Kovacevic: Time to end the Woodley mistake

[stillers4me]

At whichever point makes the most fiscal sense following the coming flip of the calendar, the Steelers (http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/) front office should — no, must, if it is to be taken seriously — release LaMarr Woodley.
Unconditionally.

Unflinchingly.

Unapologetically............


Read more: http://triblive.com/sports/dejankovacevic/dejancolumns/5264222-74/woodley-steelers-worilds#ixzz2oDJaIpTM

[Hindes204]

I was a supporter of Woodley when we signed him, I was excited we did so. I gave him chance after chance after the contract, but I'm done. He's done. He's got to go, regardless of the cap hit

[stillers4me]

Makes me sad.......he was so good at first. I even have a Woodley jersey because I thought he was going to be another legendary great Steelers linebacker.

[GBMelBlount]

I was a supporter of Woodley when we signed him, I was excited we did so. I gave him chance after chance after the contract, but I'm done. He's done. He's got to go, regardless of the cap hit

My feelings EXACTLY.

[SteelerFanInStl]

I agree, he's got to go. He got fat after getting paid and seemingly didn't care any more. His production has been in the tank since that contract.

[salamander]

He signed that contract and now he can't stay healthy. I wouldn't be sad to see him go.

[MrPgh]

The Steelers locker room will be much better off once Woodley, Sanders, and Clark are gone.

[steelerdude15]

I've been very supportive of LaMarr through out the years. He was a good pass rushing linebacker and at one point, was one of the premier pass rushing linebackers in the league. However, he hasn't been healthy nor effective since the Patriots games in 2011. I also think it is time to move on and just eat the dead money.

[steelreserve]

I'm no capologist, so I wouldn't touch the timing issue. But as for fretting over dead money as it pertains to a Woodley release, hey, isn't that kind of what the Steelers have been getting out of him for three years now?

Well, I'm glad somebody outside these message boards has woken up and seen it that way.

I personally thought the contract was a mistake when it was first signed because of the amount, but was hopeful that it'd hurt less because he'd be a solid contributor. This has just been an unmitigated disaster.

[fansince'76]

June 1st cut.

[Texasteel]

Just wondering. If we could trade him, and take on most of his base salary, would that help with our salary cap?

[GBMelBlount]

Just wondering. If we could trade him, and take on most of his base salary, would that help with our salary cap?

It sure would make sense if it did....and if it does I hope they start shopping him out the first day they are allowed to.

[Dwinsgames]

Just wondering. If we could trade him, and take on most of his base salary, would that help with our salary cap?

unlikely ....

we would still be on the hook for a huge amount and his inability to stay healthy , and inability for production #'s when he is healthy would make a trading partner nearly impossibel to find IMO and even if we where lucky enough to find a foolish GM to take it on what we would get back in terms of a draft pick would be a very late round pick at best , but perhaps we could sweet talk them into a 5th rounder with a conditional selection the following year if he logs x amount of plays or x amount of production ?



his base salary in 2014 is 8 million plus bonus's ( I will assume they are roster and or workout so that would be on the trading partner to fulfill is my guess 5.5 mill ) so 5.5 mill would be up to the team of trade ... 8 mill base would be as much as we could absorb ( to much IMO ) .....

the kicker is as soon as he is traded or released 14,170.000 hits the cap ( the dead money ) unless its done post June 1 but if we wait that long part of the bonus money would also have to come from us ( roster bonus's and workouts ) ....

without seeing exactly how the contract is written its all guess work as to how much is allocated to what in terms of the bonus money ....

he is going to be VERY expensive on or off the roster , will be cheaper to keep him than cut him in the short term , but at some point you have to pay the piper when you make bad deals ( not saying his deal was nessasarily bad when it started but we made it that way by restructuring him several times )

[steelreserve]

Just wondering. If we could trade him, and take on most of his base salary, would that help with our salary cap?

No, that would only make things worse. If he's not on our roster anymore, we still have to eat the same amount of dead money whether it was a trade or we just released him. Taking on part of his salary just piles more on top of that. Better to just release him, or trade him with no strings attached if someone's a big enough sucker to do it.

It's also important to remember that we are going to be eating the "dead money" even if we keep him for the duration. It's money that's already been paid out and we have to take the hit for. The only difference is that if the player is on the roster, they call it "prorated signing bonus," but if he is gone they call it "dead money." But we are taking the cap hit for it either way; the only question, as I said, is whether we pay him additional money in salary on top of that.

