Mike Adams

[Shoes]

Anyone think he's going to be a starter? I don't…maybe a backup. He's getting schooled at right tackle now.


In team drills, second-year safety Shamarko Thomas, 5 feet 9, 217 pounds, bull-rushed 6-7, 323-pound right tackle Mike Adams and drove him to the turf.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2014/07/29/Steelers-notebook-Inside-linebacker-and-No-1-pick-Ryan-Shazier-makes-huge-and-positive-first-impression/stories/201407290116#ixzz38v14esji

[blackngldblood]

No, I've given up hope in Adams. I really believed that he had a chance to become a great tackle, but I've moved on. He's soft...

[st33lersguy]

Got bull-rushed to the turf by a guy 10 inches shorter and 106 pounds lighter. FAIL!

[Psycho Ward 86]

what the fuck? tidbits like that make it hard to believe, but with the best O-line coach, its still possible. im giving him one more go around this year before i say yes or no

[Shoes]

what the fuck? tidbits like that make it hard to believe, but with the best O-line coach, its still possible. im giving him one more go around this year before i say yes or no

The best O-line coach just may have someone else in mind to start at RT. Adams always seems to be *somewhere else* even when he's playing football.

[Chidi29]

To be fair, no lineman looks "good" against a bull rush. With a thick safety having a head start and complete leverage, it really shouldn't be that shocking. Adams' bend looks better from what I can tell. But long ways to go.

To the larger point, if Munchak can't generate noticeable improvement with Adams during the preseason, it should be fair to discuss if he should still have a roster spot. At some point, you have to throw your hands up and say you've done all you can with the guy. And then move on.

[Shoes]

Adams started where he left off ...on his A$$! I don't believe Adams has the mental drive to play a solid, complete game. I wouldn't be surprised to see Munch's pick, Wesley Johnson getting more reps.

[zulater]

I don't think he's on the final 53 this year.

[steelreserve]

Getting knocked over once in practice does not mean a hell of a lot. In fact, it means less than nothing. You know what reporters do at training camp? Stand around all day waiting for their one or two interviews, and rack their brains looking for any little thing interesting to talk about that happened on the field, without having any clue whether it actually means anything or not.

What I really hope is that Adams is learning something, instead of getting knocked on his ass and "well, whup, whuddya know," and being left to his own devices. It really is make-or-break for both him and Gilbert this year, and I think they both know it.

I can't see either of them being left off the final roster, because who else do we have that's better? Even if our fifth-round guy makes it, AND we keep Whimper, AND nobody gets hurt, that only makes 7 linemen and we usually keep 9, or 10 if somebody's going to miss the first few weeks. (Beachum, Foster, Pouncey, DeCastro, rookie, Goose, Whimper, two more). Maybe if a UDFA has a HUGE preseason, but it would have to be fucking incredible.

[GBMelBlount]

I hope they have learned from Gilbert and Adams not to waste early round picks on players pegged as lazy and unmotivated.

Starks, while a great person and decent lineman at times, was also pegged as a low intensity player coming out of college.

Just saying there seems to be a pattern here.

[TMC]

I have heard that Adams has looked better, other than this one play, and has had a pretty good camp to this point. I would not take one play as an indicator, and this is coming from a guy that holds out little hope that Adams becomes a starter.

I have also heard that Gilbert is having a great camp. Still early. Have to see how this all shakes out, but I do not see Adams cracking the starting lineup anytime soon.

I still think they need a true blue-chip LT and that would help this line greatly. No knock on Beachum, but I think he would be even better at a position where his length was not tested.

[GBMelBlount]

I am being premature in implying they are both busts. Hopefully this year will be their coming out party...

[zulater]

Getting knocked over once in practice does not mean a hell of a lot. In fact, it means less than nothing. You know what reporters do at training camp? Stand around all day waiting for their one or two interviews, and rack their brains looking for any little thing interesting to talk about that happened on the field, without having any clue whether it actually means anything or not.

What I really hope is that Adams is learning something, instead of getting knocked on his ass and "well, whup, whuddya know," and being left to his own devices. It really is make-or-break for both him and Gilbert this year, and I think they both know it.

I can't see either of them being left off the final roster, because who else do we have that's better? Even if our fifth-round guy makes it, AND we keep Whimper, AND nobody gets hurt, that only makes 7 linemen and we usually keep 9, or 10 if somebody's going to miss the first few weeks. (Beachum, Foster, Pouncey, DeCastro, rookie, Goose, Whimper, two more). Maybe if a UDFA has a HUGE preseason, but it would have to be fucking incredible.

