Breaking news! LaMarr Woodley

[Pittsburgh43]

LaMarr Woodley has signed a long-term contract extension with the Pittsburgh Steelers! More details to come...

[Count Steeler]

They must have been burning the midnight oil. Great news.

[Pittsburgh43]

From Woodley's twitter page:

Wanted u 2 hear it 1st- drafted here...Super Bowl here...will retire here!! time 2 get u #7!! @STEELERS 4 LIFE!!

[Pittsburgh43]

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=253972647954000&set=a.136880349663231.19869.132914193393180&type=1&theater


Check this out!

[Vis]

What are the numbers?

[Pittsburgh43]

No clue yet.

[fansince'76]

What are the numbers?

Even more importantly, how close does it bring us back down to the cap? We were about $8.5 million over, last I checked.

[Bluecoat96]

Even more importantly, how close does it bring us back down to the cap? We were about $8.5 million over, last I checked.

I'm willing to bet we were under the cap regardless of what Schefter thought he knew or heard from a "source." Bouchette had completely contradicted Scheftie and had said that all deals were made to be under the cap in time. IMHO Schefter had info from before the trio of contracts that restructed to get under the cap.

[stillers4me]

I never even had a doubt that the Steelers would even consider letting Lamarr sniff FA...ever. That man is a Steeler LB to the core.

[fansince'76]

I'm willing to bet we were under the cap regardless of what Schefter thought he knew or heard from a "source." Bouchette had completely contradicted Scheftie and had said that all deals were made to be under the cap in time. IMHO Schefter had info from before the trio of contracts that restructed to get under the cap.

Yeah, it wouldn't be the first time Schefter was wrong about something.

[HometownGal]

Awesome news! :applaudit: :yay3:

[venom]

Me likey

[Pittsburgh43]

Sources say the deal is for 6 years/ $61.5 million.

[stillers4me]

http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/1269370077/edphoto1_normal.jpgEdBouchette (http://www.steelersuniverse.com/#!/EdBouchette)Ed Bouchette



#steelers (http://www.steelersuniverse.com/#!/search?q=%23steelers) get LaMarr Woodley deal done in middle of the night . 6 years, $61.5 M with $22.5 M bonus

[stillers4me]

UPDATE: Per a source with knowledge of the situation, it’s a six-year, $61.5 million deal. He’ll make $18.1 million in 2011 and $27 million over two years, making him the second highest-paid Steeler of all time, behind only Roethlisberger. The cap number for 2011 is not yet known.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

[SteelMember]

Wow. Great news. Glad to have him locked in for 6.

[86WARD]

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=253972647954000&set=a.136880349663231.19869.132914193393180&type=1&theater


Check this out!
For those of you not on facebook:



Quote:

Thought id let yall hear it from me 1st- Drafted here... super bowl here.. will retire here!! STEELER 4 LIFE!!!!!! now time to get u this 7th trophy!!!! thank u 2 the rooney family, my teammates, my agent, and you!!



https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/226146_253972647954000_132914193393180_990928_8239 793_n.jpg

[Bluecoat96]

If anyone's worried about future salary cap issues a deal like this could create, keep in mind that the salary cap should rise a good bit over the next several years due to the increase in revenue, thus enabling us to lock up more players like Timmons and Wallace, and Polamalu. That, along with expected retirements, (Farrior, Ward:Cry:, James?) should keep us in decent shape.

BTW, I think that Woodley was worth a $61 million dollar contract. I think we had little choice but to offer him a deal like that. He's a good bit younger than Harrison.

[steeldevil]

So happy Woodley is gonna be staying with us!! I think that is a fair deal.

Apparently his cap number for this year is going to be about 5 Million.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11217/1165410-100.stm?cmpid=steelers.xml

[The Duke]

Spread out through six years so definitely a friendlier deal than Hali's

[kmsteelerwr15]

Great news to wake up to this morning!

[BlastFurnace]

Based upon what he has done for years, I think the Steelers need to extend Omar Khan.

[polamalubeast]

great news!

[hotrodder07]

Great! Glad to have him as a Steeler for 6 more years. Great job locking him up!

[suitanim]

He'll be 32 when his contract is up again. I can live with that...

[Steeldude]

that's a little much. he better live up to it. i want to see him put forth the effort harrison does. from what i have seen so far woodley isn't worth 10 mil a season. then again i don't think any player should be paid that kind of money.

[HometownGal]

I think Wood is worth every penny of that contract and obviously the Steelers do which is really all that matters. :yay3:

[steelerfan]

I think Wood is worth every penny of that contract and obviously the Steelers do which is really all that matters. :yay3:




Good for Wood :applaudit:....But maybe Bad for Harrison. I think the writing is on the wall for James after this season. I think he will be released after this season. Cause no way can they pay Woodley what he is making, and Harrison, and expect to re-sign a player like Timmons and Wallace, and Troy.

[86WARD]

Spread out through six years so definitely a friendlier deal than Hali's

Much friendlier. Less guaranteed too.

Now get Timmons done!

[tube517]

Yeah, it wouldn't be the first time Schefter was wrong about something.

Ever since he went to BSPN/Disney Channel 2 Schaftyou has been inconsistent.

[Chidi29]

I still think it's a lot of money to shell out for a position we've had so much past success with.

[O'Malley]

LaMarr posted of face book that he was drafted a Steeler won a championship as a Steeler and plans to retire a Steeler!!!!!!!! He then said time for # 7..........

[Steeldude]

I still think it's a lot of money to shell out for a position we've had so much past success with.

agreed. it's the steelers' system that makes most of the LBs. IMO, woodley is weak in containment and very average in coverage.

[polamalubeast]

Woodley has 35 sacks since 2008 and has 11 sacks in seven playoff games....He deserves to contract!

[7willBheaven]

Good to hear...glad he'll be around for a while...its good to see some of the younger guys being locked up (now onto Timmons/Wallace). Also I heard the cap hit this year is 6.5 mil not 5. Also for those of you worried about such a big contract for a position the Steelers can usually easily replace...I heard somewhere that the contract is more front loaded...so they can cut ties with him in the later years of he starts to fall off as he gets older.

[The Duke]

Woodley has 35 sacks since 2008 and has 11 sacks in seven playoff games....He deserves to contract!

Of course he deserves one. Not nearly as big as this one, but oh well, that's the market and they like to keep the same players I guess

I just hope there's enough for Timmons to be kept. Now he is one special talent

[Psycho Ward 86]

ok first of all...


That, along with expected retirements, (Farrior, Ward:Cry:, James?)

lol

really jacked about this deal! A bit hefty, but it wouldve been tough to go into not this season, but the next without Woodley and an aging Harrison with only Worilds behind the two having played at all.

[Carolina Steelers]

Like everyone else has said im glad hes back. It does seem like alot of money since it is the 2nd highest contract ever (Big Ben) to be given out by Steelers, but Wood is still young and I do believe he could be D.P.O.Y. in the near future. Plus now I can buy some Woodley Memorbilia, I usually wait till they sign there 2nd contract to buy anything major im just funny that way.

[suitanim]

Some people are never happy.

[oneforthetoe]

agreed. it's the steelers' system that makes most of the LBs. IMO, woodley is weak in containment and very average in coverage.

I don't think he is week in containment or we wouldn't consistently have the best run defense in the league. And while he is not great in pass coverage, he is 1000 times better at it than Kevin Greene was - and I was bummed when Kevin Greene left.

[Steeldude]

Woodley has 35 sacks since 2008 and has 11 sacks in seven playoff games....He deserves to contract!

i'll be happier with the contract when he matches harrison's motor. i expect woodley to be a beast against the run; in containment and in pass coverage(at least better) now. earn the money. even gildon got sacks in this system.

[Steeldude]

Some people are never happy.

and some people are lemmings and the world keeps turning.

[st33lersguy]

Glad to have Woodley for at least 6 more years

[Nadroj 20]

We had to keep Woodley and that is what we did. If people think its pricey then ask yourself this question.....pay a little more then you think he is worth? or lose him....

No brainer if you ask me.

[Chidi29]

Don't forget the contracts that are going to be coming up real soon. Wallace, Timmons, Pouncey, Mendenhall, Hood, Troy. Not to mention the fact that the cap will be tighter in future years with all the restructured money coming back into play.

We aren't going to be able to keep everyone. Yeah, fans might be happy now but not when they see one of those guys walk.

[Boomerang]

Glad to have Lamarr signed,he is valuable to our continued success.

[suitanim]

and some people are lemmings and the world keeps turning.

Dude, you NEVER say ANYTHING positive! About the most successful football franchise of the last 40 years!

So, according to you, the team that traditionally NEVER overpays, overpaid for Woodley? You were also the guy who kept harping on how fat and slow Wood was last year. So, again, you know better than the FO. Laughable.

It's a damned good thing you have nothing to do with the decision making of this club, because they'd be worse off than the Browns with you at the helm.

[polamalubeast]

Dude, you NEVER say ANYTHING positive!

True

Many people forget that Joey Porter had his best season of his career with the Dolphins in 2008!

[TMC]

Don't forget the contracts that are going to be coming up real soon. Wallace, Timmons, Pouncey, Mendenhall, Hood, Troy. Not to mention the fact that the cap will be tighter in future years with all the restructured money coming back into play.

We aren't going to be able to keep everyone. Yeah, fans might be happy now but not when they see one of those guys walk.

I really do not agree. The Steelers were about $90M in spent money towards the 2012 salary cap. When they cut Starks and ARE, they saved another $7.5M against that number, dropping it to roughly $82.5M. Just going through the numbers that were leaked and applying some rough justice, Woodley should come in around $7.5M or so in 2012. When you factor in the other moves, subtractions and additions, it will probably place them in the neighborhood of under $115M towards the 2012 salary cap.

Now, the NFL just reached an agreement with a major cable supplier that puts the NFL Network in 27.5 million more homes. The terms (money) was not released, but that will hit the cap next year. In addition, they are working on putting together the Thursday Night package. The Monday NF package brings about $1.1 billion in revenue a year with the Sunday NF package bringing in just under $700M. They may only sell half of the TNF package because the NFL network televised the other half. It could add another $500M to the pot. The players get 55% of all TV revenue. That goes to the cap.

Then, ALL the TV deals come up in 2013 and some expect those to double. DOUBLE. That would explode the cap in 2013 making any deal signed this year or next look like a bargain.

Pouncey's contract does not come up for 4 more years. Hood is not due until after 2013. Both of those should fall in after the new TV deals. Mendenhall runs out after 2012, but IMO, while he is a nice back to have, I do not know if I feel he is a must keep, break the bank type. Polamalu wants to be a Steeler for life. I think he works with the front office. The big young guns to ink are Timmons and Wallace. If they both sign next season, the Steelers should have space to ink both because they should not have more than $115M committed AND the cap should increase. The first year salaries of these guys will be low and as they get pricey, they should also be feeling the effects of the new increases in revenue.

Finally, I think you have to look at some of the larger contracts that will fall off. The Steelers have 8 starters on defense over 30. You will see, in the next couple years, guys like Aaron Smith, Hampton, Keisel, Farrior, and Clark hang up the cleats. Hampton makes $7M per season. Smith is at $6.1M in cap space. Keisel and Farrior are over $4M as is Clark. On offense, Ward will call it a day soon.

It is not as dire as some paint it to be.

[Pittsburgh43]

Great post, TMC. We have arguably the best player management team in the NFL and I trust their decision. Not every player can get a max contract, you have to pick & choose, and they chose Wood & I'll happily live with that decision. Guy puts up great regular season numbers and is one of our most clutch players in the playoffs.

[fansince'76]

and some people are lemmings and the world keeps turning.


Dude, you NEVER say ANYTHING positive! About the most successful football franchise of the last 40 years!

So, according to you, the team that traditionally NEVER overpays, overpaid for Woodley? You were also the guy who kept harping on how fat and slow Wood was last year. So, again, you know better than the FO. Laughable.

It's a damned good thing you have nothing to do with the decision making of this club, because they'd be worse off than the Browns with you at the helm.

C'mon guys, stay on topic here, please.

[tube517]

I really do not agree. The Steelers were about $90M in spent money towards the 2012 salary cap. When they cut Starks and ARE, they saved another $7.5M against that number, dropping it to roughly $82.5M. Just going through the numbers that were leaked and applying some rough justice, Woodley should come in around $7.5M or so in 2012. When you factor in the other moves, subtractions and additions, it will probably place them in the neighborhood of under $115M towards the 2012 salary cap.

Now, the NFL just reached an agreement with a major cable supplier that puts the NFL Network in 27.5 million more homes. The terms (money) was not released, but that will hit the cap next year. In addition, they are working on putting together the Thursday Night package. The Monday NF package brings about $1.1 billion in revenue a year with the Sunday NF package bringing in just under $700M. They may only sell half of the TNF package because the NFL network televised the other half. It could add another $500M to the pot. The players get 55% of all TV revenue. That goes to the cap.

Then, ALL the TV deals come up in 2013 and some expect those to double. DOUBLE. That would explode the cap in 2013 making any deal signed this year or next look like a bargain.

Pouncey's contract does not come up for 4 more years. Hood is not due until after 2013. Both of those should fall in after the new TV deals. Mendenhall runs out after 2012, but IMO, while he is a nice back to have, I do not know if I feel he is a must keep, break the bank type. Polamalu wants to be a Steeler for life. I think he works with the front office. The big young guns to ink are Timmons and Wallace. If they both sign next season, the Steelers should have space to ink both because they should not have more than $115M committed AND the cap should increase. The first year salaries of these guys will be low and as they get pricey, they should also be feeling the effects of the new increases in revenue.

Finally, I think you have to look at some of the larger contracts that will fall off. The Steelers have 8 starters on defense over 30. You will see, in the next couple years, guys like Aaron Smith, Hampton, Keisel, Farrior, and Clark hang up the cleats. Hampton makes $7M per season. Smith is at $6.1M in cap space. Keisel and Farrior are over $4M as is Clark. On offense, Ward will call it a day soon.

It is not as dire as some paint it to be.


Potsie will retire at age 67 in time for Social Security. :chuckle:

[SteelGhost]

Glad to know we'll keep Wood for 6 more years :tt02:

[polamalubeast]

don't start crying because you think kordell was a good decision. i guess the FO knew better. that 5+ year kordell experiment was grand indeed.

actually, if you ever really read what anyone posts, i said 10 mil is too much for any player. are you saying woodley has shown to be worth 10 mil a season?

you can relax now. there is no reason why you need to pepper your rant with uppercase words...lol. before you take your blood pressure medicine remember that not everyone is like you. we can't all be mindless lemmings as you happen to be. many people have their own thoughts/opinions. try to remember that before you start whining about posts written on here by various members.


3 Presence in the Super Bowl in the last six years, I think we can trust our front office.

For Kordell Stewart .. it happens to everyone to make mistakes, and Stewart left in 2003.

And Woodley, he made ​​35 sacks in his last three years and 11 sacks in seven playoff games.... It was only 26 years (It will only be better)and if you look at other players in the league in his position, we can say that deserves to contract.


I would not like to see Woodley with the Patriots, Jets, Ravens or Cowboys!

[oneforthetoe]

Brett Favre

[Psycho Ward 86]

Brett Favre

irrelevant and unoriginal?

[oneforthetoe]

irrelevant and unoriginal?

Brett Favre references are never irrelevant. Geeez ...... next thing you'll tell me is John Kuhn references are irrelevant and unnecessary. Crazy talk.:tongue1:

[Chidi29]

I really do not agree. The Steelers were about $90M in spent money towards the 2012 salary cap. When they cut Starks and ARE, they saved another $7.5M against that number, dropping it to roughly $82.5M. Just going through the numbers that were leaked and applying some rough justice, Woodley should come in around $7.5M or so in 2012. When you factor in the other moves, subtractions and additions, it will probably place them in the neighborhood of under $115M towards the 2012 salary cap.

Now, the NFL just reached an agreement with a major cable supplier that puts the NFL Network in 27.5 million more homes. The terms (money) was not released, but that will hit the cap next year. In addition, they are working on putting together the Thursday Night package. The Monday NF package brings about $1.1 billion in revenue a year with the Sunday NF package bringing in just under $700M. They may only sell half of the TNF package because the NFL network televised the other half. It could add another $500M to the pot. The players get 55% of all TV revenue. That goes to the cap.

Then, ALL the TV deals come up in 2013 and some expect those to double. DOUBLE. That would explode the cap in 2013 making any deal signed this year or next look like a bargain.