Our options basically boil down to this - sorry if it duplicates what I posted in another thread, but I think that one's long gone:

Cut before start of next season:
2014: $14M dead money
2015: nothing

Cut on June 1 next season:
2014: ~$7M dead money
2015: ~$7M dead money

Keep for 2014, then cut
2014: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)
2015: $7M dead money

Keep for two years
2014: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)
2015: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)

Personally, I'd say cut him now and get the money trouble over with. We fortunately don't have many key free agents to try and re-sign this offseason - I think Sanders, Kiesel and Cotchery are the only ones worth mentioning, and we could live without them if we had to. Best to be ready for whoever we need the year after.

[MrPgh]

No, that would only make things worse. If he's not on our roster anymore, we still have to eat the same amount of dead money whether it was a trade or we just released him. Taking on part of his salary just piles more on top of that. Better to just release him, or trade him with no strings attached if someone's a big enough sucker to do it.

It's also important to remember that we are going to be eating the "dead money" even if we keep him for the duration. It's money that's already been paid out and we have to take the hit for. The only difference is that if the player is on the roster, they call it "prorated signing bonus," but if he is gone they call it "dead money." But we are taking the cap hit for it either way; the only question, as I said, is whether we pay him additional money in salary on top of that.

Our options basically boil down to this - sorry if it duplicates what I posted in another thread, but I think that one's long gone:

Cut before start of next season:
2014: $14M dead money
2015: nothing

Cut on June 1 next season:
2014: ~$7M dead money
2015: ~$7M dead money

Keep for 2014, then cut
2014: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)
2015: $7M dead money

Keep for two years
2014: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)
2015: $14M-$15M ($7M dead money, $8M salary)

Personally, I'd say cut him now and get the money trouble over with. We fortunately don't have many key free agents to try and re-sign this offseason - I think Sanders, Kiesel and Cotchery are the only ones worth mentioning, and we could live without them if we had to. Best to be ready for whoever we need the year after.

I'd consider resigning Cotchery, but Keisel is likely done after the season and Sanders isn't worth the money.

[steelreserve]

I'd consider resigning Cotchery, but Keisel is likely done after the season and Sanders isn't worth the money.

My thoughts exactly. The other thing we have to worry about, IMO, is keeping Velasco, because there's no way we'll afford Pouncey when his contract comes up. Hopefully we can move him and get a decent pick, and use that money for Velasco so it basically evens itself out.

[dislocatedday]

I'm not sure why so many people say that the Steelers can't cut Woodley because of the cap hit. Well, if they keep him next year they pay him an $8M base salary on top of the $7M pro-rated signing bonus. Even if they cut him before June 1 and all the dead money rolls up into next year they break even on the financial side and get the Woodley contract behind them. Personally, I would declare him a June 1st cap cut (like they did with Colon last year) and spread the dead money over two years. This way the team still saves $8M next year, and I think it is $7M the following season, and then Woodley is totally off the books. Why in the world would they even consider paying Woodley an $8M base salary next year? It makes no sense under any circumstances.

[steelreserve]

I'm not sure why so many people say that the Steelers can't cut Woodley because of the cap hit.

Me neither. If we cut him, we take a huge cap hit. If we don't cut him, we take an even bigger cap hit.

The biggest argument I hear against it is well, even if it would cost us the same amount of money, we'd still have to fill the roster spot and spend even more money on it. Fuck that. We have to fill the roster spot anyway with him hurt every year. Time to give that overpaid, non-productive fatass his walking papers.

You know what? I bet we do that and he signs with the Patriots for next to nothing, then starts putting up big stats again. That'd piss people off.

[Steeldude]

But wait, I thought Woodley was a god? Didn't he get some sacks? As I have always stated, he is no better than Gildon. Cut out the cancerous tumor.

[ALLD]

JaMarcus Russell, Chris Johnson, Josh Cribbs, & LaMarr Woodley are players who got paid and fell way short of their projected contributions.

[Psycho Ward 86]

1) Designate Woodley a June 1st cut
2) Resign Al Woods and Jason Worilds
3) Draft people worth a damn

if we do only those things and stay healthy, i will honestly call it a successful offseason

[dislocatedday]

1) Designate Woodley a June 1st cut
2) Resign Al Woods and Jason Worilds
3) Draft people worth a damn

if we do only those things and stay healthy, i will honestly call it a successful offseason

I'd add signing Velasco to that list as well, but I agree with everything you said.