I don't base my opinion on a second hand account of one play during a training camp scrimmage. I base it on two years of his substandard game play. If anything his game actually regressed last year. Unless his play improves 10 fold he doesn't belong on an NFL roster. His draft status is the only thing that has saved him to this point. I doubt it will again. So unless his play has indeed improved I'll stand by my prediction that he wont make the final 53. As far as who's better? About 15 guys on the waiver wire at just about any given time after the 1st of September.

[slippy]

gilbert will be gone next year. we will not pay him 5 mil a year (i hope).

[steelreserve]

I don't base my opinion on a second hand account of one play during a training camp scrimmage. I base it on two years of his substandard game play. If anything his game actually regressed last year. Unless his play improves 10 fold he doesn't belong on an NFL roster. His draft status is the only thing that has saved him to this point. I doubt it will again. So unless his play has indeed improved I'll stand by my prediction that he wont make the final 53. As far as who's better? About 15 guys on the waiver wire at just about any given time after the 1st of September.

No doubt if he keeps playing like last year, we have no use for him. I'm still hoping that we WILL see a big improvement this year, now that we have an OL coach who we know is the real deal. Adams' problem, IMO, as well as Gilbert's, is that both of them came in with great physical tools and potential, but both still play like they're rookies. For that matter, DeCastro has turned out to be good, but seems to me he was almost NFL-ready when he came into the league, and has been learning it all on his own. He should be knocking it out of the park now, and hopefully a coach like Munchak will help him reach the next level too.

I agree completely, if Adams has his chance to learn from Munchak and still doesn't get it, it's probably a lost cause. On the other hand, I am skeptical that it's as easy to find serviceable offensive linemen on the random training-camp scrap heap as you think it is. That's where you find world-beaters such as Guy Whimper, Levi Brown and Jonathan Scott. (No, they didn't all come to us exactly that way, but that's the kind of player you find).



I still think they need a true blue-chip LT and that would help this line greatly. No knock on Beachum, but I think he would be even better at a position where his length was not tested.


I'm happy with Beachum, especially if he continues improving. The idea of a star left tackle is one of the biggest red herrings in football, and if you ask me creates just as many problems as it solves. A ton of hype about the position started several years ago, roughly at the time the movie "The Blind Side" came out, and all of a sudden, teams are paying offensive tackles almost as much as quarterbacks, which doesn't work. People are always saying, "I wish we'd draft a blue-chip offensive tackle in the first round and lock down the left side for 10 years," but what that really means is, "Let's do that and lock down the left side for 4 years, then face a crippling $11M-a-year contract extension that means we have to let go of another star player at a skill position, not to mention the other player we missed out on by spending our top draft pick on an offensive tackle."

What you want is a left tackle that's good, but not the kind with name recognition that commands stupid amounts of money when it's contract time. Put it this way: The difference between a slightly above-average LT on a $4-5M salary, and a star LT on an $10-11M salary - in terms of the on-field impact it has on your team overall - is nowhere near the difference between an average player and a star player at most other positions, and it's certainly not worth the extra $5-6 million. In that respect, Beachum is almost perfect for us. Or if one of the other two clowns competing for the spot becomes serviceable at a similar cost, that would be a blessing as well.

[Shoes]

I honestly believe Adams issue is between the ears, kinda like Mendy. The tools are present but the desire or mental makeup isn't. I wish him success, but don't see it happening.

[GBMelBlount]

I honestly believe Adams issue is between the ears, kinda like Mendy. The tools are present but the desire or mental makeup isn't. I wish him success, but don't see it happening.

I think the most intensity we have seen from him thus far is when he begged Pittsburgh to give him a chance to play here.

Sigh.

[steelreserve]

I think the most intensity we have seen from him thus far is when he begged Pittsburgh to give him a chance to play here.

Sigh.


He also apparently has a passion for late-night drunken sandwich runs, don't forget. I never quite had the fire to be doing that at 3am.

[Psycho Ward 86]

You know what reporters do at training camp? Stand around all day waiting for their one or two interviews, and rack their brains looking for any little thing interesting to talk about that happened on the field, without having any clue whether it actually means anything or not.


lol like Baron Batch blocking James Harrison (in his prime) decently on literally just one play in training camp

[TMC]

I'm happy with Beachum, especially if he continues improving. The idea of a star left tackle is one of the biggest red herrings in football, and if you ask me creates just as many problems as it solves. A ton of hype about the position started several years ago, roughly at the time the movie "The Blind Side" came out, and all of a sudden, teams are paying offensive tackles almost as much as quarterbacks, which doesn't work. People are always saying, "I wish we'd draft a blue-chip offensive tackle in the first round and lock down the left side for 10 years," but what that really means is, "Let's do that and lock down the left side for 4 years, then face a crippling $11M-a-year contract extension that means we have to let go of another star player at a skill position, not to mention the other player we missed out on by spending our top draft pick on an offensive tackle."