Pouncey's contract does not come up for 4 more years. Hood is not due until after 2013. Both of those should fall in after the new TV deals. Mendenhall runs out after 2012, but IMO, while he is a nice back to have, I do not know if I feel he is a must keep, break the bank type. Polamalu wants to be a Steeler for life. I think he works with the front office. The big young guns to ink are Timmons and Wallace. If they both sign next season, the Steelers should have space to ink both because they should not have more than $115M committed AND the cap should increase. The first year salaries of these guys will be low and as they get pricey, they should also be feeling the effects of the new increases in revenue.

Finally, I think you have to look at some of the larger contracts that will fall off. The Steelers have 8 starters on defense over 30. You will see, in the next couple years, guys like Aaron Smith, Hampton, Keisel, Farrior, and Clark hang up the cleats. Hampton makes $7M per season. Smith is at $6.1M in cap space. Keisel and Farrior are over $4M as is Clark. On offense, Ward will call it a day soon.

It is not as dire as some paint it to be.

It's hard to say how much the cap will be raised. It will be but I don't see a dramatic increase that would create a giant spending frenzy. Those don't typically happen, am I right?

Just because Pouncey is going to be locked up for awhile, it doesn't mean he isn't going to want a big payday quicker. You think he's going to like being paid under a million in base salary while being touted as the next great Pittsburgh center?

Didn't Ben take a pretty hefty "paycut" this year in his restructure? I put it in quotes because as I'm sure you know, it wasn't a paycut. That money just got moved to bonuses. He could be looking at a 15 million base salary when that money comes up. With his signing bonus, you're looking at close to a 20 million cap hit. That'd be over 16% of the cap this year alone so roughly 12-13 percent of the cap when the time comes.

You're right that there are players that will be gone in the next couple years. But of course, there will be fresh faces that take their places and become stars. We weren't having a conversation about Mike Wallace being one of the next big money receivers this time last year. He was still more potential than anything else. For all we know, Marcus Gilbert becomes one of the best OL. Sanders or Brown may do what Wallace did. What if one of the young corners plays well? They're going to want to get paid. You have to factor that in too.

And this wasn't even my main point. No matter what the cap situation is, I'm not paying that much to a position where Clark Haggans can get thrown in there and record 8.5 sacks.

[Count Steeler]

And this wasn't even my main point. No matter what the cap situation is, I'm not paying that much to a position where Clark Haggans can get thrown in there and record 8.5 sacks.

That is a very valid point Chidi29. However, there must be something going on in the FO for them to sign this contract. They must see something in Woodley that they want to wrap up for 6 years, or they have come to a realization that this is the kind of money that needs to be spent in the new NFL (thank you Oakland). I'm not sure of their thought process, but given their track record, they seem to be right more often than they are wrong.

[Chidi29]

That is a very valid point Chidi29. However, there must be something going on in the FO for them to sign this contract. They must see something in Woodley that they want to wrap up for 6 years, or they have come to a realization that this is the kind of money that needs to be spent in the new NFL (thank you Oakland). I'm not sure of their thought process, but given their track record, they seem to be right more often than they are wrong.

It's not hard to see why he got the long-term deal. LaMarr is a great player. Done nothing but good things for us. I'm not denying that.

And you're right they know what they're doing much more than I do. They know more than all of us. But I hate to play the "trust the FO" card. Because that can be the answer for everything. They always know better than we do. But it makes this forum a whole lot less interesting when we all just go with the flow.

[Count Steeler]

True enough. I guess we (I) play the FO card when it is a player we (I) like and are more subjectively thinking than objectively. This year though, I think the Oakland signing of their LB distorted the market. Now we are not privy to the negotiations, but I wonder if that card was played at all. I wonder how much Woodley was originally asking for and how low the Steelers originally offered.

By the last couple of years standard, I think you are right that the Steelers overpaid, but in the next couple of years, Woodley may be a bargain.

[Chidi29]

True enough. I guess we (I) play the FO card when it is a player we (I) like and are more subjectively thinking than objectively. This year though, I think the Oakland signing of their LB distorted the market. Now we are not privy to the negotiations, but I wonder if that card was played at all. I wonder how much Woodley was originally asking for and how low the Steelers originally offered.

By the last couple of years standard, I think you are right that the Steelers overpaid, but in the next couple of years, Woodley may be a bargain.

Nah, the market was pretty much already set. Ware and Dumervil cashed in in the past couple years. Ware got 7/79/40. Dumervil got 6/61.5/43.5. Just realized that is nearly identical to Woodley's. Hali just got 5/60/35.

So for once, Oakland isn't to blame.

[O'Malley]

Nah, the market was pretty much already set. Ware and Dumervil cashed in in the past couple years. Ware got 7/79/40. Dumervil got 6/61.5/43.5. Just realized that is nearly identical to Woodley's. Hali just got 5/60/35.

So for once, Oakland isn't to blame.

In all fairness none of the above are as good or valuable as Woodley... The man is tied for second all time in sacks in the playoffs(11)... He's a beast when it counts down the stretch and in the playoffs.. IMO well worth the price they paid!

[Chidi29]

How is he making a reported 18 million this year but his cap hit be at 5?

I'm looking at it being at least 7.75.

Steelersdepot is reporting a base salary of 4 million.

Rotoworld is saying he got a signing bonus of 22.5. Steelersdepot is reporting the same number though just calling it bonuses.

If it's a signing bonus, then there's 3.75 right there. Signing bonuses are paid in full right away but the cap hit is prorated over the length of the contract. 22.5/6 = 3.75. Tack on the four million base and you're at 7.75.

I'm no capologist but what gives?

[TMC]

It's hard to say how much the cap will be raised. It will be but I don't see a dramatic increase that would create a giant spending frenzy. Those don't typically happen, am I right?

The jumps in the cap are not typical. That is absolutely correct. But, look at the history of the cap. Here are the salary cap numbers since 1994 (in parenthesis is the percentage increase from the prior year):
1994-$34.6M
1995-$37.1M (7%)
1996-$40.7M (9%)
1997-$41.4M (2%)
1998-$52.3M (21%)
1999-$57M (8%)
2000-$62M (8%)
2001-$67M (7%)
2002-$71M (6%)
2003-$75M (5%)
2004-$80.5M (7%)
2005-$85.5M (6%)
2006-$102M (16%)
2007-$109M (6%)
2008-$116M (6%)
2009-$128M (9%)

If you notice, there are two double digit increases (percentage wise) during the history of the CBA. Do you know what also happens the two years of those double digit increases? The NFL signed new TV deals in 1998 (went from 1998-2005) and in 2006 (2006-2013). The total TV revenue increased from $1.1 billion to $2.2 billion (not including NFL ticket) in 1998. It jumped to $3.085 billion in 2006, again not including NFL Ticket.

So, while I ordinarily do not expect cap jumps, when there are new TV deals, it does and I expect it then. And, the NFL does not always open up new packages for sale. The Thursday Night Football will be an increase. So, you have impending money coming in, money that was not there during negotiations.


Just because Pouncey is going to be locked up for awhile, it doesn't mean he isn't going to want a big payday quicker. You think he's going to like being paid under a million in base salary while being touted as the next great Pittsburgh center?

I think with the new rookie salary cap, the ones that reaped the benefits of the last big rookie pay day will be less inclined to complain. I also read a lot from Pouncey on his twitter. He does not strike me as the type to complain about money. He won't see all 5, probably 4, and then they re-sign him. By that time, money will be open.


Didn't Ben take a pretty hefty "paycut" this year in his restructure? I put it in quotes because as I'm sure you know, it wasn't a paycut. That money just got moved to bonuses. He could be looking at a 15 million base salary when that money comes up. With his signing bonus, you're looking at close to a 20 million cap hit. That'd be over 16% of the cap this year alone so roughly 12-13 percent of the cap when the time comes.

Ben's base salary does not increase until the final year of his deal. It will sit at $11.6M in 2012, 2013, and 2014 climbing to $12.1M in 2015. If he turned $10M into signing bonus, it would prorate over his remaining 5 seasons at $2M per season, opening $8M this season and adding $2M per for the next 4. The thing is, in 2014, his initial signing bonus money falls off lowering his cap hit. Prior to the restructure, he only would have counted $11.6M against the cap in 2014 and $12.1M in 2015. Those will climb by less than $2M. The closest he will get to $20M is in 2013, when his cap hit could potentially be $17.8M. But, that is also the season the new TV deals kick in.


You're right that there are players that will be gone in the next couple years. But of course, there will be fresh faces that take their places and become stars. We weren't having a conversation about Mike Wallace being one of the next big money receivers this time last year. He was still more potential than anything else. For all we know, Marcus Gilbert becomes one of the best OL. Sanders or Brown may do what Wallace did. What if one of the young corners plays well? They're going to want to get paid. You have to factor that in too.

I have to factor it in after they play out their rookie deals, not prior. You cannot panic today for money you may have to spend 3-4 years from now. What if Sanders cannot recover from his foot injury? Do you fail to sign Woodley to keep the room and then potentially lose Sanders too? Then you have money and no players. You have to sign them when they come due. Woodley was due. Harrison and Woodley are often considered two of the top 10 at their position and, to be honest, there are probably 10 pass rushers in the NFL with larger contracts. I cannot see how signing two of the top 10 for less than top 10 money can be bad. And again, for each guy that may crop up, you can see guys fall off in play as well and get released. Who saw Starks being released this season when he reported to camp at almost 400 pounds?


And this wasn't even my main point. No matter what the cap situation is, I'm not paying that much to a position where Clark Haggans can get thrown in there and record 8.5 sacks.

The funny part is, when Woodley was a rookie and Haggans started ahead of him, people begged for Woodley stating it was obvious he was a better player. Haggans started 4 years at LOLB and had more than 7 sacks one season, the season you list. Woodley has started 3 seasons for the Steelers and broken 10 sacks per year EVERY season. Haggans had 25 sacks in 4 years as a starter. Woodley has 35 sacks in 3 years. He could take this year OFF and still best Haggans by a 10 spot. I think it is pretty funny that people want to throw Woodley away. I mean, it is easy to forget about how pedestrian Haggans was or how bad the guys drafted to play OLB (Alonzo Jackson, Bruce Davis) have been. This is not Madden. It is not plug and play. The reason everyone has forgotten how bad it is is simple, we have two elite OLBs that have erased the bad memories. I mean, why not just get rid of Ben. They went deep in the playoffs without him.

[Chidi29]

In all fairness none of the above are as good or valuable as Woodley... The man is tied for second all time in sacks in the playoffs(11)... He's a beast when it counts down the stretch and in the playoffs.. IMO well worth the price they paid!

That's not the issue. The problem I have is the fact that they could stick me in at OLB and I'd do well. When you can plug and chug, you don't need to spend so lavishly.

[86WARD]

I still think it's a lot of money to shell out for a position we've had so much past success with.

If they didn't pay it, he wouldn't be in Pittsburgh. He'd be somewhere else next season and the contract they gave him is much better than the going rate...

See:

Tamba Hali - $60 million extension, including $35 million in guarantees (5 years)
Kamerion Wimbley - $48 million and includes $29 million in guarantees (5 years)

Woodley - $61.5 million extension, including $27 million in guarantees (6 years)

[TMC]

How is he making a reported 18 million this year but his cap hit be at 5?

I'm looking at it being at least 7.75.

Steelersdepot is reporting a base salary of 4 million.

Rotoworld is saying he got a signing bonus of 22.5. Steelersdepot is reporting the same number though just calling it bonuses.

If it's a signing bonus, then there's 3.75 right there. Signing bonuses are paid in full right away but the cap hit is prorated over the length of the contract. 22.5/6 = 3.75. Tack on the four million base and you're at 7.75.

I'm no capologist but what gives?

I'll explain it. In fact, that last line in SteelersDepot cap analysis, he got from me in a tweet. While there are $22.5M in bonuses, they are not signing bonuses and are not crammed into this season. You can have option bonuses, roster bonuses, workout bonuses, and others. Let me cover it from the beginning.

Adam Schefter tweeted this: "With his new deal, LaMarr Woodley's salary-cap number actually dropped from $10 million to $6.5 million in 2011. Steelers spent - and saved."

He also tweeted the $18.1M in the first year with a cap hit of $6.5M. If he gets $18.1 million in his 1st year with a cap hit of $6.5 million, it is not hard to give an idea of how this breaks out.

You know his cap hit is @$6.5 million and his 2011 salary and total signing bonus will equal $18.1 million, so you can get an idea of the details of the first year. With those numbers, I estimate that his 2011 salary (or money counted as salary) will be roughly $4 million with a $14.1 million dollar signing bonus. That signing bonus would prorate to $2.35 million per season, making his 2011 cap hit be $6.35 million. It does not fit exactly in with Schefter's total, but is pretty close.

It also fits the $18.1M first year. We know his money jumps $9M in the 2nd year of the deal, but I would be willing to bet that half is an option bonus that will be spread over the final 5 seasons. I would hazard a guess it is another $4M in salary with $5M in signing bonus, meaning his 2012 cap hit would be roughly $7.35M.

So, that fits the total money paid in year 1 and the salary cap hit. If there are truly $22.5M in total bonuses, the $14.1M in signing bonus and the $5M option bonus (2012) would account for $19.1M of the $22.5, meaning there is $3.4M to be placed in the final 4 seasons, probably roster or workout bonuses of $750,000 per year.

It means his cap hit in 2011 would be $6.35M and would give the Steelers $3.5M in salary cap space this year.

[86WARD]

I'll explain it. In fact, that last line in SteelersDepot cap analysis, he got from me in a tweet. While there are $22.5M in bonuses, they are not signing bonuses and are not crammed into this season. You can have option bonuses, roster bonuses, workout bonuses, and others. Let me cover it from the beginning.

And some of those are the best bonuses to have because they "count" against the cap, but if aren't hit (or spent,) teams get cap credits in the following season. That's how the Eagles managed to find all this extra space this season...

[Chidi29]

I'll tackle everything here in a bit but first let me say. Seriously TMC, post more often.

[TMC]

Let me also add this. While you may think you can plug and play at LOLB, think about this, what if the Steelers allowed Woodley to walk and saved that money. Do you think the Ravens would sign him? They inked Suggs to a bigger money contract than we paid Woodley. Suggs has broken 10 sacks once in the last 6 years. I think they would be all over Woodley.

So, you have to ask yourself, not only is he good enough to be a part of this team, is it not also a prudent move to keep this guy from blowing by Willie Colon and putting Ben on a stretcher twice a year.

I worked for a company that did warehousing. They purchased just about every large warehouse that was available in our state. Did they need it? Nope. A few sat empty. Why did they do it? Sometimes it is better to overpay and protect yourself than it is to give your opponent an edge.

[Pittsburgh43]

Good point, while we're paying Woodley big $ to be a part of the Steelers, we're also paying him to not join forces with the likes of the Ravens, Pats, Jets and so on. Woodley would have had his pick of pretty much any team, cap willing. If Wood goes to FA, the bidding war would be outrageous, and he would no longer be a Pittsburgh Steeler. He's a very loyal Steeler, but money does talk.

[Chidi29]

The jumps in the cap are not typical. That is absolutely correct. But, look at the history of the cap. Here are the salary cap numbers since 1994 (in parenthesis is the percentage increase from the prior year):
1994-$34.6M
1995-$37.1M (7%)
1996-$40.7M (9%)
1997-$41.4M (2%)
1998-$52.3M (21%)
1999-$57M (8%)
2000-$62M (8%)
2001-$67M (7%)
2002-$71M (6%)
2003-$75M (5%)
2004-$80.5M (7%)
2005-$85.5M (6%)
2006-$102M (16%)
2007-$109M (6%)
2008-$116M (6%)
2009-$128M (9%)

If you notice, there are two double digit increases (percentage wise) during the history of the CBA. Do you know what also happens the two years of those double digit increases? The NFL signed new TV deals in 1998 (went from 1998-2005) and in 2006 (2006-2013). The total TV revenue increased from $1.1 billion to $2.2 billion (not including NFL ticket) in 1998. It jumped to $3.085 billion in 2006, again not including NFL Ticket.

So, while I ordinarily do not expect cap jumps, when there are new TV deals, it does and I expect it then. And, the NFL does not always open up new packages for sale. The Thursday Night Football will be an increase. So, you have impending money coming in, money that was not there during negotiations.



I think with the new rookie salary cap, the ones that reaped the benefits of the last big rookie pay day will be less inclined to complain. I also read a lot from Pouncey on his twitter. He does not strike me as the type to complain about money. He won't see all 5, probably 4, and then they re-sign him. By that time, money will be open.