[Psycho Ward 86]

I'd add signing Velasco to that list as well, but I agree with everything you said.

bleh, forgot about him. and cotchery as said before as well.

[Devilsdancefloor]

June 1st cut.

sad but i agree we need to spread that hit over 2 years he just cant stay on the field, plus worilds needs to stay in da burgh

[KeiselPower99]

I have been a Woodley fan since we drafted him and thought that contract was too big and would bite us in the ass. Well here we are big ol bite marks in the buttocks.

[Chidi29]

I really don't see re-signing Worilds. He's not going to get a low tier, 20 million contract. He's going to get close to Woodley money. Paul Kruger got 40 million last year. Worilds has priced himself out of what we can afford with our cap situation the way it is. And cutting Woodley before FA so we can sign Worilds won't work as you guys have pointed out. Just as much to cut as keep. Product of being up against the cap. Gotta make decisions you wish you didn't.

And I don't know if it's been said yet, but let's not act like Woodley was trash. I was actually against the contract when he signed it (don't want to put in big money to a position we've had a ton of success at with many different players since pretty much the 90s) but he did have five sacks in the first six games and was our only source of a pass rush. And then he got hurt.

Anyone ever think Giemont is the issue?

[Steeldude]

Even if Worilds can't be re-signed they should still get rid of Woodley.

[NCSteeler]

I really don't see re-signing Worilds. He's not going to get a low tier, 20 million contract. He's going to get close to Woodley money. Paul Kruger got 40 million last year. Worilds has priced himself out of what we can afford with our cap situation the way it is. And cutting Woodley before FA so we can sign Worilds won't work as you guys have pointed out. Just as much to cut as keep. Product of being up against the cap. Gotta make decisions you wish you didn't.

And I don't know if it's been said yet, but let's not act like Woodley was trash. I was actually against the contract when he signed it (don't want to put in big money to a position we've had a ton of success at with many different players since pretty much the 90s) but he did have five sacks in the first six games and was our only source of a pass rush. And then he got hurt.

Anyone ever think Giemont is the issue?


It's gotta be a consideration, after many seasons of out of shape players, odd injury fill years. Who knows.

Consider the possibility that Worilds reduced his market by being a no show on the right side and only being able to beat LTs and TEs. IDK.

I read this in the comments on Bleacher report, poster Big T Bone

What this tells us is that they need to use Worilds on the left side and give J. Jones a chance to develop on the right side. Just as they need to use Mike Adams on the right side of the O-line. It's about knowing your players' talent/limitations and then exploiting that talent to it's maximum benefit. Worilds is younger, healthier and less expensive than Woodley. Woodley has already reached his expiration date in terms of Steelers' OLBs (i.e. age 30). He has under-performed, turned up to camp out of shape (hardly the stuff of team leadership) and cannot stay healthy. He's not getting any younger and not worth his bloated salary either on the left or the right OLB spot. Woodley needs to go.

Worilds will most likely be worth a 5 yr/ $41M deal (based on recent 3-4 OLB salary trends) or they could use their franchise tag on him for about $9 million. A long-term contract of this type makes his 2014 cap number "friendly" to the tune of $4.5 - 5M. In this scenario, franchising him for 1 year at over $9M makes no sense.

Cutting Woodley means eating his $5 million dead money for 2014 which we have to do whether he stays or goes so that's a wash and cutting him after June 1 saves the team his $8 million salary in 2014 alone. That more than offsets Worilds' $4-5 million 2014 cap hit. I understand that they have to sign Worilds BEFORE they cut Woodley but they can save money elsewhere to stay under their cap until cutting Woodley after June 1 (ex. Cutting Levi Brown straight away saves the team $6.25 million which is more than enough to offset Worilds' $4-5 million in 2014). Another way to sign Worilds before cutting Woodley would be extending Big Ben’s contract and lowering his 2014 salary cap number.


If it could work that way , it sounds like the best deal.
The biggest point to me is what he said about Woodley. Let's say we keep him and let Worilds walk, there is no indication(or reason to believe) that Woodley will A) be in shape B) stay healthy more than 8 games . Keeping him looks like the bigger gamble than dumping him in favor of Worilds.