What you want is a left tackle that's good, but not the kind with name recognition that commands stupid amounts of money when it's contract time. Put it this way: The difference between a slightly above-average LT on a $4-5M salary, and a star LT on an $10-11M salary - in terms of the on-field impact it has on your team overall - is nowhere near the difference between an average player and a star player at most other positions, and it's certainly not worth the extra $5-6 million. In that respect, Beachum is almost perfect for us. Or if one of the other two clowns competing for the spot becomes serviceable at a similar cost, that would be a blessing as well.

I know you believe that having a great LT is a red herring, I do not. I also do not believe that the book "The Blindside" made NFL teams go: "Hey, we need to pay LTs more". "The Blindside" was published in 2006. Do you know the list of tackles taken in the top 10 prior to 2006? They include Robert Gallery, Jordan Gross, Mike Williams, Bryant McKinnie, Levi Jones, Leonard Davis, Chris Samuels, Kyle Turley, Orlando Pace, Walter Jones, Jon Ogden, Willie Anderson, Tony Boselli, Lincoln Kennedy, Willie Roaf, and many, many more. If left tackles lacked importance prior to the book,why did so many teams invest significant assets to acquire tackles?

And, as for the money aspect. If you draft a corner, say, like Patrick Peterson, in the first round, how much does he cost you on your second contract? We just extended a center for 5 years, $44M. That is $8.8M per season. How much will Heyward get? What did they pay Woodley? What did they pay Harrison? How much was Worilds tag?

If the player is good, he will get paid, regardless of the position. I find it crazy to think you do not want an elite player at tackle because you are worried what he makes in 5 seasons. That is nuts. What if Beachum develops into an elite tackle. Do you let him walk or pay him?

Shit, might as well hope that all the players are just good, but we do not want any stars. Better trade Ben before next off season too........

- - - Updated - - -

Just to put this out, rumor is that Dulac said he looked like crap today, so it appears we are back on the rollercoaster with Adams.

[Mojouw]

In what world does having a great LT hurt you? Yes, there may be a correlation between awesome LT's and terrible teams but they are not the cause. That is because only teams that pick in the first 8 picks or so of the draft get to select the 1-3 players from every draft class that are immediate decade long starters at the position. Just because Joe Thomas got picked by a crappy poorly run franchise does not mean he isn't one of the best players in the game at his position and possibly at any position.

[Dwinsgames]

it really does not matter how much talent you have or how well you are coached if you lack the ability to concentrate and think on the move ... the latter is Mike Adams problem IMO

[steelreserve]

In what world does having a great LT hurt you? Yes, there may be a correlation between awesome LT's and terrible teams but they are not the cause. That is because only teams that pick in the first 8 picks or so of the draft get to select the 1-3 players from every draft class that are immediate decade long starters at the position. Just because Joe Thomas got picked by a crappy poorly run franchise does not mean he isn't one of the best players in the game at his position and possibly at any position.

In the world where there's a salary cap, that's where. There's no way of avoiding it: If you have a great LT, either you have to spend way way way too much on one lineman, or you lose that player anyway. It's a fool's errand. I don't think it's any coincidence that most of the teams that pick OTs in the top 10 are bad - that move holds them back from getting better.

Would you rather have Beachum doing an OK job on the left side, and Timmons and Shazier as your inside linebackers? Or would you rather have a great left tackle but no Timmons because you couldn't afford him, and no Shazier because you never drafted him? That's the kind of tradeoff you'd be making. You're talking about passing up players in spots where you get guys like Ben Roethlisberger and Troy Polamalu, to get an offensive lineman. You think the Cowboys are going to suddenly be great because they gave their left tackle a $110 million contract? Or is that going to guaran-fucking-tee that they have one or more big holes in their lineup that teams will take advantage of for the next eight years? In that light, it's no wonder most of those teams stay bad.

[TMC]

This offseason, the going rate for free agent left tackles was $7M a season. Albert is the only guy in the top 10 free agent OTs that climbed over $8M a season. We pay that for Antonio Brown.