Ben's base salary does not increase until the final year of his deal. It will sit at $11.6M in 2012, 2013, and 2014 climbing to $12.1M in 2015. If he turned $10M into signing bonus, it would prorate over his remaining 5 seasons at $2M per season, opening $8M this season and adding $2M per for the next 4. The thing is, in 2014, his initial signing bonus money falls off lowering his cap hit. Prior to the restructure, he only would have counted $11.6M against the cap in 2014 and $12.1M in 2015. Those will climb by less than $2M. The closest he will get to $20M is in 2013, when his cap hit could potentially be $17.8M. But, that is also the season the new TV deals kick in.



I have to factor it in after they play out their rookie deals, not prior. You cannot panic today for money you may have to spend 3-4 years from now. What if Sanders cannot recover from his foot injury? Do you fail to sign Woodley to keep the room and then potentially lose Sanders too? Then you have money and no players. You have to sign them when they come due. Woodley was due. Harrison and Woodley are often considered two of the top 10 at their position and, to be honest, there are probably 10 pass rushers in the NFL with larger contracts. I cannot see how signing two of the top 10 for less than top 10 money can be bad. And again, for each guy that may crop up, you can see guys fall off in play as well and get released. Who saw Starks being released this season when he reported to camp at almost 400 pounds?



The funny part is, when Woodley was a rookie and Haggans started ahead of him, people begged for Woodley stating it was obvious he was a better player. Haggans started 4 years at LOLB and had more than 7 sacks one season, the season you list. Woodley has started 3 seasons for the Steelers and broken 10 sacks per year EVERY season. Haggans had 25 sacks in 4 years as a starter. Woodley has 35 sacks in 3 years. He could take this year OFF and still best Haggans by a 10 spot. I think it is pretty funny that people want to throw Woodley away. I mean, it is easy to forget about how pedestrian Haggans was or how bad the guys drafted to play OLB (Alonzo Jackson, Bruce Davis) have been. This is not Madden. It is not plug and play. The reason everyone has forgotten how bad it is is simple, we have two elite OLBs that have erased the bad memories. I mean, why not just get rid of Ben. They went deep in the playoffs without him.

Good info on the salary cap. I guess there will be a jump and that's a good thing for us.

Remember that while Pouncey got paid well, he didn't get paid like an elite player that the top ten draft picks did. It's a modest deal in comparison and he won't be making over 1 million in base salary until the last year of his deal. There are bonuses that will be added in yes, but it's not a giant pile of money relatively speaking.

Pouncey seems like a great guy but everyone wants to get paid. Pouncey's dad lost half his leg in an accident; while it helps that there are two brothers playing in the NFL and I'm sure his dad got money from his work, he wants to give back to his family I'm sure. Get that big payday and they're set for life.

The same with Hood. He got a smaller deal.

There are some players on the team who will breakout and some that will fail. Even ones that have a promising future at the moment. But there will be some players who end up playing well and want to cash in. I can't say for sure who but I can say that there will be players.

You say it isn't plug and play but for us, it kinda is. We've had that much success. Kevin Greene, Greg Lloyd, Jason Gildon, Joey Porter, Haggans, Harrison, and Woodley all since the 90s. It's not 100% success but it's about as good as it'll get.

And I'm not saying Haggans is as good as Woodley. He isn't. What I am saying is that the drop off from Woodley to one of the lesser players at OLB, Haggans, isn't as huge as the money Woodley got.

And hey, we still have Jason Worilds. It's not like there's no other OLB on the roster.

[oneforthetoe]

I think the issue is which vets might be gone soon. I believe any of the following could be gone next season: Farrior, Clark, Smith, Ward and/or Harrison could be gone after this season. Ward won't be chased away, but he could chose to go. Smith, I believe will definitely be gone. I think Farrior is likely gone. Harrison and Clark are likely back, but it would not surprise me if they were let go.

Then for 2013 I'd say, if Clark and Harrison make it through 2012, they almost certainly will be gone. Big Snack likely gone.

I think given the above we should be able to re-up Timmons, Ziggy and Troy. Now Wallace could be a different issue. If there is one position outside of QB that teams overpay for (and the Steelers will not) it is WR.

[Chidi29]

Let me also add this. While you may think you can plug and play at LOLB, think about this, what if the Steelers allowed Woodley to walk and saved that money. Do you think the Ravens would sign him? They inked Suggs to a bigger money contract than we paid Woodley. Suggs has broken 10 sacks once in the last 6 years. I think they would be all over Woodley.

So, you have to ask yourself, not only is he good enough to be a part of this team, is it not also a prudent move to keep this guy from blowing by Willie Colon and putting Ben on a stretcher twice a year.

I worked for a company that did warehousing. They purchased just about every large warehouse that was available in our state. Did they need it? Nope. A few sat empty. Why did they do it? Sometimes it is better to overpay and protect yourself than it is to give your opponent an edge.

Who knows where Woodley would've ended up. Nearly every team would have had interest because you could throw a little weight on him and he could play as an end in an even defense as he did in college.

I understand your point but I'm not spending that kind of money just so I don't have to worry about where he goes, especially when the odds of him going to a divsional opponent are slim.

I make moves based solely on how good of an idea it is for my team. It's too much energy to worry about what other teams are planning to do.

[Chidi29]

I'll explain it. In fact, that last line in SteelersDepot cap analysis, he got from me in a tweet. While there are $22.5M in bonuses, they are not signing bonuses and are not crammed into this season. You can have option bonuses, roster bonuses, workout bonuses, and others. Let me cover it from the beginning.

Adam Schefter tweeted this: "With his new deal, LaMarr Woodley's salary-cap number actually dropped from $10 million to $6.5 million in 2011. Steelers spent - and saved."

He also tweeted the $18.1M in the first year with a cap hit of $6.5M. If he gets $18.1 million in his 1st year with a cap hit of $6.5 million, it is not hard to give an idea of how this breaks out.

You know his cap hit is @$6.5 million and his 2011 salary and total signing bonus will equal $18.1 million, so you can get an idea of the details of the first year. With those numbers, I estimate that his 2011 salary (or money counted as salary) will be roughly $4 million with a $14.1 million dollar signing bonus. That signing bonus would prorate to $2.35 million per season, making his 2011 cap hit be $6.35 million. It does not fit exactly in with Schefter's total, but is pretty close.

It also fits the $18.1M first year. We know his money jumps $9M in the 2nd year of the deal, but I would be willing to bet that half is an option bonus that will be spread over the final 5 seasons. I would hazard a guess it is another $4M in salary with $5M in signing bonus, meaning his 2012 cap hit would be roughly $7.35M.

So, that fits the total money paid in year 1 and the salary cap hit. If there are truly $22.5M in total bonuses, the $14.1M in signing bonus and the $5M option bonus (2012) would account for $19.1M of the $22.5, meaning there is $3.4M to be placed in the final 4 seasons, probably roster or workout bonuses of $750,000 per year.

It means his cap hit in 2011 would be $6.35M and would give the Steelers $3.5M in salary cap space this year.

Gotcha. It makes more sense knowing it isn't all a signing bonus. I knew there was no way that could be the case.

Does an optioon bonus work similar to a signing bonus? In the sense that if it's picked up, it's prorated over the length of the contract?

Couple other cap questions. I know a signing bonus is guaranteed money. But when you see a guaranteed money amount, that includes the signing bonus, right? That's how I understand it, just making sure.

I'm trying to figure out guaranteed money too. I wrote this the other day. Tell me how accurate it is.

I've been thinking about guaranteed money lately and how it works. There are two types of guaranteed. For skill and injury.

Skill means you're getting that money no matter what you do. You can go all JaMarcus Russell in your first year and you're still getting paid. That money is rarely given out.

Then there is guaranteed money for injury. If you go all LeCharles Bentley and blow out your knee the first play of practice and the team ends up releasing you because of it, then you get that money. As far as I know, and I have to concede that I'm no capologist, if you get cut for a non-injury related issue, you don't get that money.

Agents just like to throw out those gaudy numbers to the media to make it sound so good.

-----------------------

One last thing. Any good websites that break down the cap and how it works? The best I've seen is askthecommish. Maybe you know another.

[TMC]

You are correct that Pouncey's salaries are not that high. The reason they are not that high is the Steelers cut him checks last year for $9.2M. They handed him a $3.6M roster bonus and a $5.6M signing bonus his rookie season and that is why his cap hits are so low. His brother Mike, who was taken 3 spots ahead of him, will get $9.2M over the life of his 4 year deal. Maurkice got in his first season what Mike gets in 4. He is not stupid. Maurkice knows what he has banked. You cannot take $9.2M from a club and 2 years later tell them it is not enough. And, if he plays 3 years before he asks, he would be heading into his final year and would be a priority anyway. I just do not see Maurkice as a problem.

As for Ziggy, this is year 3 of his 5 year deal. He would have to start balking next year to be an issue. I just do not see it especially when he knows he is the heir to Smith's spot and when his time comes, they will probably hand him money like they did Smith. And, he also got to hear from guys like Foote and Randle El about how it sucked when they left and watched guys like Polamalu and Taylor know they want to stay. Many people often point to money as a reason to change jobs, but reality is, once you get to a certain point, money takes a back seat to work environment and the Steelers are elite in that area.

As for the outside linebackers, if you go back to Cowher's first season, the OLBs were Lloyd and Jerrol Williams. Do you remember Williams? Yeah, me neither. Then it was Lloyd and Greene from 1993-1995. Lloyd gets hurt in 1996 and Brown steps in for that season with Gildon starting on the left side. Gildon was in the system 2 seasons before getting the nod and then locked the left side down from 1996 to 2003. Brown leaves via free agency and Lloyd steps back in but is not the same guy. Emmons follows him and is PUTRID for 2 seasons before Porter steps in and locks it down from 2000 to 2006. Then, it became Harrison. Haggans starts when Gildon leaves and holds it down until Woodley steps in, but he is only average.

While it looks like you just plug and play, here is the problem with that line of thinking. In that time frame, you are looking at roughly 10 players that started at OLB. Of those, 9 were drafted (Greene was a free agent). During that time frame, the Steelers spent, at least, 22 draft picks on outside linebackers and roughly 6-8 of them were in the first three rounds. While you have success stories, you also have picks like Bruce Davis, Alonzo Jackson, and Nathaniel Adibi.

By inking Woodley and having Worilds and Carter behind the two starters, the Steelers won't be throwing away a draft pick next season on an outside linebacker. In addition, if you have an injury, you actually have depth. These young guys can come along at their own pace and not be thrown in and potentially struggle.

You have to take everything into account. The Steelers have hit on roughly half their OLB picks and that is IF you consider guys like Carlos Emmons and Clark Haggans "hits". And, in that 9, I count Jerrol Williams, who was not in that 22 drafted (nor was Lloyd). In truth, of those 22 draft picks, less than 33% turned out.

Woodley did and in his first three years as a starter, he has better numbers than ANY Steeler OLB (not just LOLB) has had over a 3 year period with the exception of Kevin Greene and James Harrison, and both beat him by less than 2 sacks. He is better than Porter, Lloyd, Haggans, and Gildon when it comes to dumping a QB.

He can also cover and play the run. The thing is, we have the players in place to have another top 5 defense and maintain that for a couple years. You start plugging in other guys, that may drop. Why roll the dice? Would you rather have Haggans or Carlos Emmons?

[TMC]

Gotcha. It makes more sense knowing it isn't all a signing bonus. I knew there was no way that could be the case.

Does an optioon bonus work similar to a signing bonus? In the sense that if it's picked up, it's prorated over the length of the contract?

Yes, it is exactly the same. Basically, it works like a second signing bonus. There are basically two types of money, those that act like a signing bonus and those that act like salary. The two types that act like signing bonus off the top of my head are signing bonuses and option bonuses. All other money acts like salary, meaning it is counted in the year it is paid. This includes incentives, roster bonuses, workout bonuses, and completion bonuses.


Couple other cap questions. I know a signing bonus is guaranteed money. But when you see a guaranteed money amount, that includes the signing bonus, right? That's how I understand it, just making sure.

Guaranteed money is a bit of a tough word to use. Okay, they can call Woodley's option bonus (if that is what it truly is) next season guaranteed, but until it is paid, it really is not. The Steelers can designate it guaranteed and they may have. I'll tell you something else too that just hit me. That "guaranteed money" of $22.5M would include his 2011 salary. If he received $14.1M to sign, they are not going to cut him, so his 2011 salary is basically guaranteed. If they pay him an option bonus in 2012 of $5M, then there is your total guarantee ($18.1+$5M is $23.1). That is why I state you have to watch when reports come out that players are getting this amount of guaranteed money. Some of that is agent talk to make the deal look good.


I'm trying to figure out guaranteed money too. I wrote this the other day. Tell me how accurate it is.

I've been thinking about guaranteed money lately and how it works. There are two types of guaranteed. For skill and injury.

Skill means you're getting that money no matter what you do. You can go all JaMarcus Russell in your first year and you're still getting paid. That money is rarely given out.

Then there is guaranteed money for injury. If you go all LeCharles Bentley and blow out your knee the first play of practice and the team ends up releasing you because of it, then you get that money. As far as I know, and I have to concede that I'm no capologist, if you get cut for a non-injury related issue, you don't get that money.

Most teams do not designate the guaranteed money for skill. Basically, it is guaranteed money. If they guarantee it, you get paid, even if you suck. Now, the "injury" guarantee crops up at times, but it is pretty rare to have it designated in the NFL. A team will only do that when they have asshole players that may hold out or have their weight balloon up....but it is pretty rare. It is the sketchy front offices that do that crap. I do not know that it is a big deal to differentiate, but that is basically the difference as you have stated.


Agents just like to throw out those gaudy numbers to the media to make it sound so good.

And most of what is reported is not completely accurate. They put a spin on it so their player does not look bad when compared to other players. Ike Taylor said it best though, if the Rooneys give you a deal and you continue to play, more than likely you get all your money. It is not like that with other teams. That is a good reputation to have.


One last thing. Any good websites that break down the cap and how it works? The best I've seen is askthecommish. Maybe you know another.

The best way, is to simply work through the numbers and then compare them to those that know. Ian Whetstone at Steelers Digest has a good grip on it. SteelersDepot does as well. Dobre Shunka, who frequents a few boards is pretty impressive with his understanding of the cap. All of these guys just got the feel from digging in it. Askthecommish has a good general outline. They explain it pretty nicely. Most are too technical.

[TMC]

Let me also add, I do not think my opinion of Woodley is the end all be all. None of my opinions are. They are simply opinions. When it comes to the cap, I have been learning the ins and outs of it for a long time now. I started digging in the cap sometime around 2000. It comes from mistakes and experience. You have to make one to have the other.

As for my opinions on players, I can dig my heels in the ground, but IMO, anyone that is passionate about something should. I watch a TON of tape of college players. I mean, I wrote bios on over 250 college players this year. In that number, I looked at 10 or so potential OLBs for a 3-4. Of those, there were, maybe 2, that could develop into a player like Woodley. In this draft, the only two guys that I think have the strength to hold against TEs, the speed to cover them, and the pass rush ability to be effective are Justin Houston and Robert Quinn. Some may like Von Miller, but he is more speed than power and I think he would struggle against TEs and RTs in the run game. In 2010, there was Thad Gibson and Worilds. There were some ROLB prospects, but none that had the power to play left. They are different animals.

So, when you start thinking you have 1-3 guys a draft that can do it, and most are going in the 1st or 2nd round now, do you really want to risk allowing one to get away? Do you think Cleveland is not kicking themselves in the ass after watching Wimbley blow up in Oakland and they have nothing......

[GBMelBlount]

Wow. 6 years 60 million. I don't know that he is worth it. After reading this thread I realize how incredibly complicated the numbers are. I also wonder if there is too much emphasis on sacks to justify a big pay day. How much do the salary cap increases over time make this a value. THAT is what I would like to know. Would I overpay so a competitor couldn't get him? I agree with Chidi. No. Although I am not an expert at crunching these numbers my biggest concern is the opportunity cost.

IF we overpaid Woodley (not saying we did) it can mean another great player may leave because we can't pay them what they're worth...or close enough. Using what other teams are paying the LB's as justification is not always good either because most other teams may not have as many quality players they are trying to keep as we are. If you have a superior team you tend to have more valuable players that can command a better wage, so again, there is a larger opportunity cost when you pay value or especially over value for a player when you have a team loaded with talent you are trying to keep together.

