Steelers' Starks has big job against Bengals
The Steelers' Max Starks will try to do what two left tackles before him could not: slow down Bengals defensive end Antwan Odom.
Odom has an astounding seven sacks through two games, which is five more than the Steelers have as a team. The 6-foot-5, 280-pounder sacked Aaron Rodgers five times Sunday in the Bengals' 31-24 upset of the Packers in Green Bay.
"He's on my side, so it's going to be a very fun game for me," Starks said Monday. "Odom's a guy, he has speed, but he likes to be inside most of the time. For me, it's going to be about being stout. He wants to pick you apart, get you with his power and use his quickness more so than using his speed upfield."
Odom's career-high in sacks is eight, which he had in 2007 with the Tennessee Titans.
• The Steelers had several costly defensive penalties in their 17-14 loss to the Chicago Bears. One, a roughing the passer call on outside linebacker James Harrison, came after punter Daniel Sepulveda had pinned the Bears inside their 5-yard line. Another, a holding call on inside linebacker Lawrence Timmons, gave the Bears a first down after quarterback Jay Cutler had thrown an incomplete pass on third down. The Bears went on to score a game-tying touchdown at the end of the first half.
"When James was rushing, the fullback still had him and the fullback kind of turned him into the quarterback, which got him," outside linebacker LaMarr Woodley said after the Steelers reviewed film of the game. "The other one, Timmons was coming off the line and might have touched the guy a little bit and the guy fell ... that's things we can't control."
85.6 — Ben Roethlisberger's passer rating through two games.
93.4 — Opposing quarterbacks' combined passer rating in two games against the Steelers.
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.