1. Eugene Monroe (Re-signed five-year, $37.5M deal with BAL)
2. Jared Veldheer (Signed five-year, $35M deal with ARZ)
3. Branden Albert (Signed five-year, $46M deal with MIA)
4. Anthony Collins (Signed five-year, $30M deal with TB)
5. Rodger Saffold (Re-signed five-year, $31.7M deal with STL)
6. Donald Penn (Signed two-year, $9.6M deal with OAK)
7. Michael Oher (Signed four-year, $20M deal with TEN)
8. Breno Giacomini (Signed four-year, $18M deal with NYJ)
9. Austin Howard (Signed five-year, $30M deal with OAK)
10. Zach Strief (Re-signed five-year, $20.5M deal with NO)

[Mojouw]

In the world where there's a salary cap, that's where. There's no way of avoiding it: If you have a great LT, either you have to spend way way way too much on one lineman, or you lose that player anyway. It's a fool's errand. I don't think it's any coincidence that most of the teams that pick OTs in the top 10 are bad - that move holds them back from getting better.

Would you rather have Beachum doing an OK job on the left side, and Timmons and Shazier as your inside linebackers? Or would you rather have a great left tackle but no Timmons because you couldn't afford him, and no Shazier because you never drafted him? That's the kind of tradeoff you'd be making. You're talking about passing up players in spots where you get guys like Ben Roethlisberger and Troy Polamalu, to get an offensive lineman. You think the Cowboys are going to suddenly be great because they gave their left tackle a $110 million contract? Or is that going to guaran-fucking-tee that they have one or more big holes in their lineup that teams will take advantage of for the next eight years? In that light, it's no wonder most of those teams stay bad.

I don't think it is as bad as you think.

http://overthecap.com/top-player-salaries-cap.php?Position=LT&Year=2014

None of those salaries is rally that unmangeable in the current NFL salary structure.

Plus your argument is a bit circular. Would you rather have Timmons and Shazier and a mediocre OT depth chart is the exact reverse of your argument. I realize that their are trade-offs and opportunity costs with any method a team chooses to pursue in its roster construction. I would simply prefer to to build a solid OL first and foremost.

Look at the terrible play-action #'s detailed in this article. http://www.steelersdepot.com/2014/07/pro-football-focus-breaks-ben-roethlisbergers-passing-tendencies/ Traditionally, Roethlisberger has been lauded as one of the better play action QB's in the game. A terrible line that opened very few consistent holes in the run game and tended to not offer good pass protection either, allowed teams to take away a whole segment of the passing offense. The high frequency of screens and short passes may be because they give Haley such a rush, or they could also be related to poor line play.

To be clear, I am not advocating for passing up franchise quarterbacks and once in a generation talents to take the 3rd rated tackle on the board in a given draft class. C'mon. I was merely pointing out that the argument that having an elite LT = bad team may have something to do with where those players are typically drafted rather than the idea that devoting salary cap $ to a LT makes your team terrible.

Finally, to address the point about having a big hole in your lineup that teams are taking advantage of...what the hell do you call the terrible offensive lines that this team has fronted Ben with? I get that it is a calculated risk on the part of the FO. Take the $$ and devote them to another area and hope that Ben can survive and thrive. But teams have decidedly taken advantage of the poor line play - often in crucial situations. I know that it is a silly hypothetical, but improve the line play and how many SB trophies would be in the case? I argue at least 1 more and likely 2.

[katmandu]

Look, it's as simple as this. If Mike Adams had HALF the heart and warrior mentality as Hines Ward he would be a perennial Pro Bowler!

Mike has all the physical tools but he's just too damn soft. PERIOD!

[Shoes]

On his A$$ again… :chuckle:


There were several highlights from the pass-rushing/pass-protection competition. Nose tackle Steve McLendon (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12895/steve-mclendon?ex_cid=null) knocked Cody Wallace (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11341/cody-wallace?ex_cid=null) on his wallet after bull-rushing the reserve center and rookie nose tackle Daniel McCullers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/16952/dan-mccullers) ran over tackle Mike Adams (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/8133/mike-adams?ex_cid=null) later in the drill. The offensive line, however, appeared to hold its own as a group in the drill.

[GBMelBlount]

Look, it's as simple as this.

If Mike Adams had HALF the heart and warrior mentality as Hines Ward he would be a perennial Pro Bowler!

Mike has all the physical tools but he's just too damn soft. PERIOD!

...you'd think he was playing high....oh wait...

[86WARD]

220 pounds running directly at you with 4.3 speed...not many tackles are going to flat out stop that. It's easy to say that Adams is soft because of that, but if you've never played O-Line and dealt with 5' 8" of 220 pounds coming at you at that speed, you really are talking out your ass...just ass-uming that "big" should beat "little" with no problem...

[Shoes]

I think most folks are basing their comments on Adams past few years…and that isn't very promising.