[Chidi29]

You are correct that Pouncey's salaries are not that high. The reason they are not that high is the Steelers cut him checks last year for $9.2M. They handed him a $3.6M roster bonus and a $5.6M signing bonus his rookie season and that is why his cap hits are so low. His brother Mike, who was taken 3 spots ahead of him, will get $9.2M over the life of his 4 year deal. Maurkice got in his first season what Mike gets in 4. He is not stupid. Maurkice knows what he has banked. You cannot take $9.2M from a club and 2 years later tell them it is not enough. And, if he plays 3 years before he asks, he would be heading into his final year and would be a priority anyway. I just do not see Maurkice as a problem.

As for Ziggy, this is year 3 of his 5 year deal. He would have to start balking next year to be an issue. I just do not see it especially when he knows he is the heir to Smith's spot and when his time comes, they will probably hand him money like they did Smith. And, he also got to hear from guys like Foote and Randle El about how it sucked when they left and watched guys like Polamalu and Taylor know they want to stay. Many people often point to money as a reason to change jobs, but reality is, once you get to a certain point, money takes a back seat to work environment and the Steelers are elite in that area.

As for the outside linebackers, if you go back to Cowher's first season, the OLBs were Lloyd and Jerrol Williams. Do you remember Williams? Yeah, me neither. Then it was Lloyd and Greene from 1993-1995. Lloyd gets hurt in 1996 and Brown steps in for that season with Gildon starting on the left side. Gildon was in the system 2 seasons before getting the nod and then locked the left side down from 1996 to 2003. Brown leaves via free agency and Lloyd steps back in but is not the same guy. Emmons follows him and is PUTRID for 2 seasons before Porter steps in and locks it down from 2000 to 2006. Then, it became Harrison. Haggans starts when Gildon leaves and holds it down until Woodley steps in, but he is only average.

While it looks like you just plug and play, here is the problem with that line of thinking. In that time frame, you are looking at roughly 10 players that started at OLB. Of those, 9 were drafted (Greene was a free agent). During that time frame, the Steelers spent, at least, 22 draft picks on outside linebackers and roughly 6-8 of them were in the first three rounds. While you have success stories, you also have picks like Bruce Davis, Alonzo Jackson, and Nathaniel Adibi.

By inking Woodley and having Worilds and Carter behind the two starters, the Steelers won't be throwing away a draft pick next season on an outside linebacker. In addition, if you have an injury, you actually have depth. These young guys can come along at their own pace and not be thrown in and potentially struggle.

You have to take everything into account. The Steelers have hit on roughly half their OLB picks and that is IF you consider guys like Carlos Emmons and Clark Haggans "hits". And, in that 9, I count Jerrol Williams, who was not in that 22 drafted (nor was Lloyd). In truth, of those 22 draft picks, less than 33% turned out.

Woodley did and in his first three years as a starter, he has better numbers than ANY Steeler OLB (not just LOLB) has had over a 3 year period with the exception of Kevin Greene and James Harrison, and both beat him by less than 2 sacks. He is better than Porter, Lloyd, Haggans, and Gildon when it comes to dumping a QB.

He can also cover and play the run. The thing is, we have the players in place to have another top 5 defense and maintain that for a couple years. You start plugging in other guys, that may drop. Why roll the dice? Would you rather have Haggans or Carlos Emmons?

I get what you're saying, but anytime a player has a chance to get extra cash, it's at the very least tough to ignore. Like you said, Pouncey isn't stupid. He knows it's a business and seeing respected vets get the axe only proves that. If he gets hurt in the final year of his contract, he may be losing out on a ton of money. I know Colon still got paid but you have to think he lost out on tens of millions because of the injury.

I don't remember Williams. Of course, I wasn't alive until after he left Pittsburgh. So I won't be too hard on myself. Looking at his stats, he had 17.5 sacks in 24 starts with the team, including nine in one year. Not too shabby for a fourth round pick.

Emmons doesn't look too special but as a pass rusher, his most productive years were with us. 12 sacks in virtually two years (barely played the first two).

Another fact about Emmons. He was a 7th round pick from a small school. So you're talking about a 4th and 7th round pick who both got more than 20 starts in their career with the team. Honestly, that's not that bad considering how small the "hit" percentage is on those picks. Especially for us. We're pretty much money in the first round but in those mid to late rounds, it's a crapshoot. I want to throw up every time I even think about Fred Gibson. :chuckle:

One other thing to note about the success at OLB was who the DC was. I'm more concerned about the time LeBeau spent with the team at DC. That's the point I've been trying to make. His defense can be so exotic that it can be successful on schematics alone with all the twists, texs, and other crazy things he cooks up. When Tim Lewis is your DC, you're less exotic and less successful.

I realize LeBeau's time here is limited but I assume Keith Butler is next in line. Being a LB coach, and a good one I might add, and working with LeBeau for some time, I still expect our LBs to have success.

And Worilds still has time to learn. I would've kept Woodley for this year and then let him walk at the end of the season. Worilds would've been in his third year. And then Chris Carter can hopefully learn behind Worilds and Harrison although I must admit I'm not really a fan of Carter to begin with.

Why roll the dice? Because we're talking about being tied up in 60 million. That's nothing to scoff at.

[Chidi29]

Let me also add, I do not think my opinion of Woodley is the end all be all. None of my opinions are. They are simply opinions. When it comes to the cap, I have been learning the ins and outs of it for a long time now. I started digging in the cap sometime around 2000. It comes from mistakes and experience. You have to make one to have the other.

As for my opinions on players, I can dig my heels in the ground, but IMO, anyone that is passionate about something should. I watch a TON of tape of college players. I mean, I wrote bios on over 250 college players this year. In that number, I looked at 10 or so potential OLBs for a 3-4. Of those, there were, maybe 2, that could develop into a player like Woodley. In this draft, the only two guys that I think have the strength to hold against TEs, the speed to cover them, and the pass rush ability to be effective are Justin Houston and Robert Quinn. Some may like Von Miller, but he is more speed than power and I think he would struggle against TEs and RTs in the run game. In 2010, there was Thad Gibson and Worilds. There were some ROLB prospects, but none that had the power to play left. They are different animals.

So, when you start thinking you have 1-3 guys a draft that can do it, and most are going in the 1st or 2nd round now, do you really want to risk allowing one to get away? Do you think Cleveland is not kicking themselves in the ass after watching Wimbley blow up in Oakland and they have nothing......

I know they're just your opinions and it's not the final word. You haven't come off like that and I respect/admire that. I'm just having fun debating about football instead of sitting in a lockout. And learning about the cap to boot.

I saw some of your stuff around draft time. You had a book, didn't you? I saw the sample you posted and it was very impressive. I'm trying to become a hardcore draftnik but am also still doing a lot of learning about the game and positions themselves. The technical, gritty details of it anyway. That's the great thing about football. If you're not learning, you're doing something wrong. I "scouted about eighty players this year.

Like I just wrote above, my point about letting Woodley go is due to the fact that we don't have to get that all-star 'backer in the first round. We seem to have a system that seems to let a player produce no matter who is in the starting lineup.

[Nadroj 20]

I'm pretty sure my football IQ has went up about 20 points due to reading this thread. Good stuff guys.

[Pittsburgh43]

These are the types of in-depth discussions I love. Two people with opposing opinions who are actually talking football instead of name-calling. Great stuff guys. :thumbsup:

[Psycho Ward 86]

I'm pretty sure my football IQ has went up about 20 points due to reading this thread. Good stuff guys.

and im pretty sure my football self-esteem went down a good 50 points because these guys made me feel a whole lot dumber :pray:

[Pittsburgh43]

and im pretty sure my football self-esteem went down a good 50 points because these guys made me feel a whole lot dumber :pray:

:rofl2:

[zulater]

If they didn't pay it, he wouldn't be in Pittsburgh. He'd be somewhere else next season and the contract they gave him is much better than the going rate...

See:

Tamba Hali - $60 million extension, including $35 million in guarantees (5 years)
Kamerion Wimbley - $48 million and includes $29 million in guarantees (5 years)

Woodley - $61.5 million extension, including $27 million in guarantees (6 years)

Good info. :applaudit:

[tube517]

and im pretty sure my football self-esteem went down a good 50 points because these guys made me feel a whole lot dumber :pray:

So true. But I think TMC is Kevin Colbert and Chidi is Ron Hughes, college scouting coordinator of the Steelers :chuckle:

[TMC]

Chidi, Jerrol Williams 9 sacks in a season came under a different system. He was also not a starter, but a situational pass rusher. He was a specialist. When Cowher arrived in 1992, he hired Dom Capers as the defensive coordinator and Dick LeBeau as the defensive backs coach. LeBeau had been talking to Bob Knight about zone defenses and pressure systems in basketball. He was the first guy to blitz and use his corner in zone behind the blitz and roll the safety over the top. It was the first zone blitz. Then, he met with Bill Arnsparger, who had placed linebackers as DEs and dropped them in coverage at times. He also double blitzed from one side. He was responsible for the Fins Killer Bs defense. From conversations with those two, the zone blitz we know today was born. And, it takes a specialized type of OLB.

They plugged Jerrol Williams into that role and his production was cut in half. It was so evident that the Steelers went out and found a pass rushing specialist, a hired gun, Kevin Greene. The difference between a Williams and a Greene is significant.

As for Emmons, he was actually a pretty decent linebacker, he just did not fit the 3-4 defense. He was a much better player in Philly and New York in the 4-3. He had 9.5 sacks in 2 seasons with the Steelers as the blindside guy. That is pretty bad. He was the worst starting ROLB the Steelers had since the start of the Zone Blitz. Good for a 7th round pick? Sure. William Gay is a good corner for a 5th round pick. I do not want to start him and rely on him.

You also point to schemes as being the reason why any OLB can be successful under LeBeau. He has been the DC since 2000. Since that time, he has had 4 OLBs start. They are Porter, Haggans, Woodley, and Harrison. Three of those four starters under LeBeau were highly paid guys. Porter was not cheap. Harrison received the largest deal for an OLB (at that time). Woodley just inked for $10M a season. Haggans even was paid well (4 years, $10M) and they signed him prior to his ever starting a game. The fact is, LeBeau has really never had to plug a play an OLB. When he took over, he had Gildon and Porter as starters and both were in the system for a couple seasons. Then, they groomed Haggans. They groomed Harrison. They had Woodley for a season prior to starting him.

I would pose this challenge to you. The first preseason game is Thursday night. The Steelers, at some point, will trot out Baraka Atkins and Chris Ellis at OLB. Watch them and think about how they compare to Harrison and Woodley. If you still feel that it is plug and play, I will concede.

Now, for a final point, you state you would have kept Woodley for this season. You would have handed him $10M this season, which would represent roughly 8.5% of the total salary cap for 2012. You are good with that. Look at this, the salary cap has, over the past three seasons, risen at a rate of roughly 6.5%. In 2013, it will jump due to the new TV deals and a conservative estimate of the increase that year will be, IMO, 15%. So, with the tag, he was 8.5%. Using a little rough math and guesstimating his salary cap hits based on the limited information I know, here is what the cap, his contract, and his percentage of the contract could look like over the life of the deal.
2011-$120M-$6.5M cap hit-5.4% of salary cap
2012-$128M-$7.5M cap hit-5.8% of salary cap
2013-$147M-$11M cap hit-7.4% of salary cap
2014-$156.5M-$12M cap hit-7.6% of salary cap
2015-$167M-$12M cap hit-7.1% of salary cap
2016-$177.5M-$12M cap hit-6.7% of salary cap

This is where I struggle to see the argument. He is good enough to keep for one season at 8.5% of the cap AND the space he ties up this season could hinder you from signing other players, but he is not good enough to keep in the future at a percentage LOWER than that even though his cash value is more. To me, that is counter-intuitive. I would buy that completely if Woodley was 29, where you may see 2-3 good seasons and then he declines and you have married yourself to that cap hit for 3 bad seasons, but Woodley is 26. At worst, you should get 5 very good seasons out of the guy and then the release in his final year would be a smallish hit. There is no way I can look at this contract and see it as a bad deal. He is considered one of the top 10 pass rushers in the NFL. Here are what others were paid:

Tamba Hali-5 years, $60M, $30+M guaranteed.
DeMarcus Ware-7 years, $79M
Terrell Suggs-6 years, $62M (2009)
Kamerion Wimbley-5 years, $48M
Elvis Dumervil-5 year extension, $61.5M
Julius Peppers-6 years, $84M
Jared Allen-6 years, $73M
Dwight Freeney-6 years, $72M
There are more, I just cannot think of them off the top of my head. I am sure Justin Tuck or Osi is near this group.

Pass rushers cost. Ten million a season for a guy that has never had less than 10 sacks as a starter is a bargain.

[TMC]

Let me also add, under Cowher, the Steelers were a consistent playoff team with the likes of Neil O'Donnell and Kordell Stewart. It could be argued that the money spent on Roethlisberger could be spent elsewhere, like the offensive line, and they could go back to a mediocre QB, running the football, and playing defense.

But, the difference between a Neil O'Donnell/Kordell Stewart comes in those final big games. With Ben, you win. Without him, you watch somebody else win.

THAT is why Roethlisberger is worth TWICE what they paid ANY other quarterback in Steeler history. Ben's 2010 cap hit is greater than BOTH Harrison and Woodley, the next two highest paid players.

Yet, no one wants to cut Ben. You pay the guys that make the plays.

[steeldevil]

I think a lot of people still underestimate just how good Woodley really is because of how special Harrison is. Woodley isn't as good in all 3 aspects of OLB play as Harrison, but no one is. I think Woodley is better against the pass and run then people want to give him credit for. And he is obviously a great pass rusher. Looking at Woodley's stats beside Harrison's isn't fair, we all know Deebo is a freak.

[86WARD]

I think people don't think Woodley is worth is because the assumption is that the Steelers can stick anyone at the OLB position and they would do well. But if you look at TMC's post (which is great stuff btw) he breaks it down...the position really isn't plug and play...Woodley fits the position and he's worth the money.

[zulater]

I think one thing you've got to consider when you refer to the relative ease the Steelers have had in the past in replacing OLB's as to whether Woodley is now cost effective, is that there are more teams currently running the 3-4 or some elements of it than there has been in the past. Thus poaching a Clark Haggans in the 6th or Joey Porter in the 3rd round becomes a lot more difficult.

Also in my opinion Woodley is far superior to any ROLB the Steelers have had since Kevin Greene. Yeah I know players such as Jason Gildon, and Clark Haggans have probably put up stats that were superior to their actual worth as ball players in the LeBeau system. But I watch the games, and neither were as strong at the point of attack as Woodley has become, and neither were as clutch as Lamarr either. The guy makes plays when they matter, and the bigger the game, the better he is. If the Steelers had allowed him to fly the coop it would have been the worst personell decsion by the team since they allowed Leon Searcy to become a Jaguar.

[Chidi29]

Chidi, Jerrol Williams 9 sacks in a season came under a different system. He was also not a starter, but a situational pass rusher. He was a specialist. When Cowher arrived in 1992, he hired Dom Capers as the defensive coordinator and Dick LeBeau as the defensive backs coach. LeBeau had been talking to Bob Knight about zone defenses and pressure systems in basketball. He was the first guy to blitz and use his corner in zone behind the blitz and roll the safety over the top. It was the first zone blitz. Then, he met with Bill Arnsparger, who had placed linebackers as DEs and dropped them in coverage at times. He also double blitzed from one side. He was responsible for the Fins Killer Bs defense. From conversations with those two, the zone blitz we know today was born. And, it takes a specialized type of OLB.

They plugged Jerrol Williams into that role and his production was cut in half. It was so evident that the Steelers went out and found a pass rushing specialist, a hired gun, Kevin Greene. The difference between a Williams and a Greene is significant.

As for Emmons, he was actually a pretty decent linebacker, he just did not fit the 3-4 defense. He was a much better player in Philly and New York in the 4-3. He had 9.5 sacks in 2 seasons with the Steelers as the blindside guy. That is pretty bad. He was the worst starting ROLB the Steelers had since the start of the Zone Blitz. Good for a 7th round pick? Sure. William Gay is a good corner for a 5th round pick. I do not want to start him and rely on him.

You also point to schemes as being the reason why any OLB can be successful under LeBeau. He has been the DC since 2000. Since that time, he has had 4 OLBs start. They are Porter, Haggans, Woodley, and Harrison. Three of those four starters under LeBeau were highly paid guys. Porter was not cheap. Harrison received the largest deal for an OLB (at that time). Woodley just inked for $10M a season. Haggans even was paid well (4 years, $10M) and they signed him prior to his ever starting a game. The fact is, LeBeau has really never had to plug a play an OLB. When he took over, he had Gildon and Porter as starters and both were in the system for a couple seasons. Then, they groomed Haggans. They groomed Harrison. They had Woodley for a season prior to starting him.