[zulater]

Just wondering. If we could trade him, and take on most of his base salary, would that help with our salary cap?

Who's stupid enough to take him with that cap hit?

[Chidi29]

It's gotta be a consideration, after many seasons of out of shape players, odd injury fill years. Who knows.

Consider the possibility that Worilds reduced his market by being a no show on the right side and only being able to beat LTs and TEs. IDK.

I read this in the comments on Bleacher report, poster Big T Bone



If it could work that way , it sounds like the best deal.
The biggest point to me is what he said about Woodley. Let's say we keep him and let Worilds walk, there is no indication(or reason to believe) that Woodley will A) be in shape B) stay healthy more than 8 games . Keeping him looks like the bigger gamble than dumping him in favor of Worilds.

Eh, I'm not buying it. Financially, it's not going to work out. And even cutting Woodley post June 1st still creates a lot of dead money. We're always so close to the cap. Throwing on six million in dead money or whatever the number is doesn't help matters.

Was Woodley really out of shape coming into this year? The numbers wouldn't support it. Prorate what he did in the first six games and Woodley finishes the year with 13 sacks. Well more than what Worilds will walk away with. Why are we forgetting that?

[NCSteeler]

Eh, I'm not buying it. Financially, it's not going to work out. And even cutting Woodley post June 1st still creates a lot of dead money. We're always so close to the cap. Throwing on six million in dead money or whatever the number is doesn't help matters.

Was Woodley really out of shape coming into this year? The numbers wouldn't support it. Prorate what he did in the first six games and Woodley finishes the year with 13 sacks. Well more than what Worilds will walk away with. Why are we forgetting that?

Somewhere these threads should merge, but in the mean time.

I'll give you that Woodley worked his ass this offseason, but it's not his usual style. But he also hasn't be healthy a whole season since 2010. Traditionally a guy on the wrong side of 30 with nagging injuries, is exactly the kind of guy the Steelers find away to get rid of

[Chidi29]

Somewhere these threads should merge, but in the mean time.

I'll give you that Woodley worked his ass this offseason, but it's not his usual style. But he also hasn't be healthy a whole season since 2010. Traditionally a guy on the wrong side of 30 with nagging injuries, is exactly the kind of guy the Steelers find away to get rid of

Swimming in loads of dead money isn't the way to go about that. We're not talking about a guy in the last year of his deal like Worilds. We're talking about a guy that will cost a lot of money to cut and when healthy, has provided similar production as Worilds.

[NCSteeler]

He costs a lot to cut and a lot to keep, how much longer do you string out his bad contract?

[Chidi29]

He costs a lot to cut and a lot to keep, how much longer do you string out his bad contract?

Until it's cheaper to cut him (i.e. next year).

I'd rather pay a guy to play and produce than have him playing against me elsewhere. And still have to pay him.

[ALLD]

Keep him and put him on IR in pre-season. The salary will still affect the cap, but insurance will pay it.

[NCSteeler]

Until it's cheaper to cut him (i.e. next year).

I'd rather pay a guy to play and produce than have him playing against me elsewhere. And still have to pay him.

Fair enough.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Until it's cheaper to cut him (i.e. next year).

I'd rather pay a guy to play and produce than have him playing against me elsewhere. And still have to pay him.

how much cheaper is it to cut woodley next year anyways? im not just afraid to cut woodley because im afraid he'll get injured and play horribly even if he isnt. im afraid that if he's still here, worilds wont want to stay. ill take the younger, healthier, emerging talent over the opposite. your point about your comparison of worilds with kruger is valid, but im willing to take the risk for the sake of the long term. and the long term solutions are something we have neglected for far too long.

[Chidi29]

how much cheaper is it to cut woodley next year anyways? im not just afraid to cut woodley because im afraid he'll get injured and play horribly even if he isnt. im afraid that if he's still here, worilds wont want to stay. ill take the younger, healthier, emerging talent over the opposite. your point about your comparison of worilds with kruger is valid, but im willing to take the risk for the sake of the long term. and the long term solutions are something we have neglected for far too long.

Let's just break down Woodley's contract for everyone to see.

Originally a 6 year, 61.5 million deal.

- 13 million signing bonus

- First year option bonus of 4.4 million

2013 restructure included a 5.4 million "signing" bonus

Prorate all the bonus money and it's a 4.24 hit each season on top of his base salary.

