion/ adjustments were ever made- and it forces me to put fingers to cyber paper and place my thoughts out there for all to see (and possibly scoffingly dismiss).

So, here’s my question for you…

How necessary is/are training camp/ pre-season games really? How truly beneficial is it all from an NFL product and fan perspective? In fact, does the current (and traditional) format actually do more harm than good overall?

I know. Like I said…sacrilegious.  But, I hope, it’s at least a well thought out heresy. In that effort, my questioning of training camp/ pre-seasons can be broken down into three main concerns:

1. Respectable Players’ Claims About Team Stamina:

My contemplation actually began when watching NFL films, “America’s Game” retrospective on the Steelers Superbowl winning season in 2008. (I told you I’ve been thinking about this for a while.) Anyway, Troy Polamalu spoke about Mike Tomlin’s first year as coach of the Steelers (the previous season), claiming he made it a point to define his style apart from Bill Cowher’s. He did this by running a very tough, physical camp that made no differentiation between aging vets and rookies. While Troy spoke well of Tomlin, (I mean, he had to as it was a film celebrating their championship) he, nevertheless, implied that it didn’t produce the desired results in their bodies over the course of their season. He then praised Tomlin for learning and adjusting/ lightening the load in his next off season regimen and cited that as a contributing factor to their winning it all in 2008. I always remembered thinking Polamalu was “understating” his frustration with what took place the first year in order to make his point more pleasantly. This came back to mind for me when, earlier this year on his podcast, Bryant McFadden stated more bluntly that the Steelers simply ran out of gas by the end of that 2007 season due to being drilled so hard by Tomlin for so many months, especially in training camp. Though the Steelers made several errors in their NFC Championship loss that year to Tom Brady and the Patriots, it’s an interesting and somewhat depressing revisionist exercise to imagine how different the world could have been if the Steelers simply had more in the tank in late January. Perhaps the Steelers would, today, be the only team with 7 Superbowl wins? Maybe Bill Bellichick’s frustrations with Tom Brady would have elevated more quickly and they bust apart before “TB12” conditioning was even a thing?…thus paving the way for the Steelers to win, like, another 4 or 5 championships while an overweight and depressed Tom Brady was traded to Carolina, then Arizona, and then the Raiders  in subsequent seasons or something en route to a “journeyman” status? (All right, maybe that’s a little too far-fetched and convenient a fantasy, especially that last part about TB). But even if just the one victory in that 2007 championship game occurred, then maybe that team of the 2000’s would be considered an indisputable dynasty, having won 3 Superbowls in just 4 seasons and appearing in a fourth two seasons later. Evidently, members of the Steelers from that time believe it could have been so.

I’m also not convinced this is a past and done issue, either. Famous former Sports Illustrated reporter, Peter King, retired just 5 years ago. One of his most consistent observations of his annual NFL training camp tours regarding the Steelers workouts was how physical and intense they were compared to all the others he would visit. That statement caused me to wonder if Tomlin’s older habits crept back in over time- perhaps as soon as enough of the players who were there before he took over had moved on. We know he compensated (maybe over compensated) by giving star, veteran players days off. But when outside reporters make statements like Peter King did, I wonder if that was just Tomlin’s way of keeping the comparable Polamalus and Mcfadddens of the world (stars and productive vets) happy while he ratcheted up the overall physical intensity back to his liking.

Think about it. What if the consistent late season collapses and blowout playoff losses the team has endured are about more than schedules and X’s and O’s? Perhaps, the modern Steelers players are no different than their predecessors from 2007- they’re simply exhausted. Honestly, the collapses have been so utterly complete that I just can’t drop that possibility. Most other explanations are complex and dependent on all sorts of mixtures of circumstances in order to explain the long playoff win drought. But, often the simplest explanations are the most truthful.

Therefore- Tomlin might be to blame for some of this reality- at least in Pittsburgh’s specific instance. But if all coaches didn’t have as long an off season program available, maybe teams would be better matched as the season wears on. It could be a change that actually protects some coaches from their own tendencies.

2. Injuries.

Nothing destroys fan enthusiasm like injuries. That’s because nothing derails seasons like injuries to key players. The longer the off season program, the greater the chance of injuries occurring before any meaningful snaps are played.

Last year we saw Russell Wilson sidelined right at the beginning of camp (pushing a sled no less but let’s stop beating the camp intensity horse). And, sure, the debate of Fields/ Wilson raged on even after the switch was made due to Field’s 4-2 start. Personally, I still think Wilson was a better prepared qb last year, and I would bet without reservation that, had he been in the games, the Steelers would still have won the same 4 and likely could have beaten the Colts and almost certainly would have beaten the Cowboys, too. The Steelers were pleasantly elated at how Fields did. But they were probably also a bit lucky their season wasn’t wrecked when their starting QB went down.