I would pose this challenge to you. The first preseason game is Thursday night. The Steelers, at some point, will trot out Baraka Atkins and Chris Ellis at OLB. Watch them and think about how they compare to Harrison and Woodley. If you still feel that it is plug and play, I will concede.

Now, for a final point, you state you would have kept Woodley for this season. You would have handed him $10M this season, which would represent roughly 8.5% of the total salary cap for 2012. You are good with that. Look at this, the salary cap has, over the past three seasons, risen at a rate of roughly 6.5%. In 2013, it will jump due to the new TV deals and a conservative estimate of the increase that year will be, IMO, 15%. So, with the tag, he was 8.5%. Using a little rough math and guesstimating his salary cap hits based on the limited information I know, here is what the cap, his contract, and his percentage of the contract could look like over the life of the deal.
2011-$120M-$6.5M cap hit-5.4% of salary cap
2012-$128M-$7.5M cap hit-5.8% of salary cap
2013-$147M-$11M cap hit-7.4% of salary cap
2014-$156.5M-$12M cap hit-7.6% of salary cap
2015-$167M-$12M cap hit-7.1% of salary cap
2016-$177.5M-$12M cap hit-6.7% of salary cap

This is where I struggle to see the argument. He is good enough to keep for one season at 8.5% of the cap AND the space he ties up this season could hinder you from signing other players, but he is not good enough to keep in the future at a percentage LOWER than that even though his cash value is more. To me, that is counter-intuitive. I would buy that completely if Woodley was 29, where you may see 2-3 good seasons and then he declines and you have married yourself to that cap hit for 3 bad seasons, but Woodley is 26. At worst, you should get 5 very good seasons out of the guy and then the release in his final year would be a smallish hit. There is no way I can look at this contract and see it as a bad deal. He is considered one of the top 10 pass rushers in the NFL. Here are what others were paid:

Tamba Hali-5 years, $60M, $30+M guaranteed.
DeMarcus Ware-7 years, $79M
Terrell Suggs-6 years, $62M (2009)
Kamerion Wimbley-5 years, $48M
Elvis Dumervil-5 year extension, $61.5M
Julius Peppers-6 years, $84M
Jared Allen-6 years, $73M
Dwight Freeney-6 years, $72M
There are more, I just cannot think of them off the top of my head. I am sure Justin Tuck or Osi is near this group.

Pass rushers cost. Ten million a season for a guy that has never had less than 10 sacks as a starter is a bargain.

That was my point. Even on guys who were longshots to make the team and contributed still managed to crack the starting lineup. Yes, they weren't on the same level as a Kevin Greene or Lloyd, but there's still something to be said to becoming a starter.

Harrison still got a smaller deal despite there being a higher cap and us probably being in better cap shape.

I think you're being a bit too literal in the "plug 'n play" statement I made. It's that we do our homework with the players we draft and bring in and have a system where we're always drafting and grooming linebackers, we don't need to throw a boatload of money at one because there's one waiting in the wings. Like Jason Worilds.

The challenge of seeing how Ellis and Atkins do in the preseason is deceiving because you know the defense will be a lot more vanilla. Especially since these guys are just trying to get the basics of it down before even attempting the more difficult concepts.

I said I would've kept the franchise tag because we had already put it on him. I likely wouldn't have done so in the first place.

I'm not saying he got more than market value. He didn't. It's about market value, heck maybe even a little less. It's not bad relatively. But like I said before, I don't care what other teams are doing with their finances. I'm only concerned about how we spend our money. Those teams need to keep their pass rushers because they don't have defenses as creative as ours that can wreak havoc on a defense like ours can. They don't have proven track records of churning out excellent pass rushers.

[Chidi29]

Let me also add, under Cowher, the Steelers were a consistent playoff team with the likes of Neil O'Donnell and Kordell Stewart. It could be argued that the money spent on Roethlisberger could be spent elsewhere, like the offensive line, and they could go back to a mediocre QB, running the football, and playing defense.

But, the difference between a Neil O'Donnell/Kordell Stewart comes in those final big games. With Ben, you win. Without him, you watch somebody else win.

THAT is why Roethlisberger is worth TWICE what they paid ANY other quarterback in Steeler history. Ben's 2010 cap hit is greater than BOTH Harrison and Woodley, the next two highest paid players.

Yet, no one wants to cut Ben. You pay the guys that make the plays.

But they weren't really all that successful QBs. We've constantly had above-average OLBs. And haven't really had to sit through the likes of Maddox and Kent Graham. Those really bad down seasons where you don't have a guy.

Without one of our OLBs, we're still Super Bowl contenders. Without Porter, we still were. If Woodley would've left, we still would have been considered as such. Without Ben, you're not a contender.

And like I've said, we have Jason Worilds sitting there. There's no one behind Ben.

You're clearly making a strawman argument.

[Devilsdancefloor]

i'll be happier with the contract when he matches harrison's motor. i expect woodley to be a beast against the run; in containment and in pass coverage(at least better) now. earn the money. even gildon got sacks in this system.

Lamarr faces a lot of right hand QB's and he can go balls out every play he has to contain his side more than james who can rev up and go go go. i think he does a really good job at staying home on most plays everyone gets suck out of position at times. I dont think anyone is worth that kind of money, but it is what the NFL has become. I hope for another season for pick your poison between him and harrison. i do hope he takes james out for dinner though

[TMC]

That was my point. Even on guys who were longshots to make the team and contributed still managed to crack the starting lineup. Yes, they weren't on the same level as a Kevin Greene or Lloyd, but there's still something to be said to becoming a starter.

Harrison still got a smaller deal despite there being a higher cap and us probably being in better cap shape.

I think you're being a bit too literal in the "plug 'n play" statement I made. It's that we do our homework with the players we draft and bring in and have a system where we're always drafting and grooming linebackers, we don't need to throw a boatload of money at one because there's one waiting in the wings. Like Jason Worilds.

The challenge of seeing how Ellis and Atkins do in the preseason is deceiving because you know the defense will be a lot more vanilla. Especially since these guys are just trying to get the basics of it down before even attempting the more difficult concepts.

I said I would've kept the franchise tag because we had already put it on him. I likely wouldn't have done so in the first place.

I'm not saying he got more than market value. He didn't. It's about market value, heck maybe even a little less. It's not bad relatively. But like I said before, I don't care what other teams are doing with their finances. I'm only concerned about how we spend our money. Those teams need to keep their pass rushers because they don't have defenses as creative as ours that can wreak havoc on a defense like ours can. They don't have proven track records of churning out excellent pass rushers.

But, as I stated, since 1992, the Steelers have drafted 22 or more outside linebackers and of those 22, how many have become studs, not starters, but studs? Lloyd was taken prior. Greene was a free agent signing. Harrison was a free agent. Haggans was not a stud. Emmons was not. You have Gildon, Porter, and Woodley of those 22 drafted players. Three of twenty-two were great players. And, Butler has stated himself that it takes a couple seasons in the system before he is comfortable enough with any LB. If you franchise Woodley this year and Butler thinks Worilds is not good enough next year, do you franchise him again? His tag number would be, at least, $12M. Where do you go if Worilds falters? Do you then hand him a bigger contract? What if he is pissed then because you tagged him and tried to screw him? No more hometown discount. Then, you are looking at 6 years, $72M. The potential for the tag him a season and let him go and replace him with Worilds has a lot of ways it can go sour. With this method, we know what we have.

And, you make a valid point about us always drafting and grooming linebackers. Since 1992, they have drafted and tried to groom 22 outside linebackers. They have three (Porter, Gildon, and Woodley) that could consistently put up double digit sack numbers in that time. The other 19 "drafted and groomed" linebackers were average or failures. That means the chance you get another stud like Woodley is less than 15%. If I set up a game where you bet $10 and lost 85% of the time, how willing would you be to make that gamble? Yet, you want to do that with Woodley?

As for the defense being vanilla and gauging the new linebackers, I expect a one legged monkey can get a sack if he gets free runs. The difference is a linebacker worth his salt will beat the man across from him. Woodley did as a rookie. Sly did last off season. He flashed in that vanilla defense. I remember Hokie's first game in Atlanta (I was there) and I remember him eating the OL up. Great players make their presence known regardless of scheme. Woodley would. Harrison would. The Steelers cannot be exotic on every play and think that LeBeau can overcome mediocrity. That is almost absurd.

And, finally, when we had Haggans at LOLB, he did not churn out sacks like Woodley does. Is your premise that LeBeau has gotten better? Why didn't Haggans get it done? You do realize that Woodley and Harrison are the most prolific duo of pass rushers the Steelers have ever put on the field at the same time.

And, if you allow Woodley to walk, Harrison turns 34 next year. Who do you have to replace him? What if he starts slowing down this season? I will never advocate allowing guys on the verge of a Pro Bowl in the prime of their career to walk.

[TMC]

But they weren't really all that successful QBs. We've constantly had above-average OLBs. And haven't really had to sit through the likes of Maddox and Kent Graham. Those really bad down seasons where you don't have a guy.

Without one of our OLBs, we're still Super Bowl contenders. Without Porter, we still were. If Woodley would've left, we still would have been considered as such. Without Ben, you're not a contender.

And like I've said, we have Jason Worilds sitting there. There's no one behind Ben.

You're clearly making a strawman argument.

No offense, but prior to drafting Ben, the Steelers were consistently strong and Super Bowl contenders. In fact, it could be argued that the Cowher win in the Super Bowl was not because they had a franchise QB, but more so because the defense played exceptional and they leaned on the running game. As for the prior QBs, we lacked successful QBs? Kordell Stewart made a Pro Bowl. So did Neil O'Donnell. O'Donnell took them to a Super Bowl. Kordell played in 2 AFC Championship games and many would argue he could have played in a Super Bowl if not for Spygate. The Steelers could easily sign an average or above-average quarterback for much less than they pay Roethlisberger. I mean, in reality, this is about cap space and money. Go cheaper. The backups were 3-1 without Ben last year. The Steelers can win without a franchise QB and think of all the money the could save and the cap room they would open. In 2011, Ben eats up more cap space alone than Woodley AND Harrison combined. In fact, if you add the cap hits of the other 10 offensive starters, Ben makes over half of what the other ten guys do. They have Leftwich and Batch, two seasoned veterans. They have also been grooming Dennis Dixon. They drafted O'Donnell and groomed him into a Pro Bowler. They did the same with Kordell. Ben is just the next in a long line of good QBs, well, as soon as he gets good enough to make a Pro Bowl.

Now, that is absolute nonsense. It borders on ludicrous. Why? Because while Kordell did make a Pro Bowl and play in 2 AFC Championship games, he was a mediocre player that made too many mistakes and failed to exhibit the talent and game to be an elite guy. Just like Clark Haggans, Carlos Emmons, and a host of other guys that the Steelers drafted to play OLB. While it is easy to point to the few successes that manned the position for YEARS, the failures have been MUCH greater. There are guys like Alonzo Jackson, Bruce Davis, Nathaniel Adibi, Chad Kelsay, Carlos Emmons, Donta Jones, Eric Ravotti, Roger Knight, and more.

To me, you hang all your premise on Worilds being that guy and right now, there is no proof he is the guy. They did not even trust him enough to spell the starters. He had 2 sacks, both coming in garbage time of games that were well in hand. The Steelers do not just stumble on great OLBs, they spend considerable draft picks, time, and money grooming guys to be great and when they get them there, they keep them in that position for a half-decade or more. The last 12 years or more has seen, what, three OLBs on each side? On the left side, you had Gildon, Haggans, Woodley. On the right side, it was Harrison, Porter, and Emmons. When you have 6 guys start at 2 positions for a dozen years, they cover a LOT of failures.

[steelerfan]

No offense, but prior to drafting Ben, the Steelers were consistently strong and Super Bowl contenders. In fact, it could be argued that the Cowher win in the Super Bowl was not because they had a franchise QB, but more so because the defense played exceptional and they leaned on the running game. As for the prior QBs, we lacked successful QBs? Kordell Stewart made a Pro Bowl. So did Neil O'Donnell. O'Donnell took them to a Super Bowl. Kordell played in 2 AFC Championship games and many would argue he could have played in a Super Bowl if not for Spygate. The Steelers could easily sign an average or above-average quarterback for much less than they pay Roethlisberger. I mean, in reality, this is about cap space and money. Go cheaper. The backups were 3-1 without Ben last year. The Steelers can win without a franchise QB and think of all the money the could save and the cap room they would open. In 2011, Ben eats up more cap space alone than Woodley AND Harrison combined. In fact, if you add the cap hits of the other 10 offensive starters, Ben makes over half of what the other ten guys do. They have Leftwich and Batch, two seasoned veterans. They have also been grooming Dennis Dixon. They drafted O'Donnell and groomed him into a Pro Bowler. They did the same with Kordell. Ben is just the next in a long line of good QBs, well, as soon as he gets good enough to make a Pro Bowl.

Now, that is absolute nonsense. It borders on ludicrous. Why? Because while Kordell did make a Pro Bowl and play in 2 AFC Championship games, he was a mediocre player that made too many mistakes and failed to exhibit the talent and game to be an elite guy. Just like Clark Haggans, Carlos Emmons, and a host of other guys that the Steelers drafted to play OLB. While it is easy to point to the few successes that manned the position for YEARS, the failures have been MUCH greater. There are guys like Alonzo Jackson, Bruce Davis, Nathaniel Adibi, Chad Kelsay, Carlos Emmons, Donta Jones, Eric Ravotti, Roger Knight, and more.

To me, you hang all your premise on Worilds being that guy and right now, there is no proof he is the guy. They did not even trust him enough to spell the starters. He had 2 sacks, both coming in garbage time of games that were well in hand. The Steelers do not just stumble on great OLBs, they spend considerable draft picks, time, and money grooming guys to be great and when they get them there, they keep them in that position for a half-decade or more. The last 12 years or more has seen, what, three OLBs on each side? On the left side, you had Gildon, Haggans, Woodley. On the right side, it was Harrison, Porter, and Emmons. When you have 6 guys start at 2 positions for a dozen years, they cover a LOT of failures.




Ben is so huge to this team it's not funny. All those earlier teams under Cowher all underachieved BECAUSE of Cowher. Because of his " Marty Ball " style of play. That is why Cowher lost every single Home AFC title game except for one. And that was against a 6th seeded Indy team that was only a Hail Mary away from beating Cowher again. You look at Super Bowl XL, and Ben's performance as being weak. And that we could have won with a AVERAGE QB with our defense and running game. But I say it was Cowher who once again put the clamps on Ben in that Super Bowl game against Seattle. That game WAS a Home game basically for the Steelers. It was in Detroit,,,Bettis Home town. And I guarantee you that 90 % of all the fans there were Steeler fans. That's why Cowher once again went Ultra Conservative, and started Bettis over Parker. Even though Willie was CLEARLY the better player. Cowher wanted to go with his BOY Bettis, and run-run-run, and take AWAY the good rythem that Ben had earlier. Remember,,,if it weren't for Ben's PASSING in those 3 road games,,,,we wouldn't even have gotten to that Super Bowl game.


But, if we would have been the # 1 seed in 2005, I have NO DOUBT that Cowher would have lost in the playoffs cause when he is at home, he feels the need to play it very conservatively,,,and NOT let his QB Loose. But, on the road, he figures he'd better cause he doesn't have that " Home field " advantage enough to play it conservately.
But a franchise QB like Ben IS the reason we did so well in getting to that first Super Bowl game. And Ben WAS the reason we won the second game against Arizona...NOT the running game. And certainly NOT the Defense.

[Chidi29]

But, as I stated, since 1992, the Steelers have drafted 22 or more outside linebackers and of those 22, how many have become studs, not starters, but studs? Lloyd was taken prior. Greene was a free agent signing. Harrison was a free agent. Haggans was not a stud. Emmons was not. You have Gildon, Porter, and Woodley of those 22 drafted players. Three of twenty-two were great players. And, Butler has stated himself that it takes a couple seasons in the system before he is comfortable enough with any LB. If you franchise Woodley this year and Butler thinks Worilds is not good enough next year, do you franchise him again? His tag number would be, at least, $12M. Where do you go if Worilds falters? Do you then hand him a bigger contract? What if he is pissed then because you tagged him and tried to screw him? No more hometown discount. Then, you are looking at 6 years, $72M. The potential for the tag him a season and let him go and replace him with Worilds has a lot of ways it can go sour. With this method, we know what we have.