Base salaries:

2013: 3.6
2014: 8
2015: 8.5
2016: 9

In 2014, his cap hit will be 12.24. If you cut him before then, his 2014 cap hit will be (pre June 1st cut) 12.72 (4.24*3).

In 2015, his cap hit will be 12.74. If you cut him before then, his 2014 cap hit will be (pre June 1st) 8.48. A savings of 4.26 million.

That's why I say wait a year and then decide to cut him. You can get away with keeping Worilds number low this year like Kruger's was (3.17 cap hit in 2013 before it spikes to 9.45 in 2014). And then the money you save by cutting Woodley can help, obviously not entirely cover, Pouncey's deal.

[MrPgh]

All money issues aside, the Steelers need to get rid of Woodley. Ever since he signed his new contract he's been out of shape, injured, and his attitude has been horrible. Can't keep that kind of player around. It's a shit sandwich, but the Steelers need to take a bite out of it and be done with it. They'll be better off for it in the future.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Let's just break down Woodley's contract for everyone to see.

Originally a 6 year, 61.5 million deal.

- 13 million signing bonus

- First year option bonus of 4.4 million

2013 restructure included a 5.4 million "signing" bonus

Prorate all the bonus money and it's a 4.24 hit each season on top of his base salary.

Base salaries:

2013: 3.6
2014: 8
2015: 8.5
2016: 9

In 2014, his cap hit will be 12.24. If you cut him before then, his 2014 cap hit will be (pre June 1st cut) 12.72 (4.24*3).

In 2015, his cap hit will be 12.74. If you cut him before then, his 2014 cap hit will be (pre June 1st) 8.48. A savings of 4.26 million.

That's why I say wait a year and then decide to cut him. You can get away with keeping Worilds number low this year like Kruger's was (3.17 cap hit in 2013 before it spikes to 9.45 in 2014). And then the money you save by cutting Woodley can help, obviously not entirely cover, Pouncey's deal.

saving that money sounds great, but if woodley stays, wouldnt you say worilds would want to leave? he's going to want to prove himself as a full time starter. so we'd have woodley and jarvis for a year, then just jarvis and who? defenders usually take time to develop in this defense, so we need the answer quickly, and i doubt we'll come up with it in time. Especially if jarvis doesnt pan out

[Chidi29]

saving that money sounds great, but if woodley stays, wouldnt you say worilds would want to leave? he's going to want to prove himself as a full time starter. so we'd have woodley and jarvis for a year, then just jarvis and who? defenders usually take time to develop in this defense, so we need the answer quickly, and i doubt we'll come up with it in time. Especially if jarvis doesnt pan out

That could be possible. He may want to leave, I don't know what his thoughts are.

But Jarvis doesn't have to start next season. Obviously, he's got a lot of work to do and I'm sure the team didn't really want him to play the number of snaps he is his rookie season. So you can go in with a Woodley/Worilds starting dup and have JJ rotate with Woodley and Woodley rotate with Worilds a tiny bit to keep everybody fresh. But Worilds can still see the vast majority of snaps.

[Psycho Ward 86]

That could be possible. He may want to leave, I don't know what his thoughts are.

But Jarvis doesn't have to start next season. Obviously, he's got a lot of work to do and I'm sure the team didn't really want him to play the number of snaps he is his rookie season. So you can go in with a Woodley/Worilds starting dup and have JJ rotate with Woodley and Woodley rotate with Worilds a tiny bit to keep everybody fresh. But Worilds can still see the vast majority of snaps.

what how? i thought worilds was a UFA at the end of the season according to this: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/jason-worilds

if you're thinking that we can keep worilds on a one year contract or something, i think thats crazy. worilds should be looking for a sizable multi-year deal from someone

[Chidi29]

what how? i thought worilds was a UFA at the end of the season according to this: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/jason-worilds

if you're thinking that we can keep worilds on a one year contract or something, i think thats crazy. worilds should be looking for a sizable multi-year deal from someone

Yeah, he's a UFA at the end of the year.

My plan is to sign Worilds to a 5 year/45 million deal. Keep Woodley too but cut him next year.

Even with all three, Worilds can be pretty much full time and Woodley/Jones con rotate. Woodley will rotate a bit with Worilds as well to keep him fresh.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Yeah, he's a UFA at the end of the year.