[Mojouw]

On his A$$ again… :chuckle:


There were several highlights from the pass-rushing/pass-protection competition. Nose tackle Steve McLendon (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/12895/steve-mclendon?ex_cid=null) knocked Cody Wallace (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11341/cody-wallace?ex_cid=null) on his wallet after bull-rushing the reserve center and rookie nose tackle Daniel McCullers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/16952/dan-mccullers) ran over tackle Mike Adams (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/8133/mike-adams?ex_cid=null) later in the drill. The offensive line, however, appeared to hold its own as a group in the drill.



to be fair, McCullers can likely run over the entire o line group at once. And mountains. And locomotives.

[Shoes]

to be fair, McCullers can likely run over the entire o line group at once. And mountains. And locomotives.

Lets hope he can and does.

[steelreserve]

I don't think it is as bad as you think.

http://overthecap.com/top-player-salaries-cap.php?Position=LT&Year=2014

None of those salaries is rally that unmangeable in the current NFL salary structure.

Plus your argument is a bit circular. Would you rather have Timmons and Shazier and a mediocre OT depth chart is the exact reverse of your argument. I realize that their are trade-offs and opportunity costs with any method a team chooses to pursue in its roster construction. I would simply prefer to to build a solid OL first and foremost.

Look, regarding all of the above ... the salary cap is all about balance, and the payoff versus salary for elite tackles (or really any offensive line position) is probably the lowest of any position. The payoff in the average to good talent range for offensive linemen is excellent, but after that the price goes up so high it becomes a bad thing. That's further compounded by the fact that your offensive line is only as good as your weakest link, so if you don't have at least above-average players at every position, you might as well not be paying any of them. The fact that there are five OL spots also makes it extremely difficult to pay all of them well. One salary might not be totally unmanageable under the current cap structure, but five most certainly are; having only one or two star linemen doesn't do you any good at all. You'll either be spending a third of your salary cap on five guys, or using an inordinate number of high draft picks year in and year out. Neither of those is attractive.

That's why I hate the blue-chip offensive lineman idea. Not because hey, it's great to have a mediocre line, but because the math just doesn't work out. OL is the one position where a single great player makes the least difference. Spend the big money almost anywhere else on the field, and you'll get a bigger impact. You just want the offensive line to be competent; that's how it works in the league now. That makes the reverse of the Timmons/Shazier scenario almost laughable. Of course you'd take the mediocre OT depth chart.

Beyond all this, we'd probably be doing at least OK with the offensive line if a) We'd had decent coaching at the position, and b) we hadn't bombed on virtually every mid- and late-round OL pick for 10 years.

[Craic]

Look, regarding all of the above ... the salary cap is all about balance, and the payoff versus salary for elite tackles (or really any offensive line position) is probably the lowest of any position. The payoff in the average to good talent range for offensive linemen is excellent, but after that the price goes up so high it becomes a bad thing. That's further compounded by the fact that your offensive line is only as good as your weakest link, so if you don't have at least above-average players at every position, you might as well not be paying any of them. The fact that there are five OL spots also makes it extremely difficult to pay all of them well. One salary might not be totally unmanageable under the current cap structure, but five most certainly are; having only one or two star linemen doesn't do you any good at all. You'll either be spending a third of your salary cap on five guys, or using an inordinate number of high draft picks year in and year out. Neither of those is attractive.

That's why I hate the blue-chip offensive lineman idea. Not because hey, it's great to have a mediocre line, but because the math just doesn't work out. OL is the one position where a single great player makes the least difference. Spend the big money almost anywhere else on the field, and you'll get a bigger impact. You just want the offensive line to be competent; that's how it works in the league now. That makes the reverse of the Timmons/Shazier scenario almost laughable. Of course you'd take the mediocre OT depth chart.

Beyond all this, we'd probably be doing at least OK with the offensive line if a) We'd had decent coaching at the position, and b) we hadn't bombed on virtually every mid- and late-round OL pick for 10 years.

Damn it, SR, stop making sense. It makes hard for me to argue with you.

[steelreserve]

Damn it, SR, stop making sense.

OK, how about this:

Shoot all the hairdressers! We don't needa be charged no $12 for no stinkin' haircut!

And another thing, all these planes that are crashing lately? They were shot down by Howard Stern. You're just listening to what they want you to believe, what they ALL want you to believe. Who? The government, it's run by vampires, you do realize. What do you mean, everybody knows that. At least in Alaska they do.

Did you know that in New York, a cab ride to the airport is like $100, and they don't even give ya a discount if yer in a wheelchair. Not like you'd need one anyway, know what I mean? huh huh huh.

Whaddya mean how am I gonna pay? I just gave you a bottlecap & like 2 whole fistfuls of pigeon feathers. WHERES MY FUCKIN PIZZA?!?!??? Who are you callin a fairweather fan? Get outta here! *throws cat*

[ALLD]

No Orlando Pace and Kurt Warner is a maybe.