And, you make a valid point about us always drafting and grooming linebackers. Since 1992, they have drafted and tried to groom 22 outside linebackers. They have three (Porter, Gildon, and Woodley) that could consistently put up double digit sack numbers in that time. The other 19 "drafted and groomed" linebackers were average or failures. That means the chance you get another stud like Woodley is less than 15%. If I set up a game where you bet $10 and lost 85% of the time, how willing would you be to make that gamble? Yet, you want to do that with Woodley?

As for the defense being vanilla and gauging the new linebackers, I expect a one legged monkey can get a sack if he gets free runs. The difference is a linebacker worth his salt will beat the man across from him. Woodley did as a rookie. Sly did last off season. He flashed in that vanilla defense. I remember Hokie's first game in Atlanta (I was there) and I remember him eating the OL up. Great players make their presence known regardless of scheme. Woodley would. Harrison would. The Steelers cannot be exotic on every play and think that LeBeau can overcome mediocrity. That is almost absurd.

And, finally, when we had Haggans at LOLB, he did not churn out sacks like Woodley does. Is your premise that LeBeau has gotten better? Why didn't Haggans get it done? You do realize that Woodley and Harrison are the most prolific duo of pass rushers the Steelers have ever put on the field at the same time.

And, if you allow Woodley to walk, Harrison turns 34 next year. Who do you have to replace him? What if he starts slowing down this season? I will never advocate allowing guys on the verge of a Pro Bowl in the prime of their career to walk.

First off, can I get the list of the 22 OLBs you're referring to? I'm not saying you're lying but by my count, I only see 12. There were some players listed as just LB from the early to mid 90s that I don't remember or don't know that may have very well been an OLB.

Let's do that first and then I can tackle the argument from there.

[TMC]

First off, can I get the list of the 22 OLBs you're referring to? I'm not saying you're lying but by my count, I only see 12. There were some players listed as just LB from the early to mid 90s that I don't remember or don't know that may have very well been an OLB.

Let's do that first and then I can tackle the argument from there.

They are: Elnardo Webster, Chad Brown, Jason Gildon, Taase Faumui, Eric Ravotti, Donta Jones, Carlos Emmons, Steven Conley, Mike Vrabel, Chad Kelsey, Joey Porter, Clark Haggans, Roger Knight, Alonzo Jackson, Nate Adibi, Rian Wallace, LaMarr Woodley, Lawrence Timmons, Mike Humpal, Bruce Davis, Jason Worilds, Thad Gibson, and now Chris Carter. There are a couple DE/OLB/ILB guys I left out because early in the process they were feeling out the guys that fit.

[TMC]

Ben is so huge to this team it's not funny. All those earlier teams under Cowher all underachieved BECAUSE of Cowher. Because of his " Marty Ball " style of play. That is why Cowher lost every single Home AFC title game except for one. And that was against a 6th seeded Indy team that was only a Hail Mary away from beating Cowher again. You look at Super Bowl XL, and Ben's performance as being weak. And that we could have won with a AVERAGE QB with our defense and running game. But I say it was Cowher who once again put the clamps on Ben in that Super Bowl game against Seattle. That game WAS a Home game basically for the Steelers. It was in Detroit,,,Bettis Home town. And I guarantee you that 90 % of all the fans there were Steeler fans. That's why Cowher once again went Ultra Conservative, and started Bettis over Parker. Even though Willie was CLEARLY the better player. Cowher wanted to go with his BOY Bettis, and run-run-run, and take AWAY the good rythem that Ben had earlier. Remember,,,if it weren't for Ben's PASSING in those 3 road games,,,,we wouldn't even have gotten to that Super Bowl game.


But, if we would have been the # 1 seed in 2005, I have NO DOUBT that Cowher would have lost in the playoffs cause when he is at home, he feels the need to play it very conservatively,,,and NOT let his QB Loose. But, on the road, he figures he'd better cause he doesn't have that " Home field " advantage enough to play it conservately.
But a franchise QB like Ben IS the reason we did so well in getting to that first Super Bowl game. And Ben WAS the reason we won the second game against Arizona...NOT the running game. And certainly NOT the Defense.

I actually look at Super Bowl XL and view it as our defensive performance as being strong. But, I really think you need to review your history. The Steelers opened Super Bowl XL with 8 of their first 12 plays being passing attempts. He went 5 of 12 in the first half with an INT and a QB rating of 29.2.

They ran 4 times and passed 8 and you call that going back to the conservative style of play? And, Bettis did not start over Parker. He may have been named the starter, but the first offensive play from scrimmage (after a false start by Heath Miller), was a run by Willie Parker. In fact, Bettis did not get a touch of the football in the first quarter. Not one. He only had 3 for the first half and TWO came inside the 10 on the series where Ben dove for the goal line. You are WAY off on this one. If anything, it was Ben's passing that kept the Seahawks in the game. The only passing TD came on the Ultra-conservative end around throw by Randle El to Hines Ward. Good thing they did not try something risky like a draw.

As for Arizona, I would certainly state that the 100-yard INT return for a TD had some effect in that Super Bowl since it could be touted as a 14-point swing. Then, there was the offensive holding call in the endzone that lead to a safety. But, I am sure that is on the defense as well. Without Harrison's play to make it 17-7, they could have entered the half with the score 14-10. The offense scored another 10 points all game and allowed 2. If not for Harrison, Ben may not have had the opportunity to pull it out.

And, I never stated Ben was not an elite QB. In fact, you argue my point for me. We should be willing to pay extra for elite players as they are the guys that take you from a playoff team to a championship team. Woodley's numbers are elite and he is one of the reasons why the Steelers have played in 2 Super Bowls during his 4 years.

[Steeldude]

Kordell Stewart made a Pro Bowl

sorry, but pro bowls mean nothing. especially for the last 20 years. kordell was hands down one of the worst QBs in the NFL. i honestly believe if the steelers had at least an average QB they would have had one or two extra SB trips.

[Steeldude]

has anyone broke down woodley's sacks? seems to me many of them were gildon-type sacks. i am not saying he is inept as a LB, but what has he really shown? i don't recall woodley being doubled very much, if at all. i have not been impressed with his containment. IMO, he seems to be a heavier version of gildon and a lesser version of kevin greene.

all i am saying is i expect to see a huge improvement with this new contract. i am a firm believer in a person earning their money. i hope woodley turns it up in 2011 because i haven't seen much from his past to justify the large raise in salary.

[fansince'76]

all i am saying is i expect to see a huge improvement with this new contract. i am a firm believer in a person earning their money. i hope woodley turns it up in 2011 because i haven't seen much from his past to justify the large raise in salary.

He's arguably better than Tamba Hali and Kamerion Wimbley and they got very similar deals to Woodley's. If anything, the Steelers got off cheaply with Woodley as he seems to have gotten the going market rate for OLBs.

[zulater]

has anyone broke down woodley's sacks? seems to me many of them were gildon-type sacks. i am not saying he is inept as a LB, but what has he really shown? i don't recall woodley being doubled very much, if at all. i have not been impressed with his containment. IMO, he seems to be a heavier version of gildon and a lesser version of kevin greene.

all i am saying is i expect to see a huge improvement with this new contract. i am a firm believer in a person earning their money. i hope woodley turns it up in 2011 because i haven't seen much from his past to justify the large raise in salary.

Dude, I really think you're watching a different game than I am. :huh:I'm not seeing your point whatsoever.

[steelpride12]

He's arguably better than Tamba Hali and Kamerion Wimbley and they got very similar deals to Woodley's. If anything, the Steelers got off cheaply with Woodley as he seems to have gotten the going market rate for OLBs.
Agreed. I think Pittsburgh expects highly of him because he plays the daunted position of OLB for the Steelers which has had pro bowlers for years, but Woodley is and an be as great. He did come cheap to the Steelers and the fans and teams should be fortunate to get this guy into his 30's.

[86WARD]

He's arguably better than Tamba Hali and Kamerion Wimbley and they got very similar deals to Woodley's. If anything, the Steelers got off cheaply with Woodley as he seems to have gotten the going market rate for OLBs.

Steelers made out like bandits with the deal they signed Woodley to compared to Hali and Wimbley...

[suitanim]

No. The Steelers are stupid.

They overpaid, period, for a fat, slow guy who cannot play the position.

So says _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

Anyway, they paid a little better than the going rate for a guy who does nothing but make "splash plays", and has since he was at Michigan. I don't give a single solitary fuck if the guy misses a tackle that results in a RB occasionally gaining 4 yards on 1st and 10 instead of 2 yards. I DO care about a guy who flies to the ball, causes fumbles, wreaks havoc in the backfield, disrupts passing lanes, and generally plays his position as well as anybody in the league.

Woodley is a stud, and we had to pay for that. Better he makes that game changing pick-6 for us then some other team, and certainly better than some other team in our division.

[Chidi29]

They are: Elnardo Webster, Chad Brown, Jason Gildon, Taase Faumui, Eric Ravotti, Donta Jones, Carlos Emmons, Steven Conley, Mike Vrabel, Chad Kelsey, Joey Porter, Clark Haggans, Roger Knight, Alonzo Jackson, Nate Adibi, Rian Wallace, LaMarr Woodley, Lawrence Timmons, Mike Humpal, Bruce Davis, Jason Worilds, Thad Gibson, and now Chris Carter. There are a couple DE/OLB/ILB guys I left out because early in the process they were feeling out the guys that fit.

Ok, let's break down where each player was drafted and how they fared. I'm assuming you just added Carter so we now have 23 players.

Webster - 9th round. Did nothing.
Brown - 2nd round. Productive, especially the year he played at OLB.
Gildon - 3rd round. Team all-time sack leader.
Faumui - 4th round. Did nothing.
Ravotti - 6th round. Did little.
Jones - 4th round. Did nothing.
Emmons - 7th round. Fairly productive considering his draft slot. But certainly not a great career.
Conley - 3rd round. Bust.
Vrabel - 3rd round. Somewhat productive here though moreso with New England.
Kelsay - 7th round. Did nothing.
Porter - 3rd round. Very productive.
Haggans - 5th round. Good, not great career. Still solid value considering where he was drafted.
Knight - 6th round. Did nothing.
Jackson - 2nd round. Bust.
Adibi - 5th round. Did nothing.
Wallace - 5th round. Did very little.
Woodley - 2nd round. Very productive career so far.
Timmons - 1st round. Another productive career and he'll continue to grow.
Humpal - 6th round. Not really fair to evaluate as injury killed his career before it could even get off the ground.
Davis - 3rd round. Bust.
Worilds - 2nd round. TBD.
Gibson - 4th round. Did nothing for us though we didn't really want to get rid of him. Combo of him falling behind and needing a spot for Smith.
Carter - 5th round. TBD.

We drafted one OLB in the first round. We're 1/1. (100%)
We drafted four OLBs in the second round. Not counting Worilds, we're 2/3. (66.6%)
We drafted five OLBs in the third round. Two definite "hits", two definite "misses". Vrabel bit of a toss up. 2.5/5 (50%)
We drafted three OLBs in the fourth round. Counting Gibson, we're 0/3. (0%)
We drafted four OLBs in the fifth. Not counting Carter, we're 1/3. (33.3%)
We drafted three OLBs in the sixth. I'm not counting Humpal because of the injury so we're 0/2. (0%)
We drafted two OLBs in the seventh. Counting Emmons as a "hit", we're 1/2. (50%)
We drafted one OLB in a round that doesn't exist anymore. 0/1. (0%)

Being the draft guy you are, you know the later you draft, the less likely you are to select a player that will be an asset to your team. That's true for any team at any position.

And the percentages indicate that. In the first three rounds, we're 6.5/9 (72.2%). Take everything after that and we're 2/11 (18.2%). A difference of a whopping 54%.

Yes, we drafted a bunch of OLBs that didn't pan out. But so many of those guys came in late rounds when the expectations weren't nearly as high and the team isn't hurt as much if the player doesn't work out. It's a much tougher pill to swallow when Alonzo Jackson busts than when Chad Kelsay doesn't do anything. Frankly, your percentages are very misleading.

And not taking my "plug 'n play" statement as literally, as I said not to do, I would advocate drafting an OLB in the early rounds where the success rate is high. It doesn't have to be in the first round either. We're not locked into the mindset of "We HAVE to draft this position now" and wind up with another Troy Edwards. We have flexibility which is a big plus and makes it a lot more comfortable come draft day.

"If I set up a game where you bet $10 and lost 85% of the time, how willing would you be to make that gamble? Yet, you want to do that with Woodley? "

I'd take that gamble. Since it'll cost me 61.5 million dollars not to play. :chuckle:

I don't know how you have yet to realize that your "Atkins and Ellis" argument isn't absurd. As I've said, you're taking "plug 'n 'play" too literally.

Haggans wasn't as productive as Woodley because he wasn't as good. I thought you knew that when I said in post seventy-three...

"And I'm not saying Haggans is as good as Woodley. He isn't."

There's your answer. But seeing that Haggans was still a productive player at a much cheaper rate, the difference between the two isn't worth the money we spent on Woodley. That's been my point all along. The issue has absolutely nothing to do with Woodley's talent. He's an extremely talented player, no doubt about it. Not the argument I'm trying to make.

Remember that Harrison didn't start getting playing time until later in his career. He's got less milage than the average player. Draft a player next year and groom him.

[Chidi29]

No offense, but prior to drafting Ben, the Steelers were consistently strong and Super Bowl contenders. In fact, it could be argued that the Cowher win in the Super Bowl was not because they had a franchise QB, but more so because the defense played exceptional and they leaned on the running game. As for the prior QBs, we lacked successful QBs? Kordell Stewart made a Pro Bowl. So did Neil O'Donnell. O'Donnell took them to a Super Bowl. Kordell played in 2 AFC Championship games and many would argue he could have played in a Super Bowl if not for Spygate. The Steelers could easily sign an average or above-average quarterback for much less than they pay Roethlisberger. I mean, in reality, this is about cap space and money. Go cheaper. The backups were 3-1 without Ben last year. The Steelers can win without a franchise QB and think of all the money the could save and the cap room they would open. In 2011, Ben eats up more cap space alone than Woodley AND Harrison combined. In fact, if you add the cap hits of the other 10 offensive starters, Ben makes over half of what the other ten guys do. They have Leftwich and Batch, two seasoned veterans. They have also been grooming Dennis Dixon. They drafted O'Donnell and groomed him into a Pro Bowler. They did the same with Kordell. Ben is just the next in a long line of good QBs, well, as soon as he gets good enough to make a Pro Bowl.

Now, that is absolute nonsense. It borders on ludicrous. Why? Because while Kordell did make a Pro Bowl and play in 2 AFC Championship games, he was a mediocre player that made too many mistakes and failed to exhibit the talent and game to be an elite guy. Just like Clark Haggans, Carlos Emmons, and a host of other guys that the Steelers drafted to play OLB. While it is easy to point to the few successes that manned the position for YEARS, the failures have been MUCH greater. There are guys like Alonzo Jackson, Bruce Davis, Nathaniel Adibi, Chad Kelsay, Carlos Emmons, Donta Jones, Eric Ravotti, Roger Knight, and more.

To me, you hang all your premise on Worilds being that guy and right now, there is no proof he is the guy. They did not even trust him enough to spell the starters. He had 2 sacks, both coming in garbage time of games that were well in hand. The Steelers do not just stumble on great OLBs, they spend considerable draft picks, time, and money grooming guys to be great and when they get them there, they keep them in that position for a half-decade or more. The last 12 years or more has seen, what, three OLBs on each side? On the left side, you had Gildon, Haggans, Woodley. On the right side, it was Harrison, Porter, and Emmons. When you have 6 guys start at 2 positions for a dozen years, they cover a LOT of failures.

You know there's no way we are a Super Bowl contender with Charlie Batch or, gulp, Dennis Dixon under center. We wouldn't have been able to compete with high-powered offenses. We're still a good team, yes, but without Ben, weren't taking that next step.

Like I've been saying, yes we need to do our homework in getting a replacement. But when we do, odds are we're going to "hit" and we can spend our money elsewhere.

[TMC]

Okay, first, I find it pretty funny when you count Timmons as a win at OLB. I do not think he has ever started a game at OLB and if he remained at OLB, he STILL would not be starting a game. How can that be a win as an OLB? That is like stating we drafted Antwaan Randle El as a QB and he is a success because he was a successful WR. He did not give you shit at QB and Timmons may get spot duty at OLB, but he is an ILB. As an outside linebacker, he could not beat out the guy drafted behind him, a guy you are ready to dismiss.

I also find it funny that you count Haggans as a success because he was a 5th round pick. So, IF Kordell was a 7th round pick, you would be willing to let Ben go because, as a 7th round pick, Kordell was successful. What kind of logic is that? Once they are here, the success or failure stands on what they do on the field, not how they were acquired.

