I'd be fine bringing harrison back, paying Moats whatever he's making, hope Howard takes a big leap forward, and Jones stays healthy. Then tell Worilds to get lost. prior to last season he said something along the lines that he shouldn't have to compete for a starting job, then he whined this year about not being used correctly. when he rushes the qb he's not that good at it, and he sure as hell isn't good vs the run or in coverage or he wouldn't be bitching about having to do that. So, why in the hell is this guy even being discussed as returning?
I'd be fine bringing harrison back, paying Moats whatever he's making, hope Howard takes a big leap forward, and Jones stays healthy. Then tell Worilds to get lost. prior to last season he said something along the lines that he shouldn't have to compete for a starting job, then he whined this year about not being used correctly. when he rushes the qb he's not that good at it, and he sure as hell isn't good vs the run or in coverage or he wouldn't be bitching about having to do that. So, why in the hell is this guy even being discussed as returning?
The truth? If the FO shows their hand already - they might as well give up already...
and that is bad ...how exactly ? Let someone else deal with it...don't even waste the time talking about it..
No other team is going to sign him to an unreasonable long term deal.
If someone is going to overpay for Jason Worilds there is nothing you can do about it, but apply the franchise tag which would be insane. The only other way to stop it would be to overpay themselves which is equally bad. This team got itself in the cap situation that it is in, byHave you ever watched NFL free agency? It's where teams do nothing but overpay for mediocre players (especially those at key positions like CB and pass rusher).
I still wonder why tagging Max Starks twice wasn't Colbert's "last official function".....
Starks was a good player but the puzzling part was that they could have got him for less. That was a situation where the FO liked the guy and the coaches did not, but then they couldn't come up with anyone better.
I'm more concerned with how it is that the Steelers call in Starks, Keisel, and Harrison and after no training camp and spending a few months on their couches watching The Price Is Right, they are instantly the best players at their respective positions.
On July 23, 2009 Max Starks signed a contract for the Steelers 4-years, $26 million with $10 million guaranteed.
12 months later Max Starks was benched in favor of JON SCOTT and FLOZELL ADAMS.
12 months after that Max Starks was released, a complete free agent and never got a SNIFF in free agency and was an unemployed, 29-year old, fat ex-NFL player until the desperate Steelers called him again 4 weeks into the season.
There is no definition of "good player" in that entire scenario. None. Max Starks sucked and the fact we consider his time here somehow "okay" defines how ***-backward our assessment of offensive line play was between 2007-2012.
couldn't agree more Ron. A role sure. But both of them instantly took major reps. What is that telling you. I feel the same about adding an experienced back after Blount walked. That was a no brainer. You needed a guy for what 8 weeks. What is that 400 K. And the proof was in the pudding. When Bell was injured Tate took most of the reps with two or three practices. What did that tell you about the way they really felt about Harris and Archer.Starks was a good player but the puzzling part was that they could have got him for less. That was a situation where the FO liked the guy and the coaches did not, but then they couldn't come up with anyone better.
I'm more concerned with how it is that the Steelers call in Starks, Keisel, and Harrison and after no training camp and spending a few months on their couches watching The Price Is Right, they are instantly the best players at their respective positions.
On July 23, 2009 Max Starks signed a contract for the Steelers 4-years, $26 million with $10 million guaranteed.
12 months later Max Starks was benched in favor of JON SCOTT and FLOZELL ADAMS.
12 months after that Max Starks was released, a complete free agent and never got a SNIFF in free agency and was an unemployed, 29-year old, fat ex-NFL player until the desperate Steelers called him again 4 weeks into the season.
There is no definition of "good player" in that entire scenario. None. Max Starks sucked and the fact we consider his time here somehow "okay" defines how ***-backward our assessment of offensive line play was between 2007-2012.
Starks was the only OL who started in all three of their last Super Bowls. I didn't mean to imply that he should be an All-Pro but he was pretty good and certainly better than any LT they've had since. Obviously the coaches didn't like him but all he did was end up beating out whoever they tried to to replace him with year after year. So Tomberts's talent evaluation and coaching failed on a couple of levels there, just like it has more recently with the LB's and Dri Archer.Starks always seemed pretty good in the passing game at LT to me.
Was he overpaid in many of the years? Probably, but Jonathan Scott proved that one could do much worse than Starks.
When Bell was injured Tate took most of the reps with two or three practices. What did that tell you about the way they really felt about Harris and Archer.
Starks was the only OL who started in all three of their last Super Bowls. I didn't mean to imply that he should be an All-Pro but he was pretty good and certainly better than any LT they've had since. Obviously the coaches didn't like him but all he did was end up beating out whoever they tried to to replace him with year after year. So Tomberts's talent evaluation and coaching failed on a couple of levels there, just like it has more recently with the LB's and Dri Archer.