[Mojouw]

Look, regarding all of the above ... the salary cap is all about balance, and the payoff versus salary for elite tackles (or really any offensive line position) is probably the lowest of any position. The payoff in the average to good talent range for offensive linemen is excellent, but after that the price goes up so high it becomes a bad thing. That's further compounded by the fact that your offensive line is only as good as your weakest link, so if you don't have at least above-average players at every position, you might as well not be paying any of them. The fact that there are five OL spots also makes it extremely difficult to pay all of them well. One salary might not be totally unmanageable under the current cap structure, but five most certainly are; having only one or two star linemen doesn't do you any good at all. You'll either be spending a third of your salary cap on five guys, or using an inordinate number of high draft picks year in and year out. Neither of those is attractive.

That's why I hate the blue-chip offensive lineman idea. Not because hey, it's great to have a mediocre line, but because the math just doesn't work out. OL is the one position where a single great player makes the least difference. Spend the big money almost anywhere else on the field, and you'll get a bigger impact. You just want the offensive line to be competent; that's how it works in the league now. That makes the reverse of the Timmons/Shazier scenario almost laughable. Of course you'd take the mediocre OT depth chart.

Beyond all this, we'd probably be doing at least OK with the offensive line if a) We'd had decent coaching at the position, and b) we hadn't bombed on virtually every mid- and late-round OL pick for 10 years.

I agree to a point. We lack enough information to really evaluate the 1 versus all 5 argument. How does having mediocrity across the line affect scheme and assignments? What we do know is that the lack of quality tackle play is the primary reason that Heath Miller hasn't put up at least Jason Witten level #'s over his career. Miller spent far too many seasons (in my opinion) as a 3rd tackle. We also know that bad interior line play caused a crucial pick in the GB super bowl. Now did that come from bad interior players or from interior players "cheating" outside to help the crappy tackles? While I am not arguing that the Steelers need to field a high $ all-star line, they do need to get to the point where on any given play each member of that unit can concentrate solely on his assignment and not have to worry about "helping" his line-mates cover deficiencies in their game.

[steelreserve]

I agree to a point. We lack enough information to really evaluate the 1 versus all 5 argument. How does having mediocrity across the line affect scheme and assignments? What we do know is that the lack of quality tackle play is the primary reason that Heath Miller hasn't put up at least Jason Witten level #'s over his career. Miller spent far too many seasons (in my opinion) as a 3rd tackle. We also know that bad interior line play caused a crucial pick in the GB super bowl. Now did that come from bad interior players or from interior players "cheating" outside to help the crappy tackles? While I am not arguing that the Steelers need to field a high $ all-star line, they do need to get to the point where on any given play each member of that unit can concentrate solely on his assignment and not have to worry about "helping" his line-mates cover deficiencies in their game.

Yeah, I know what you're saying. We definitely want the line to be better than it was from circa 2007-2011, for all of the above reasons.

I do think that the problems tend to show up wherever the crappy player is, inside or out. When we had Mahan, it was Mahan getting abused; when we had Stapleton, it was Stapleton getting abused; when we had Jonathan Scott, it was Scott getting abused. Of course, it didn't help that the rest of the players were just average, but in my mind, with the way the line was so cartoonishly bad in 2007-09, with a guy coming completely unblocked on half the plays, it really seemed that more often than not, the weakest guy was the one making the whole thing collapse.

For that Super Bowl interception that you mentioned ... we had pretty decent tackles that year - Flozell Adams and Max Starks, neither of whom were great, but both of whom were respectable at that point; exceeding expectations, if you will. Then of course, Starks wound up on injured reserve and we were treated to Jonathan Scott for the rest of the season. Ironically, Scott wasn't even a part of that play - his guy backed up and then did a delayed rush, and they didn't even make contact until the ball was thrown. Meanwhile, Adams did a good job keeping his guy out, Foster stood around looking for someone to block, Legursky had a little trouble with his guy (B.J. Raji), but Kemoeatu caused the interception by getting straight-up murdered 1-on-1. Whether that was because he was "cheating" or not, we'll never know, but to me it looked like the plan was for Legursky to block Raji, Adams to block the LE or LOLB depending on who rushed, Foster to take the LE if the linebacker rushed, or help with Raji if he didn't, and for Kemo and Scott to block the guys in front of them 1-on-1. So there were no surprises, just Kemo getting his ass handed to him. You can be the judge of that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8iqMXyOZZc

Anyway. It's not my intention to argue with you about any of this, just an interesting exercise ... I definitely feel where you're coming from, and to have the line swing to the depths it did a few years ago, well, I don't think anyone wants that. But what I do think is that five competent players make a far better line than 3 or 4 great ones and 1 or 2 terrible ones. Make no mistake, having a guy like Pouncey on the team definitely helps them on the field. Does his contract give me pause? Absolutely. If we had the option to take 5 players of Velasco's level for $3M or $4M a pop, I'd probably do that in a heartbeat.