Here is another thing I find funny. You do not advocate spending the money on Woodley, yet you will readily spend high draft picks to stock the position. If Woodley leaves, we have to spend another high pick there because Harrison is 33. Furthermore, when Harrison was extended, he added 5 years at just over $49M. So, he is a $10M a year man as well. To be financially prudent, as you are advocating, the smart move would be to cut both of the expensive OLBs and draft two new guys with 1st or 2nd round picks.

Now, since you do not advocate signing any OLBs to big money deals, and let us assume that every 2nd round linebacker makes it, and knowing that Coach Butler takes 2 years before he is comfortable with a LB enough to play him unless he is a freak (like Woodley), then we would need to draft an OLB, let him season two years, get two good years from him, and watch him walk. Let me see if I can paint this picture.....
2012-Woodley would come off his franchise tag and Worilds would start. Spend a 2nd on an OLB because in 2 years, Worilds would have played out his deal.
2013-Draft an OLB in the 2nd and hope Harrison can play 2 more seasons.
2014-Draft another OLB to replace the 2012 OLB (becomes starter) as Worilds moves on.
2015-Harrison leaves, rookie steps in, spend 2nd on OLB to replace the 2013 draft pick so he can learn.
2016-That 2012 OLB is out of his deal, the 2014 OLB is starting, you need another to season. And so the cycle continues.
So, we would spend a 2nd round pick pretty much every year because you do not want to pay the guys and you have to fill that spot so they can understand the system. Miss one, and you are screwed and are forced to spend multiple picks.

Now, I am sure you will state that is ludicrous. You did not mean that we should not ever sign an OLB, just not Woodley because of the amount and the fact that they drafted Worilds last season. But, if Worilds stepped in and did not miss a beat, he would be a FA in 2-3 seasons. Do you pay him? In 2-3 seasons, it will probably be $15M a season for a pass rusher (or more). At what point will you be willing to pay a guy? And, what if Worilds fails miserably. What if he cannot hold the point? What if he sucks in coverage? Cannot get off blocks? That is a house of cards.

And, would you not think that Coach LeBeau and Coach Butler know what they have in Worilds? Maybe they also know what they have in Woodley. Maybe, just maybe, that is why they paid Woodley and did not allow him to walk and Worilds to step in. Woodley was starting his 2nd season. He TOOK it by flashing his rookie year. Worilds, not so much.

Again, you argue that this guy performed well for his draft slot, but when the ball is kicked off, those guys do not run around with numbers on their back showing their draft slot and they get bonus points for being lower round guys. I expect many of my lower round picks to wash out. That is exactly true, which is why I do not want to throw away my more valuable picks on positions where I have elite guys that I can pay a few more dollars to keep.

Furthermore, if we did not pay Woodley, where would the money go? Would we retain Starks? Randle El? Spend it on a 34-year old Burress? Add Dan Graham? Sorry, not one of those guys carry the roster value, not monetary value, but roster value LaMarr Woodley carries. It is not even close. The current estimate for the Steelers is $5M under the salary cap. In addition to that, Ben could have opened another $5M in the restructure if they so desired. The Steelers could have easily added any big ticket free agent. Woodley did not hinder that in any way.

Sorry, I simply cannot see this as a bad deal in any way, shape, or form. I like my high draft picks. When they turn out, like Woodley, I do not mind paying them. I had no issue with Ben being a $100M QB. That was the going rate. I did not take issue with Bettis being a $6M a year RB either. When they made Harrison the highest paid OLB in the NFL, I thought he deserved it. They pay Troy. They will pay Pouncey, Timmons, and Wallace. I damn sure do not want to watch Pouncey walk because we drafted Colon in the 4th and he was a pretty good player so we should be able to find decent OLs in the 4th. Sorry. When I get good players, I want to keep them.

[TMC]

You know there's no way we are a Super Bowl contender with Charlie Batch or, gulp, Dennis Dixon under center. We wouldn't have been able to compete with high-powered offenses. We're still a good team, yes, but without Ben, weren't taking that next step.

Like I've been saying, yes we need to do our homework in getting a replacement. But when we do, odds are we're going to "hit" and we can spend our money elsewhere.

No offense, but in Ben's rookie season, the Steelers went 15-1 in the regular season. They had the #1 ranked defense and were excellent against the run and pass. They were the #2 rushing offense in the NFL and 28th in passing. They won 15 games in a row. They lost in the AFC Championship game. A game where Ben threw three INTs including a pick-6. Those three INTs lead to 17 NE points. The Steelers lost by 14.

In 2002, there was the no-hold call against the Jags in the playoffs. In 2001, they lost by 7 to the Pats in the AFC Championship game. So, not exactly sure what constitutes a contender to you, but they have been contenders MANY times without Roethlisberger.

[Chidi29]

Okay, first, I find it pretty funny when you count Timmons as a win at OLB. I do not think he has ever started a game at OLB and if he remained at OLB, he STILL would not be starting a game. How can that be a win as an OLB? That is like stating we drafted Antwaan Randle El as a QB and he is a success because he was a successful WR. He did not give you shit at QB and Timmons may get spot duty at OLB, but he is an ILB. As an outside linebacker, he could not beat out the guy drafted behind him, a guy you are ready to dismiss.

I also find it funny that you count Haggans as a success because he was a 5th round pick. So, IF Kordell was a 7th round pick, you would be willing to let Ben go because, as a 7th round pick, Kordell was successful. What kind of logic is that? Once they are here, the success or failure stands on what they do on the field, not how they were acquired.

Here is another thing I find funny. You do not advocate spending the money on Woodley, yet you will readily spend high draft picks to stock the position. If Woodley leaves, we have to spend another high pick there because Harrison is 33. Furthermore, when Harrison was extended, he added 5 years at just over $49M. So, he is a $10M a year man as well. To be financially prudent, as you are advocating, the smart move would be to cut both of the expensive OLBs and draft two new guys with 1st or 2nd round picks.

Now, since you do not advocate signing any OLBs to big money deals, and let us assume that every 2nd round linebacker makes it, and knowing that Coach Butler takes 2 years before he is comfortable with a LB enough to play him unless he is a freak (like Woodley), then we would need to draft an OLB, let him season two years, get two good years from him, and watch him walk. Let me see if I can paint this picture.....
2012-Woodley would come off his franchise tag and Worilds would start. Spend a 2nd on an OLB because in 2 years, Worilds would have played out his deal.
2013-Draft an OLB in the 2nd and hope Harrison can play 2 more seasons.
2014-Draft another OLB to replace the 2012 OLB (becomes starter) as Worilds moves on.
2015-Harrison leaves, rookie steps in, spend 2nd on OLB to replace the 2013 draft pick so he can learn.
2016-That 2012 OLB is out of his deal, the 2014 OLB is starting, you need another to season. And so the cycle continues.
So, we would spend a 2nd round pick pretty much every year because you do not want to pay the guys and you have to fill that spot so they can understand the system. Miss one, and you are screwed and are forced to spend multiple picks.

Now, I am sure you will state that is ludicrous. You did not mean that we should not ever sign an OLB, just not Woodley because of the amount and the fact that they drafted Worilds last season. But, if Worilds stepped in and did not miss a beat, he would be a FA in 2-3 seasons. Do you pay him? In 2-3 seasons, it will probably be $15M a season for a pass rusher (or more). At what point will you be willing to pay a guy? And, what if Worilds fails miserably. What if he cannot hold the point? What if he sucks in coverage? Cannot get off blocks? That is a house of cards.

And, would you not think that Coach LeBeau and Coach Butler know what they have in Worilds? Maybe they also know what they have in Woodley. Maybe, just maybe, that is why they paid Woodley and did not allow him to walk and Worilds to step in. Woodley was starting his 2nd season. He TOOK it by flashing his rookie year. Worilds, not so much.

Again, you argue that this guy performed well for his draft slot, but when the ball is kicked off, those guys do not run around with numbers on their back showing their draft slot and they get bonus points for being lower round guys. I expect many of my lower round picks to wash out. That is exactly true, which is why I do not want to throw away my more valuable picks on positions where I have elite guys that I can pay a few more dollars to keep.

Furthermore, if we did not pay Woodley, where would the money go? Would we retain Starks? Randle El? Spend it on a 34-year old Burress? Add Dan Graham? Sorry, not one of those guys carry the roster value, not monetary value, but roster value LaMarr Woodley carries. It is not even close. The current estimate for the Steelers is $5M under the salary cap. In addition to that, Ben could have opened another $5M in the restructure if they so desired. The Steelers could have easily added any big ticket free agent. Woodley did not hinder that in any way.

Sorry, I simply cannot see this as a bad deal in any way, shape, or form. I like my high draft picks. When they turn out, like Woodley, I do not mind paying them. I had no issue with Ben being a $100M QB. That was the going rate. I did not take issue with Bettis being a $6M a year RB either. When they made Harrison the highest paid OLB in the NFL, I thought he deserved it. They pay Troy. They will pay Pouncey, Timmons, and Wallace. I damn sure do not want to watch Pouncey walk because we drafted Colon in the 4th and he was a pretty good player so we should be able to find decent OLs in the 4th. Sorry. When I get good players, I want to keep them.

All I did was take the list of players you gave me. That's partially why I asked for the list. That way, there'd be no debate as to who would be counted as an OLB or not. Don't complain because that's what you gave me to work with and that's exactly what I did.

I count Haggans as a success because he was one. He was a starter and a fairly productive one. The fact that he was a mid round pick is icing on the cake.

By putting a blanket conclusion on success and failures, you're basically saying that we can't build through the draft at all. We're failures at every position. Because there are so many failures at the end rounds that make the numbers look bad. Drafting a player in the first round is a lot different than the seventh. The success rate in the early rounds are much different than the later rounds and you have to account for that. You're simply not getting the same players. And the percentages show that.

So, as I was saying. The numbers show that when we draft within the first three rounds, the success rate is high. Yes, anything below that and you're throwing garbage at the wall hoping something sticks, but that's not what I was advocating.

I will spend draft picks because I know OLB is a key cog in this defense. And they are cheaper. Moreso now that there's a rookie wage scale in effect though that really only dramatically effected the top ten.

It's not that I'm not willing to pay an OLB anything or as simple as letting them walk after their rookie contract. It's just that I'm not willing to pay an OLB that kind of money. It's just a ton of money to be tied up with and very few players are worthy of it IMO.

Harrison's deal was cheaper. Less money as a whole, less guaranteed, and less of a signing bonus. As you showed, the salary cap was higher at that time. And even then, there were some who questioned if we should've paid the money.

If I can get Worilds for the right price, I'd be willing to re-sign him should he perform well.

I would've spent that money to revamp the offensive line. Knowing none of that money would have been tied up, I could spend it freely this offseason. I would've taken a run at Harvey Dahl to fix our RG woes. I'd look at Leonard Davis as a fallback option, and he'd be very, very cheap while still giving us a power blocker at RG. Maybe go after Doug Free at LT. Give myself a solid line to work with. Could've had: Free, Kemoeatu, Pouncey, Dahl, Adams. I wouldn't had signed Colon. Could move Free to RT next year. Put Gilbert at LT where I like him the best.

Or perhaps I sit on the money and wait until next year and look at the FA market then. I definitely have options.

"They pay Troy. They will pay Pouncey, Timmons, and Wallace. I damn sure do not want to watch Pouncey walk because we drafted Colon in the 4th and he was a pretty good player so we should be able to find decent OLs in the 4th. Sorry. When I get good players, I want to keep them"

Here is the problem with that statement. I would LOVE to keep all those guys, including Woodley. Really, I would. But when your idea is "keep all the good players" you're going to run into problems. You can't keep everyone, sadly. Tough decisions have to be made sometimes. As much as you don't like them, you gotta bite the bullet.

[Steeldude]

the OLB has been shown pretty much to be plug-n-play for the steelers.

who has really failed at OLB since 1992? seems to me each LB has done a serviceable job. while some may be better than others it doesn't really show any true failure on the part of the lesser LBs? though i must slightly contradict myself by saying i believe gildon was horrible, but he did get by due to the system. IMO, jerrol williams did pretty well considering it was the first year of the new defense. his stats pretty much mirrored lloyd's. haggans did well considering porter was usually blocked with a single player unlike harrison who is doubled and even tripled at times.

seems to me worilds would do just as good. IMO, i think worilds would be better against the run and coverage. woodley appears slow to react in containment. are woodley's sacks anything special? or are they sacks any average player can make in the steelers' system? i didn't record any games last year, but i can't recall very many sacks that were more of a result of woodley's abilities/tenacity than the defensive scheme or instances where a RB or TE is blocking him. i am not saying woodley hasn't made plays based on his own power. he has made some very good plays that were a result of his abilities, but so have many other players throughout NFL history. is woodley, considering the position he plays, really worth that contract? i personally think no one is worth that kind of money, but as another member stated, that's what the NFL has turned into.

i am basing my opinion on the position with the salary cap. if there wasn't a salary cap then it wouldn't be an issue. i would like to see more money spent on blue chip O-linemen. i am tired of seeing the steelers squeak by on poor to average O-linemen. i don't mean to change the topic, but come on, scott starting at LT?

[TMC]

All I did was take the list of players you gave me. That's partially why I asked for the list. That way, there'd be no debate as to who would be counted as an OLB or not. Don't complain because that's what you gave me to work with and that's exactly what I did.

I get what you did. We both know what you did. You took the list I handed you and cherry picked it. You picked the players you liked and worked them to fit your argument. You throw in Timmons as an OLB when everyone knows he is an ILB to make your percentages look better. You also add in Vrabel, who did nothing here and was allowed to walk without even making him a decent offer. Yeah, he turned out in New England, but he never had more than 2.5 sacks in any of his 4 years with the Steelers and never started a game, at a time when Carlos Emmons was the ROLB. He only had more than 5 sacks in 2 of his 14 seasons. For us, he was a bust. For other teams, he played better. That does not help us. Why are these two important? Well, if you admit they failed at OLB for the Steelers, it turns your draft numbers into 0% for the first round and 40% for the 3rd. It then makes the first three rounds drop to 55%, almost 20% less than your touted number. You can call Timmons a successful pick, but you cannot call him a successful pick at OLB, and that is what he was drafted to do.


I count Haggans as a success because he was one. He was a starter and a fairly productive one. The fact that he was a mid round pick is icing on the cake.

William Gay is a mid-round pick and was a starter. Do you think he is a success? Ready to run with him at corner? Willie Colon is a starting RT and was a 4th round pick, yet, you would not have re-signed him. Is he a success? The going rate for tackles is $10M, Willie took just better than half of that. Yet, you do not want him. I guess starting and being fairly productive does not matter at tackle. Haggans was an average football player. Average. There were games our defense could have used a better pass rusher in his place. When Woodley walked on the field, Haggans days were numbered.


By putting a blanket conclusion on success and failures, you're basically saying that we can't build through the draft at all. We're failures at every position. Because there are so many failures at the end rounds that make the numbers look bad. Drafting a player in the first round is a lot different than the seventh. The success rate in the early rounds are much different than the later rounds and you have to account for that. You're simply not getting the same players. And the percentages show that.

Actually, that is not what I am doing. In fact, you have actually helped prove a point here. As you show, the only way to even guarantee some type of hope of getting a quality OLB would be to draft them highly. In the 3rd round, the number is under 50% as I do not buy the Vrabel was good for us argument. Let us just assume that 50% for the first and 2nd round is a good number (not buying the Timmons argument either). If the Steelers spent their 2nd round pick every year, like I proposed in the earlier scenario, sooner or later the failure rate of 50%, hell, even 75%, would mean that one of the guys could not handle the position. As you state, it is not plug and play. You cannot plug rookies in. They have to have time to grasp it. Coach Butler, in an interview, states it takes 2 years. Farrior said he was lost his first full season and he was an established veteran. So, if you use that scenario, you would have to be perfect in drafting those guys or it would bite you in the ass at some point.

Furthermore, you could not address other positions with that pick because it would be designated to spend on OLBs to keep meat in the grinder.


So, as I was saying. The numbers show that when we draft within the first three rounds, the success rate is high. Yes, anything below that and you're throwing garbage at the wall hoping something sticks, but that's not what I was advocating.

I will spend draft picks because I know OLB is a key cog in this defense. And they are cheaper. Moreso now that there's a rookie wage scale in effect though that really only dramatically effected the top ten.

