Is Mike Tomlin of the Steelers a true “player coach” or not?

I overheard months of arguments between Pittsburgh Steelers supporters concerning the identity of head coach Mike Tomlin as he is, was, and still is. The phrase “player coach” was most frequently used to disparage Tomlin.

Following almost two weeks of polling, social media conversations, and interviewing, I think I’ve uncovered some important details regarding that term. While some fans view it negatively, others view it positively. Although they use it somewhat differently, even coaches disagree that the term signifies the same thing as it does to someone else.

To address the topic of whether Tomlin is a true player coach, I provide a succinct analysis of all the data I gathered from multiple sources in this editorial.

Utilize an embed code from Getty Images

How it all began

When I first heard the term, I was really interested to know what it meant in reference to Mike Tomlin. 2023 was a difficult year for the

Michael Tomlin

Consequently, a disgruntled fan base was predicted. The Super Bowl is the NFL’s greatest triumph of all time, and fans crave victories.

It seemed appropriate to go further into this subject and share it now that the team’s off-season has started so that supporters may do their own research and draw their own conclusions.

“Players coach”—what is that?

It’s a bit of a loaded question. Why? The response, however, is subjective and not based on any accurate or well-defined language. You can’t just pick a predetermined outcome by visiting a sports encyclopedia.

Three approaches are the most effective ways to dissect it. So that’s how I went about solving the issue.

1. The term’s disparaging use

According to my research, rather of supporting the players’ feelings and opinions, fans who had primarily unfavorable opinions of Tomlin implied that he was a coach with poor business acumen and little allegiance to the team by referring to him as a “players coach.” They frequently used language that implied that Tomlin was more of a “big brother” than a manager, that he lacked “control of the locker room,” that he couldn’t act like an adult, that he couldn’t hold players accountable, and that he encouraged players to act in ways that disappointed the fans (Diontae Johnson not rushing to recover a loose football, for example). They frequently said he was “too stubborn” or “fixed in his ways” to modify his plans or play to the strength of an opponent.

Their nomenclature and final conclusion were based on hypotheticals: if Tomlin wasn’t acting in a way that they thought was more fitting for a CEO, if he wasn’t transparent about how business was conducted, then he wasn’t living up to their expectations of what an NFL head coach ought to be. His goal was to become a player rather than a coach.

Most of individuals who used the disparaging form said that Tomlin ought to leave his position as head coach of the Steelers.

2. The term’s constructive application

Many fans stated that they saw Tomlin as a player coach because he had been a player himself, thus they understood what it was like to put in a lot of practice time and the kind of effort required to play professionally. They may not have known him directly, but they believed he lived up to public remarks he made about certain team members (e.g., saying George Pickens had been talked to about maturity and adversity and how to manage it).

These same supporters frequently brought up the idea that Tomlin had an obligation to the team and the players, but not to listen to or please the fan base, “regardless of his win-loss record.” They were divided on whether Tomlin should continue as the Steelers’ head coach, but they frequently cited his respect from players—even those who weren’t on the team—as justification for why they thought it was a good thing to be a player coach.