[Dwinsgames]

James C Wexell @jimwexell (https://twitter.com/jimwexell) · 4h (https://twitter.com/jimwexell/status/494952306471751680) Howard Jones just beat Mike Adams inside and on next rep outside in one on one drills.


.

[Shoes]

.


Offensive tackle Mike Adams (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/8133/mike-adams?ex_cid=null) has struggled during the first week of camp. Adams, who got bowled over by rookie nose tackle Daniel McCullers on Wednesday, allowed rookie outside linebacker Howard Jones (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/17009/howard-jones?ex_cid=null) to run right past him in a pass rushing drill. Adams has been alternating practices when it comes to playing left and right tackle, and the third-year man needs to pick up his play.

[Mojouw]

Yeah, I know what you're saying. We definitely want the line to be better than it was from circa 2007-2011, for all of the above reasons.

I do think that the problems tend to show up wherever the crappy player is, inside or out. When we had Mahan, it was Mahan getting abused; when we had Stapleton, it was Stapleton getting abused; when we had Jonathan Scott, it was Scott getting abused. Of course, it didn't help that the rest of the players were just average, but in my mind, with the way the line was so cartoonishly bad in 2007-09, with a guy coming completely unblocked on half the plays, it really seemed that more often than not, the weakest guy was the one making the whole thing collapse.

For that Super Bowl interception that you mentioned ... we had pretty decent tackles that year - Flozell Adams and Max Starks, neither of whom were great, but both of whom were respectable at that point; exceeding expectations, if you will. Then of course, Starks wound up on injured reserve and we were treated to Jonathan Scott for the rest of the season. Ironically, Scott wasn't even a part of that play - his guy backed up and then did a delayed rush, and they didn't even make contact until the ball was thrown. Meanwhile, Adams did a good job keeping his guy out, Foster stood around looking for someone to block, Legursky had a little trouble with his guy (B.J. Raji), but Kemoeatu caused the interception by getting straight-up murdered 1-on-1. Whether that was because he was "cheating" or not, we'll never know, but to me it looked like the plan was for Legursky to block Raji, Adams to block the LE or LOLB depending on who rushed, Foster to take the LE if the linebacker rushed, or help with Raji if he didn't, and for Kemo and Scott to block the guys in front of them 1-on-1. So there were no surprises, just Kemo getting his ass handed to him. You can be the judge of that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8iqMXyOZZc

Anyway. It's not my intention to argue with you about any of this, just an interesting exercise ... I definitely feel where you're coming from, and to have the line swing to the depths it did a few years ago, well, I don't think anyone wants that. But what I do think is that five competent players make a far better line than 3 or 4 great ones and 1 or 2 terrible ones. Make no mistake, having a guy like Pouncey on the team definitely helps them on the field. Does his contract give me pause? Absolutely. If we had the option to take 5 players of Velasco's level for $3M or $4M a pop, I'd probably do that in a heartbeat.

There is definitely something to everything your saying. I wasn't trying to get in a huge fight either - I think for me it is just frustration with not seeing a consistently above average, let alone dominant line from the Steelers since sometime during the middle part of Cowher's tenure.

As to Adams getting beat in practice, it sounds like it is for the same reason as a long and undistinguished list of Steelers tackles; Scott, Starks (the best of a bad lot), Gilbert, Hillis, etc - -they all are slow and change direction with the nimbleness and grace of a Nimitz class aircraft carrier.

I don't find it surprising that Adams still kinda stinks. I was hoping that he got better, but whatever. I am far more concerned about this (from Dale Lolley's blog): "Spaeth had his way with Jarvis Jones in one-on-one run blocking drills. The two were paired five times and Spaeth won four of the matchups."

One on one and Spaeth hands him his lunch? So Jones isn't that fast, doesn't have many pass rush moves, and can't bull rush a TE - albeit a pretty good blocking TE-let alone a tackle? Shazier better be damn good. Or maybe we can just trade Adams to the other team each week. Jones might be able to beat him...

[Shoes]

Strange, Tunch said he thought Jones was starting to looking good (the other day) and this from the PG today. Looks like he cleaned Millers clock in the pic…I think Jones will be fine.

