Seahawks offensive lineman: Steelers passrushers ‘started to get tired and wear down’ |

Seahawks offensive lineman: Steelers passrushers ‘started to get tired and wear down’

Chris Adamski
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Steelers linebacker T.J. Watt sacks Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson in the first quarter Sunday, Sept. 15, 2019 at Heinz Field. All four of the Steelers’ sacks Sunday came during the first half.

The way Sunday’s game against the Seattle Seahawks started, the Pittsburgh Steelers looked every bit the unit that tied for the NFL lead in sacks last season. By the end of it, they looked anything but.

At least one Seahawks player had a theory to explain why.

“You could feel them kind of start to get tired and wear down,” Seattle left tackle Duane Brown said, “and that helped us out in the second half.”

The Steelers brought down Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson on three of his first seven and four of his first 15 dropbacks. But they barely touched him after that, and the Seahawks used a quick passing game to take a second-half lead en route to a 28-26 win.

“We just took over,” Brown said. “They got tired. They’ve got the big guys over there. It’s hot out there.”

Gametime temperature was 82 degrees. But it didn’t seem to affect the Seahawks as much.

The Steelers had 52 sacks last season. No NFL team had more. They only had one during a season-opening loss to the New England Patriots. Stephon Tuitt had 2½ of their four Sunday, but all came during the first half.

“We had put Russ really in command of the rhythm of the game, and all the quick stuff he did a really great job on,” Seahawks coach Pete Carroll said.

“I thought Russ’s rhythm really picked up, and the sacks went away in the second half.”

Hey, Steelers Nation, get the latest news about the Pittsburgh Steelers here.

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

Categories: Sports | Steelers
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.