My plan is to sign Worilds to a 5 year/45 million deal. Keep Woodley too but cut him next year.

Even with all three, Worilds can be pretty much full time and Woodley/Jones con rotate. Woodley will rotate a bit with Worilds as well to keep him fresh.

if we can resign velasco, cotchery, and woods along with that im on board

[Chidi29]

if we can resign velasco, cotchery, and woods along with that im on board

I'm sure you could. None of them will cost that much. Cotchery is old and Velasco and Woods would likely be backups (unless you let Hood go and sign Woods to be your LDE?)

Here's the way I mapped things out last night. Obviously numbers could be tweaked based on personal preference but I think works out well.

For Pouncey...

Quick looks at Ryan Kalil and Nick Mangold's contracts. Those will be the framework that the Pouncey deal will work with. Cap hits next to the year.

Kalil: 6/49 18 signing bonus

2014: 10.25

2015: 10.8

Mangold: 8/57.4 6.3 signing, 9.7 second year bonus

2013: 5.9

2015: 8.72

Based off of that, my proposal for Pouncey. Cap hits in parentheses next to each season and rationale below.

Pouncey: 7/63 17.5 signing bonus, 10 second year bonus

2015: 2.5 million base (5 hit)

2016: 3 million base (7.2)

2017: 3 million base (7.2)

2018: 6 million base (10.2)

2019: 6.5 million base (10.7)

2020: 7 million base (11.2)

2021: 7.5 million base( 11.7)

Reason: Pouncey much higher annual salary, by far highest paid center in the league (9 million, Mangold 7.1 & Kalil 8.16) Signing bonus may be less but in essence, 27.5 guaranteed with second year bonus. Not going to get cut after one year (cap hit would be 15 million in 2016 if he did – not going to happen) so still gets way more guaranteed than Mangold (16) or Kalil (18). Lowered cap hit in 2015 to ease the cutting of Woodley and dead space (~8.4) it’ll take up. 2nd year bonus kicks in 2016 when new TV contracts are fully in effect and salary cap likely spikes.

Mangold/Kalil’s base salaries were low first few years before taking one fairly big spike (Mangold 2.9-4.8, Kalil (5.3-7.5) and then levels out. Kalil’s restructured so many does get weird in his because of it.

By the time big money rolls in, contract likely to be restructured anyway so not a big concern. Common for contracts to be backloaded.

And for Jones. Using Paul Kruger's deal as a baseline.

Paul Kruger – 5/40.5 6 sign, 6.2 first year roster bonus

2013: 715K (2.955)

2014-2015: 7 million (9.24)

Jason Worilds – 5/45, 7 sign, 8 first year bonus

2014: ~900K ( whatever league min is) (3.9)

2015: 7 million (10)

2016: 7 million (10)

Reason. Worilds, with a similar path as Kruger (career high of 8.5 sacks in 2012 after combined career of 6.5 prior) but little more money in each aspect (every agent wants to one up the last guy).

First year bonus, like Kruger, greatly softens 2014 cap hit to keep Woodley. Can cut Woodley following year when it’s cheaper to cut than keep (save 4.26 million) helping clear some room for Worilds increase and/or Pouncey’s deal. But mainly, you get to wait a year to cut Woodley than cutting him this offseason and spending more to cut than keep and having a pile of dirty dead money.

--------

I do still believe if it comes down to signing one or the other, and I find that unlikely, I'd take Pouncey over Worilds. Paying same money for a much better player.

[zulater]

I do still believe if it comes down to signing one or the other, and I find that unlikely, I'd take Pouncey over Worilds. Paying same money for a much better player.

First off that's debatable if Pouncey is much better than Worlids as we sit and type today. Second as we've discovered through the season Pouncey was replaceable. First by Velasco, and now by Cody Wallace. You could most likely sign Velasco and Wallace combined for much less than half of what you'll give Pouncey on a second contract. And third, Worlids is at a greater position of need. He's far and away the Steelers best pass rusher. You can't play winning defense if you can't pressure the passer. So by position alone Worlids is of much greater value to this Steeler team than Pouncey is. I don't even see how that's arguable?