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2014/07/30/Jones-showing-some-punch-in-second-Steelers-training-camp/stories/201407300106


@ 26:14

http://www.steelers.com/video-and-audio/videos/LIVE-1st-practice-in-pads/e8303365-9f6f-4182-be5a-0d4d28e0a494

[TMC]

Look, regarding all of the above ... the salary cap is all about balance, and the payoff versus salary for elite tackles (or really any offensive line position) is probably the lowest of any position. The payoff in the average to good talent range for offensive linemen is excellent, but after that the price goes up so high it becomes a bad thing. That's further compounded by the fact that your offensive line is only as good as your weakest link, so if you don't have at least above-average players at every position, you might as well not be paying any of them. The fact that there are five OL spots also makes it extremely difficult to pay all of them well. One salary might not be totally unmanageable under the current cap structure, but five most certainly are; having only one or two star linemen doesn't do you any good at all. You'll either be spending a third of your salary cap on five guys, or using an inordinate number of high draft picks year in and year out. Neither of those is attractive.

That's why I hate the blue-chip offensive lineman idea. Not because hey, it's great to have a mediocre line, but because the math just doesn't work out. OL is the one position where a single great player makes the least difference. Spend the big money almost anywhere else on the field, and you'll get a bigger impact. You just want the offensive line to be competent; that's how it works in the league now. That makes the reverse of the Timmons/Shazier scenario almost laughable. Of course you'd take the mediocre OT depth chart.

Beyond all this, we'd probably be doing at least OK with the offensive line if a) We'd had decent coaching at the position, and b) we hadn't bombed on virtually every mid- and late-round OL pick for 10 years.

Again, I am not sure that I agree with that premise. The NFL, in 2013, averaged just over $19 million per team on the offensive line. The Seahawks spend the most at $27 million. They are starting Okung ($9.54M), Carpenter ($2M), Unger ($6M), Sweezy ($500k), and Giacomini ($4.5M). They do not have elite level players across the board and do not pay elite level players but in 2 positions. They have a guy on a rookie contract (Carpenter), two high paid guys, and some manageable contracts to fill out the line.

In fact, the 4 teams that played in the Conference Championship games (Seattle, San Fran, Denver, New England) are #1, #6, #9, and #22 in spending on the offensive line with San Fran coming in at #22. San Fran is so low ($17M this season) because Staley is in the first season of his new 6 year, $44M contract. Iupati and Anthony Davis are still on their rookie deals. Kilgore and Snyder are low cost fill-ins. The common thread on these 4 teams are they all have quality left tackles. These 4 teams have Okung, Clady, Staley, and Solder.

Where do the Steelers fall on the spending for offensive line? 31st. The Steelers spent $10.7M on the offensive line last season. The highest paid offensive lineman right now is Pouncey. His salary cap number for this season is just over $5M. It will peak at just over $10M. Think about that. You complain about not wanting to pay a left tackle and the Steelers have left tackle cap hits at center because the line is so devoid of talent they had to keep the talent they do have. DeCastro will likely sign a new deal after this season and he is certain to get paid. If they drafted an elite left tackle today, he would play his rookie deal, which is very cheap, and by the time he was ready to get paid, Pouncey's contract would be coming off the books.

The key is to manage the salary cap, not shoot for lesser talent so you do not have to pay it. I would rather draft to be great and have to find ways to pay guys than strive to be average so I do not have those issues. If they draft a left tackle today, by the time he gets to his big money, Pouncey could be nearing the end of his career with DeCastro not far behind. Who else do the Steelers have to pay on that line? Gilbert? Foster? Adams? Beachum? You can afford two high end offensive linemen, keep a guy or two on their rookie deals, and scab in the rest. It is what the 4 teams that played for it all do.

[Shoes]

I'm thinking Wesley Johnson may be the #2 behind Beach tomorrow. This kid has made mistakes but he seems to learn fast and it's pretty clear Munch is putting him to the test in every position on the O-line. I think Adams can be the barge and Landry Jones can be the cargo….send them on down the Ohio or the practice squad.

[Devilsdancefloor]

I dont get adams at all but he got the serious case of the lazy i wouldnt lose any sleep if he left

[Steeldude]

I dont get adams at all but he got the serious case of the lazy i wouldnt lose any sleep if he left

He is also timid.

[ALLD]

He is also timid.

Becuase like our Cheech & Chong RBs, too much smoking makes you stupid and lazy. Just think if Adams was in the car that day, instead of Cheech & Chong we would have the Three Amigos.

[steelerdude15]

Hasn't he always played better at right tackle? He could possibly make a good right tackle, but yeah, he doesn't get the job done at left tackle.

[Dwinsgames]

Hasn't he always played better at right tackle? He could possibly make a good right tackle, but yeah, he doesn't get the job done at left tackle.



He was better than Gilbert on the right side during Adams rookie year .... key word WAS ....

since he was stabbed its like all his skilled leaked out ... not the same player at all