PDA

View Full Version : The Price of Loyalty in Pittsburgh



polamalubeast
09-11-2014, 11:42 AM
Just like the Steelers, the Cowboys seem to be stuck in a cycle of 8-8 seasons. And just like the Cowboys, the Steelers have a problem: They’re too loyal.

Bill Barnwell on September 11, 2014

For generations, the Pittsburgh Steelers have been regarded as the NFL’s model franchise. Sure, they’ve won more Super Bowls than anybody else in league history, but it’s more than that. The Steelers have been the blueprint for organizational success, the drafting-and-development machine that remains competitive, year after year, in one of the league’s smallest markets. Pittsburgh has had three head coaches since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970. Three! If that’s not the picture of stability, what is?

Recently, though, Pittsburgh has seen struggles. After losing to Tim Tebow’s Broncos in the 2011 playoffs, the Steelers have been underwhelming. They just finished their second consecutive 8-8 season, marking only the fourth time in the past 40 years that Pittsburgh has failed to post a winning record in consecutive seasons. Their coaching decisions have come into question, as much-maligned offensive coordinator Bruce Arians was let go and gave way to much-maligned offensive coordinator Todd Haley, only for Arians to thrive in Indianapolis and Arizona.

And, perhaps most distressingly, the Steelers have found themselves in dire salary-cap straits for several seasons now. Pittsburgh had one of the worst cap situations in football heading into the 2014 offseason, at which point it was one of just two NFL teams projected to be over the cap. The other team? The Dallas Cowboys, whose cap woes I documented last October. Just like the Steelers, the Cowboys seem to be stuck in a cycle of 8-8 seasons. And just like the Cowboys, the Steelers have a problem: They’re too loyal.

Let the Man Go Through

You know what the Pittsburgh Steelers do. They draft a guy who played well in college. He sits as a rookie and plays limited snaps before moving into the starting lineup in either his second or third season. He’s immediately very good, eventually gets great, makes a few Pro Bowls, and after about 10 to 12 seasons, he either leaves Pittsburgh and plays poorly or retires. There are generations of Steelers players, especially on defense, who have lived that out. It’s a great way to run an organization.

What’s happened over the past few years is similar to what we’ve seen in Dallas. In Texas, Jerry Jones has repeatedly fallen in love with players on his own roster and given them massive extensions, only to find that the players either weren’t very good or went south awful fast. Having spent heavily to lock up as many Pro Bowl–caliber starters as possible, Jones was then forced to rely on undrafted free agents and late-round picks on rookie deals to fill much of the second and third string. When those stars played poorly or got injured, the backups would be forced into starting roles, where they would be abysmal. Ask a Cowboys fan about Jeff Heath sometime.

When Jones moved on from those players, the prorated signing bonus remaining on Dallas’s cap in future seasons would accelerate onto the current cap, drowning the team in dead money. Eventually, the Cowboys were going to have to take a stand and move on from talented players or field a 40-man roster. That moment happened this offseason, when they had to release DeMarcus Ware, pass on Jason Hatcher, and restructure a half-dozen more contracts just to get under the cap. Of course, they still managed to find enough cap space to give kicker Dan Bailey an extension through 2020, which should show you how much the Cowboys have learned.

This isn’t about the Cowboys, but I bring up their mistakes to put what the Steelers have done in context. The Steelers aren’t quite as bad as the Cowboys because they haven’t been as aggressive about dumping contracts to try to regain cap space in each given year. The Steelers have done plenty of restructuring, especially over the past two seasons, but their list of players who were given big contracts in recent seasons without coming close to finishing them is nowhere as long:

Player | Contract | Signed | Last Year With Team
Chris Kemoeatu | 5 years, $20 million | 2009 | 2011
Max Starks | 4 years, $26.3 million | 2009 | 2010
Willie Colon | 5 years, $29 million | 2011 | 2012
LaMarr Woodley | 6 years, $61.5 million | 2011 | 2013
James Harrison | 6 years, $51.8 million | 2009 | 2012



read more

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-price-of-loyalty-in-pittsburgh/

fansince'76
09-11-2014, 11:54 AM
Stopped reading after the first sentence when he compared the Steelers' situation to that circus Jerry Jones is running in Dallas.

The bottom line is this: the Steelers held on to aging players in an attempt to make one last one run with the old guard that they won 2 other rings with and came up one drive short against the Packers in the Super Bowl. That, plus the albatross that was the Woodley contract and a salary cap that has remained largely flat since 2009 have had them financially hamstrung for the last 3 years. They are just beginning to climb out of it now, but it's going to take a bit more time because of the dramatic amount of roster turnover they've had recently.

The Cowboys have been going down in flames for years now, they haven't sniffed a Super Bowl since Clinton's first term and will continue down the same path as long as Jones continues to hold onto the delusion that he is a GM.

The two situations are not even remotely comparable. More shit sports "journalism" which has become par for the course anymore.

ALLD
09-11-2014, 12:19 PM
Fire Goodell!

Craic
09-11-2014, 12:35 PM
Here's the funniest part about it:


Roethlisberger clearly isn’t the second-best passer in football. He’s obviously good enough for Pittsburgh to win, but his contract is sufficiently onerous enough to prevent the team from spending money elsewhere. At 32 and with a history of both taking big hits and getting injured, it’s not clear that signing him to an extension would be a wise move, even if there isn’t an obvious Roethlisberger replacement on the roster.

Didn't bother reading the entire thing, just scanned it here and there. This is what happens when you have people solely looking at stats and not the context in which the stats were developed. Such as, the entire issue wasn't about loyalty, but about keeping the SB window open. Such as, Pittsburgh has cut a number of big names after their thirtieth birthday, even if they were playing at a high standard. Such as, Pittsburgh regularly loses free agents that we think are important to the team.

HollywoodSteel
09-11-2014, 01:36 PM
Everyone loves to make weird comparisons, but some things are pretty easy to figure out. Our stars got old and our drafts haven't been good enough. When you hit him runs like the Seahawks have in drafts several years in a row you end up with, well the Seahawks.

I think Ben is the one factor that gives us a chance. Our offense has talent and could be very good if we stay healthy and we game plan well. Our D is a question mark and a work in progress. I think our secondary will be moderately bad to really bad all year, but we a chance that our front seven can improve as the season goes forward. The big problem with that is at NT. We just have to pray that someone steps up this year and is better than they are now. I'd love for Dan the giant to be the answer, but I fear he will not be ready this year. He has strength but no real technique yet. I hope he can improve with coaching. We haven't found the next Casey Hampton yet and will never find another Aaron Smith, but at least we have talent (Heyward) and hopefully future talent (Tuit) there.

Crow-Magnon
09-11-2014, 06:30 PM
Comparing the Steelers to the 'Boys is like comparing Ruth's Chris to Golden Corral. With Clowns.