Yes- injuries are part of the game and season ending/ altering injuries can happen at any time and there is little data available to directly correlate between injury likelihood and pre-season length. But those of the season ending variety are particularly demoralizing for a fan when they happen in camp, as was the case with Calvin Austin two years ago and Roman Wilson last season, and numbers of players each year in Pittsburgh and throughout the league.

Notably, the Kansas City Chiefs have invented and implemented the “10-10-10” rule for their training camps, whereby they run just ten offensive plays, followed by ten defensive plays, followed by 10 Special Team focused minutes. Their stated reasons for doing so are to reduce the aforementioned fatigue as well as camp/ practice injuries. Yes, they have an all-world QB. But, he doesn’t play defense. And despite the substantially lighter practice regimen, the whole team doesn’t look lost or unprepared when the season begins. In fact, last year the Chiefs won 15 games, came closer to pulling off the first ever 3-peat than any team ever has, and have been to the Superbowl 4 of the last 5 seasons. Several teams have great qb’s, but if they have a deep playoff run again this year, the Chiefs may simply be the exception that proves the rule regarding the value of a lighter practice schedule and, by extension, the lack of reckoning a potentially shorter pre-season and camp would produce.

3. Fan Product

The truth is, the NFL is messy at the beginning of the regular season no matter how long training camps and pre-seasons are. According to ESPN, the average turnover rate over the first few weeks of an NFL season fluctuates between two and three times as frequent as at the end of the season. If the pre-season is shortened to two games and camps were merely a week or two more, yes, NFL offenses may be even more ‘offensive’ to the eye in September. But, I say they’d recover as they always do, and it would likely be relative to the defense also not having as much time to prep.

Chances are, to most fans, it probably wouldn’t feel very different, and we’d get to meaningful football more quickly or such games would be played much longer into our calendar years.

Objections!

Looking at the other point of view, when considering the reduction of pre-season/ shortening of camps, there are typically two categories of objections I’ve seen people raising:

1. They’re wimps.

Basically, this one clings to tradition and the overall sense that football is the most masculine of manly games. Therefore, the move to reduce the practice time and its intensity is a move toward wussy-ness. (Especially when compared to the ‘real’ football of the 70’s.)

Well, that could be true. Then again, it could also be true that NFL men are simply bigger, faster, and stronger than they were at one time. Consider this: In 1975, the average Offensive Lineman was 6ft 3 and weighed just 255 pounds. Today, they are 6 ft 5 and weigh an average of 315 lbs…That’s like half a small human heavier.

On the other side, Mean Joe Green was certainly a big guy at 6’3” and 275. But the Steelers new rookie, Derek Harmon, is 6’ 4” and 315.

And oh- lest we forget- today, the best lineman run 40 yards in around 5 seconds, sometimes less.

I don’t think they’re wimpier. I think they run faster and hit with more force today than before and yet their muscle and bone density is likely about the same (humans are humans). Therefore, it requires more energy to sustain their larger bodies, and the chance of injury is higher in today’s NFL.

2. Talent Evaluation and Game Complexity.

This one is likely the most salient argument against shortening the season, and it will certainly be what coaches will pound the table about with their owners as they prep for negotiations.

It’s simply a fact that no other sport on the planet requires as many as 22 players on the field with an additional 31 on each sideline. That’s like fielding 4 and a half professional basketball teams. The more players, the more time it takes to evaluate them, and the more time it requires to get them to understand what their role is.

It’s also true that the game of American Football is more complex and creative than any other sport. There’s just only so many plays and strategies that can be employed on a court, diamond, rink, or pitch. Football is ever evolving in alignment, strategy, and experimentation on both sides of the ball and can be almost instantly revolutionized with a novel idea or even a simple rule change. That complexity demands preparation and preparation, again, takes time.

My Worthless Conclusion:

Personally, I fret and sweat all camp and pre-season. I’ve invested hope and excitement for months envisioning what the players will bring to our beloved team, and I can’t wait until the real snaps are hiked, hopefully, with every starter in tact for at least a little while.

Now, a longer regular season does concern me in that one of the things I love most about football is the stakes in each and every game. No team can take a game off as the consequences of a single loss can disrupt a season or affect a precious playoff seeding. But that is truly a separate issue entirely.

Therefore, whether the season is lengthened to 18 games or not I, for one, am in favor of a shorter pre-season and camp for all NFL teams and believe it would, on balance, have a more positive impact than negative on the game.

So, what say you? Would you be ok with a shorter pre-season and, potentially, the end of the Latrobe camp experience? Do you agree that it would actually, overall, protect and even enhance the game we love? 

Or is it time to end VinnySteel’s short lived sports writing career and send me off to an ignominious island inhabited exclusively with Tom Brady fans for ever suggesting as much? 

I look forward to your thoughts!