Steelers notebook: Season-opening rushing yards among worst in team annals
• The Steelers' 32 yards rushing against the Titans were their second fewest in a season opener since 1945. They bounced back after gaining only 30 yards during a 16-0 loss to the Ravens in 2000 by running for 170 yards against the Browns — 133 by Jerome Bettis.
• According to Pro Football Focus, Ben Roethlisberger targeted Emmanuel Sanders 12 times, or twice as many as any other receiver in the game. Sanders made seven catches for 57 yards.
• Cornerback William Gay, who took over after Cortez Allen injured an ankle, allowed only one catch on five passes thrown his way.
• The Steelers needed only 3 seconds to start the season with a 2-0 lead, but the safety caused by Darius Reynaud's kneel-down wasn't the fastest score to open an NFL game. The Cowboys scored in 3 seconds on an onside attempt in 2003.
• Defensive captain Brett Keisel said the Steelers needed a greater sense of urgency against the Titans. Troy Polamalu said if Keisel said it, it must be true. But Ryan Clark wasn't so sure. “Sometimes when they talk about the lack of intensity, it sounds like a lack of effort,” he said. “I don't think we lacked effort, we lacked execution.”
• The Steelers dropped their season opener nine times in the past 20 years, but recovered to win their next game six times — including each of the past two seasons. They have won seven of their past eight Monday night games.
• New Steelers kicker Shayne Graham has been with 14 teams, including training camp trials, and all four AFC North teams.
— Alan Robinson
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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 â 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.