[Psycho Ward 86]

First off that's debatable if Pouncey is much better than Worlids as we sit and type today. Second as we've discovered through the season Pouncey was replaceable. First by Velasco, and now by Cody Wallace. You could most likely sign Velasco and Wallace combined for much less than half of what you'll give Pouncey on a second contract. And third, Worlids is at a greater position of need. He's far and away the Steelers best pass rusher. You can't play winning defense if you can't pressure the passer. So by position alone Worlids is of much greater value to this Steeler team than Pouncey is. I don't even see how that's arguable?

my thoughts exactly. except while i dont see pouncey as exactly replaceable, i just feel good that we potentially have solid centers behind him that dont look like sean mahan or justin hartwig. ick

[Chidi29]

First off that's debatable if Pouncey is much better than Worlids as we sit and type today. Second as we've discovered through the season Pouncey was replaceable. First by Velasco, and now by Cody Wallace. You could most likely sign Velasco and Wallace combined for much less than half of what you'll give Pouncey on a second contract. And third, Worlids is at a greater position of need. He's far and away the Steelers best pass rusher. You can't play winning defense if you can't pressure the passer. So by position alone Worlids is of much greater value to this Steeler team than Pouncey is. I don't even see how that's arguable?

I really didn't see Pouncey as replaceable this season. Velasco does nothing special and Wallace is like Legursky. Lunch pail guy fans fall in love with but will get exposed over time. Our run game has still sucked and not having Pouncey there is a big reason why. If we're still going to run zone blocking, we can't do it as effectively with Velasco and not nearly as effectively with Wallace.

Worilds has given us half a season. That's a small sample size to give a lot of money to. Those guys can regress quick. Like I said, Kruger's sack count was split in half in a season. Connor Barwin declined from 11 to 3 two seasons ago. We know Pouncey is one of the best when healthy. He's proven that. So I'll give my money to the more proven and better player.

And again, we're focusing on that one aspect of what I said. I want to sign both and keep Woodley for a year and outlined it above.

[zulater]

I really didn't see Pouncey as replaceable this season. Velasco does nothing special and Wallace is like Legursky. Lunch pail guy fans fall in love with but will get exposed over time. Our run game has still sucked and not having Pouncey there is a big reason why.

The running game failed initially because we had no real back, no left tackle and no tight ends. In case you haven't noticed, by current NFL standards the running game is quite fine now. Getting Spaeth back on the field has helped a lot in this area. And I see Wallace as being a lot stronger than Legurskey. I don't think Velasco comes back because Wallace made him expendable and there's no guarantee that Achilles injury will be healed by the time next season opens.





If we're still going to run zone blocking, we can't do it as effectively with Velasco and not nearly as effectively with Wallace.

Honestly I hope we're done with that. And better yet I hope it's outlawed before too much longer. It was Karma that we put out our own center when we attempted to use that cheap tactic. The Steelers have managed to thrive in the league for 80 years without that dirty tactic.


Worilds has given us half a season. That's a small sample size to give a lot of money to. Those guys can regress quick. Like I said, Kruger's sack count was split in half in a season. Connor Barwin declined from 11 to 3 two seasons ago. We know Pouncey is one of the best when healthy. He's proven that. So I'll give my money to the more proven and better player.

This team proved in the last month that the offense can function at a pretty high level without Pouncey. Losing your best pass rusher will make a mediocre defense abysmal. Worilds has more value to the Steelers than Pouncey does, even if Pouncey is the better player.


And again, we're focusing on that one aspect of what I said. I want to sign both and keep Woodley for a year and outlined it above.


I think Pouncey will be back next season but I'm not sure if they can sign him to a 2nd contract?

It's out of our hands, we'll see how the Steelers go about it. I still don't get the sense that they'll bring back Woodley. But time will tell? :noidea:

[Chidi29]

I still think a big reason why the running game failed was our inability to get lineman to the second level. We suck running vs 4-3 defenses. Guys can't combo block and work to the 2nd level. Much different story if we have Pouncey. Wallace is better than Legursky. He's stronger and doesn't have T-Rex arms. But still has the same limited upside and is awful in space. And that really limits him.

[BnG_Hevn]

Makes me sad.......he was so good at first. I even have a Woodley jersey because I thought he was going to be another legendary great Steelers linebacker.

I have a signed Woodley jersey that I essentially paid $100 for.

I don't think it's a coincidence that players who sign big contracts all of a sudden lose production. It illustrates the character of the player IMO. Injuries are injuries, but do you honestly think that if he was in line for a big payday that he would have produced the same amount?