It is high IF I buy that Timmons was a successful OLB. Again, if ARE was drafted as a QB and played WR, does that make him a successful QB? No, it does not. And, that is IF you buy Vrabel was a success in our system, which he was not. I also like how you attach the 3rd round to that, because the 3rd round is a huge drop from the first two, but it allows you to use the argument that it does not have to be a 1st or 2nd round pick, when, in reality, if you want a high percentage, it does. The Steelers success rate of drafting OLBs that PLAYED OLB in their system is: 0% (1st round), 66.7% (2nd), 40% (3rd). It really is not that good unless you massage the numbers to make your argument stronger.

Futhermore, you are willing to "spend draft picks because I know OLB is a key cog in this defense" yet you are not willing to spend money and you are willing to ignore other positions in the draft to fill the need. Odd.


It's not that I'm not willing to pay an OLB anything or as simple as letting them walk after their rookie contract. It's just that I'm not willing to pay an OLB that kind of money. It's just a ton of money to be tied up with and very few players are worthy of it IMO.

Harrison's deal was cheaper. Less money as a whole, less guaranteed, and less of a signing bonus. As you showed, the salary cap was higher at that time. And even then, there were some who questioned if we should've paid the money.

If I can get Worilds for the right price, I'd be willing to re-sign him should he perform well.

First, the going rate for pass rushers is climbing towards $12M per season. Woodley comes in at 17% less than the going rate for elite pass rushers and do not be fooled, he is elite. He was top 10 for OLBs last season and Top 5 the other two. He is the #1 LOLB in sacks for each of the past three seasons. Harrison's deal was cheaper, but not by much. Harrison signed a 5-year extension. He was under contract for one more season at $1.4M. He signed for 5 more years adding $50.35M in new money. They could have made Harrison play under that $1.4M just like they made Woodley play under his $550,000 last season. If he had signed last year and it had been touted as a 6-year extension for $60M, would that make it better for you? If you look at new money over years, Harrison received $10.07M per year to Woodley's $10M. Now, the cap is different. To what extent, no one yet knows because the CBA has not trickled out. The number we hear is lower. But, Harrison signed the LARGEST deal ever for an OLB when he signed. It was later beaten by Ware, Suggs, and many others. The going rate for OLBs has increased dramatically and Woodley actually signed a deal very comparable to Harrison's on a per year basis. As for guaranteed money, Woodley got a grand total of $2M more than Harrison. I cannot comment on the signing bonuses yet because everything with them is speculation, they were not released. Woodley's deal is very comparable to Harrison's deal and was signed 2 years later AFTER the OLB market exploded.


I would've spent that money to revamp the offensive line. Knowing none of that money would have been tied up, I could spend it freely this offseason. I would've taken a run at Harvey Dahl to fix our RG woes. I'd look at Leonard Davis as a fallback option, and he'd be very, very cheap while still giving us a power blocker at RG. Maybe go after Doug Free at LT. Give myself a solid line to work with. Could've had: Free, Kemoeatu, Pouncey, Dahl, Adams. I wouldn't had signed Colon. Could move Free to RT next year. Put Gilbert at LT where I like him the best.

Or perhaps I sit on the money and wait until next year and look at the FA market then. I definitely have options.

Harvey Dahl is 30 years old and just signed a 4-year deal. The terms were not released. Do you really advocate signing a 30-year old guard over a 26-year old pass rusher? There are 4 valued positions in the NFL that trump all others. It is pretty well known by most draftniks that IF you get a shot at a QB, CB, LT, or pass rusher, you take them over other positions. Do you really advocate taking a guard over a pass rusher? And, Doug Free signed a 4-year deal averaging $8M per season with $17M guaranteed. In essence, you would trade Doug Free for LaMarr Woodley. It is a $2M a year difference with a $5M difference in guarantees but when you account Woodley gets a bigger signing bonus because of longer years, that is a wash. Doug Free allowed 5 sacks, had 1 holding penalty, and 7 false starts last year. It was his first year as a starter and MANY believe he is not a true LT and should move to the right side. Leonard Davis is 32. Are you really advocating dumping elite youth for average aged veterans?


"They pay Troy. They will pay Pouncey, Timmons, and Wallace. I damn sure do not want to watch Pouncey walk because we drafted Colon in the 4th and he was a pretty good player so we should be able to find decent OLs in the 4th. Sorry. When I get good players, I want to keep them"

Here is the problem with that statement. I would LOVE to keep all those guys, including Woodley. Really, I would. But when your idea is "keep all the good players" you're going to run into problems. You can't keep everyone, sadly. Tough decisions have to be made sometimes. As much as you don't like them, you gotta bite the bullet.

And when the time comes to bite that bullet, we will. We bit it this year with Starks, ARE, and Flozell Adams. I would much rather bite the bullet with hired guns, veterans that are beaten out of their jobs, and injury/weight issues that I would with elite pass rushers in their prime. You are basically advocating biting the bullet with Woodley when they do not have to do so. And, you are advocating it so they can bring in more aging hired guns on the offensive line that may or may not be better than what we have. Who knows how many sacks Dahl or Free would give up if Ben started running around behind them with the football.

As I have shown, in the future, the Steelers do not have over the cap dollars allocated, the cap should rise significantly in 2-3 seasons, and aging veteran salaries will continue to fall off. You allow Woodley to leave, watch Harrison, Farrior, Smith, Hampton, Polamalu, Ike, and Clark retire in 2-4 seasons, pretty soon you do not have any talent on defense because you allowed your youth to walk to sign older offensive linemen.

Sorry, that formula just does not work for me. And, after all this, I understand the crux of your argument. You do not like the signing of Woodley because you feel it handcuffs the signings at other positions, like the offensive line, even though the Steelers could have reworked the Roethlisberger deal and been $10M under the salary cap right now (they are estimated at $5M). Woodley does not effect that at all. If it were $20M, it still does not mean they would change their activity in the market. They are not even bringing in offensive linemen to talk. Don't blame that on Woodley.

[Chidi29]

I get what you did. We both know what you did. You took the list I handed you and cherry picked it. You picked the players you liked and worked them to fit your argument. You throw in Timmons as an OLB when everyone knows he is an ILB to make your percentages look better. You also add in Vrabel, who did nothing here and was allowed to walk without even making him a decent offer. Yeah, he turned out in New England, but he never had more than 2.5 sacks in any of his 4 years with the Steelers and never started a game, at a time when Carlos Emmons was the ROLB. He only had more than 5 sacks in 2 of his 14 seasons. For us, he was a bust. For other teams, he played better. That does not help us. Why are these two important? Well, if you admit they failed at OLB for the Steelers, it turns your draft numbers into 0% for the first round and 40% for the 3rd. It then makes the first three rounds drop to 55%, almost 20% less than your touted number. You can call Timmons a successful pick, but you cannot call him a successful pick at OLB, and that is what he was drafted to do.



William Gay is a mid-round pick and was a starter. Do you think he is a success? Ready to run with him at corner? Willie Colon is a starting RT and was a 4th round pick, yet, you would not have re-signed him. Is he a success? The going rate for tackles is $10M, Willie took just better than half of that. Yet, you do not want him. I guess starting and being fairly productive does not matter at tackle. Haggans was an average football player. Average. There were games our defense could have used a better pass rusher in his place. When Woodley walked on the field, Haggans days were numbered.



Actually, that is not what I am doing. In fact, you have actually helped prove a point here. As you show, the only way to even guarantee some type of hope of getting a quality OLB would be to draft them highly. In the 3rd round, the number is under 50% as I do not buy the Vrabel was good for us argument. Let us just assume that 50% for the first and 2nd round is a good number (not buying the Timmons argument either). If the Steelers spent their 2nd round pick every year, like I proposed in the earlier scenario, sooner or later the failure rate of 50%, hell, even 75%, would mean that one of the guys could not handle the position. As you state, it is not plug and play. You cannot plug rookies in. They have to have time to grasp it. Coach Butler, in an interview, states it takes 2 years. Farrior said he was lost his first full season and he was an established veteran. So, if you use that scenario, you would have to be perfect in drafting those guys or it would bite you in the ass at some point.

Furthermore, you could not address other positions with that pick because it would be designated to spend on OLBs to keep meat in the grinder.



It is high IF I buy that Timmons was a successful OLB. Again, if ARE was drafted as a QB and played WR, does that make him a successful QB? No, it does not. And, that is IF you buy Vrabel was a success in our system, which he was not. I also like how you attach the 3rd round to that, because the 3rd round is a huge drop from the first two, but it allows you to use the argument that it does not have to be a 1st or 2nd round pick, when, in reality, if you want a high percentage, it does. The Steelers success rate of drafting OLBs that PLAYED OLB in their system is: 0% (1st round), 66.7% (2nd), 40% (3rd). It really is not that good unless you massage the numbers to make your argument stronger.

Futhermore, you are willing to "spend draft picks because I know OLB is a key cog in this defense" yet you are not willing to spend money and you are willing to ignore other positions in the draft to fill the need. Odd.



First, the going rate for pass rushers is climbing towards $12M per season. Woodley comes in at 17% less than the going rate for elite pass rushers and do not be fooled, he is elite. He was top 10 for OLBs last season and Top 5 the other two. He is the #1 LOLB in sacks for each of the past three seasons. Harrison's deal was cheaper, but not by much. Harrison signed a 5-year extension. He was under contract for one more season at $1.4M. He signed for 5 more years adding $50.35M in new money. They could have made Harrison play under that $1.4M just like they made Woodley play under his $550,000 last season. If he had signed last year and it had been touted as a 6-year extension for $60M, would that make it better for you? If you look at new money over years, Harrison received $10.07M per year to Woodley's $10M. Now, the cap is different. To what extent, no one yet knows because the CBA has not trickled out. The number we hear is lower. But, Harrison signed the LARGEST deal ever for an OLB when he signed. It was later beaten by Ware, Suggs, and many others. The going rate for OLBs has increased dramatically and Woodley actually signed a deal very comparable to Harrison's on a per year basis. As for guaranteed money, Woodley got a grand total of $2M more than Harrison. I cannot comment on the signing bonuses yet because everything with them is speculation, they were not released. Woodley's deal is very comparable to Harrison's deal and was signed 2 years later AFTER the OLB market exploded.



Harvey Dahl is 30 years old and just signed a 4-year deal. The terms were not released. Do you really advocate signing a 30-year old guard over a 26-year old pass rusher? There are 4 valued positions in the NFL that trump all others. It is pretty well known by most draftniks that IF you get a shot at a QB, CB, LT, or pass rusher, you take them over other positions. Do you really advocate taking a guard over a pass rusher? And, Doug Free signed a 4-year deal averaging $8M per season with $17M guaranteed. In essence, you would trade Doug Free for LaMarr Woodley. It is a $2M a year difference with a $5M difference in guarantees but when you account Woodley gets a bigger signing bonus because of longer years, that is a wash. Doug Free allowed 5 sacks, had 1 holding penalty, and 7 false starts last year. It was his first year as a starter and MANY believe he is not a true LT and should move to the right side. Leonard Davis is 32. Are you really advocating dumping elite youth for average aged veterans?



And when the time comes to bite that bullet, we will. We bit it this year with Starks, ARE, and Flozell Adams. I would much rather bite the bullet with hired guns, veterans that are beaten out of their jobs, and injury/weight issues that I would with elite pass rushers in their prime. You are basically advocating biting the bullet with Woodley when they do not have to do so. And, you are advocating it so they can bring in more aging hired guns on the offensive line that may or may not be better than what we have. Who knows how many sacks Dahl or Free would give up if Ben started running around behind them with the football.

As I have shown, in the future, the Steelers do not have over the cap dollars allocated, the cap should rise significantly in 2-3 seasons, and aging veteran salaries will continue to fall off. You allow Woodley to leave, watch Harrison, Farrior, Smith, Hampton, Polamalu, Ike, and Clark retire in 2-4 seasons, pretty soon you do not have any talent on defense because you allowed your youth to walk to sign older offensive linemen.

Sorry, that formula just does not work for me. And, after all this, I understand the crux of your argument. You do not like the signing of Woodley because you feel it handcuffs the signings at other positions, like the offensive line, even though the Steelers could have reworked the Roethlisberger deal and been $10M under the salary cap right now (they are estimated at $5M). Woodley does not effect that at all. If it were $20M, it still does not mean they would change their activity in the market. They are not even bringing in offensive linemen to talk. Don't blame that on Woodley.

Cherry picked the list? Again, all I did was take the list you provided me. I don't know why you'd include Timmons on your list if you really didn't consider him an OLB for us. If I wanted to "cherry pick", I wouldn't have asked you what players you considered.

Yes, I do think Gay is a success. He's a solid nickelback. I wouldn't have signed Colon because of the torn Achilles but we're getting off topic at this point.

Like I said, you could use any of the top three picks on an OLB. You're not locked in so you have to take a player at a certain position in a specific round.

By using your logic, it's not really fair to count Timmons against us. Because while he hasn't been used at OLB, he's still been a great player for us. If it wasn't for how well Woodley has played, it's quite possible Timmons would be starting at OLB right now. You might not think he should be counted for us, but he definitely shouldn't be counted against.

There was no chance of signing Woodley last year. Due to the 30% rule, any sort of long-term deal would've involved an insane amount of bonuses. You're looking at a total base salary over 6 years of just 8-10 million IIRC.

What I'm saying is that if our money was not tied up in Woodley, we could look elsewhere and get multiple players at other positions we don't have as much success drafting with. Our RG spot has been terrible for the past years. Left tackle has been discussed a lot and whether or not we could've used an upgrade over Starks. With him gone and Scott probably starting, we definitely do.

And even if the extension wouldn't have effected the cap this year, it will in future years. Like I said, I could've sat on the money and played the FA pool next year.

For the record, I definitely wasn't suggesting a swap of Woodley to Davis. I was just spit-balling free agent ideas.

I really think we're going to have a tough time signing all of our stars. Are you hoping that our starting left tackle gets hurt and becomes out of shape so we can cut him? And replace him with Jonathan Scott? And we only cut Flozell because we re-signed Colon and Adams wasn't going to take a paycut without starting.

[TMC]

Cherry picked the list? Again, all I did was take the list you provided me. I don't know why you'd include Timmons on your list if you really didn't consider him an OLB for us. If I wanted to "cherry pick", I wouldn't have asked you what players you considered.

Yes, I do think Gay is a success. He's a solid nickelback. I wouldn't have signed Colon because of the torn Achilles but we're getting off topic at this point.

Like I said, you could use any of the top three picks on an OLB. You're not locked in so you have to take a player at a certain position in a specific round.

By using your logic, it's not really fair to count Timmons against us. Because while he hasn't been used at OLB, he's still been a great player for us. If it wasn't for how well Woodley has played, it's quite possible Timmons would be starting at OLB right now. You might not think he should be counted for us, but he definitely shouldn't be counted against.

There was no chance of signing Woodley last year. Due to the 30% rule, any sort of long-term deal would've involved an insane amount of bonuses. You're looking at a total base salary over 6 years of just 8-10 million IIRC.

What I'm saying is that if our money was not tied up in Woodley, we could look elsewhere and get multiple players at other positions we don't have as much success drafting with. Our RG spot has been terrible for the past years. Left tackle has been discussed a lot and whether or not we could've used an upgrade over Starks. With him gone and Scott probably starting, we definitely do.

And even if the extension wouldn't have effected the cap this year, it will in future years. Like I said, I could've sat on the money and played the FA pool next year.

For the record, I definitely wasn't suggesting a swap of Woodley to Davis. I was just spit-balling free agent ideas.

I really think we're going to have a tough time signing all of our stars. Are you hoping that our starting left tackle gets hurt and becomes out of shape so we can cut him? And replace him with Jonathan Scott? And we only cut Flozell because we re-signed Colon and Adams wasn't going to take a paycut without starting.

Timmons is on the list because he was DRAFTED to play outside linebacker. Then, he was beaten out by an undrafted free agent that had been a backup bouncing on and off the roster for years. On the other side, he was beaten out by the guy drafted BEHIND him in the same draft. Lawrence Timmons was drafted as an outside linebacker, a first round pick, and cannot win the starting role as an outside linebacker because an undrafted free agent pushed him out of the position. If Brian St. Pierre had turned into our franchise QB and Ben moves to TE and does well, is he a successful pick at QB? Hell no. That is what happened with Timmons. They had to move him around to find a use for him.

So, Gay is a success as a nickel back, but you do not want to let Ike walk and start him. And, we are not off topic. You are using certain players, where you can fit them, and where they were drafted to try and paint them as successes. If Gay was a successful corner, teams would not consistently target his ass.

Back to Timmons, he was a first round pick. Woodley was a 2nd round pick. If a 2nd round guy beats out a 1st round guy (drafted in the same year), he cannot be too much of a success. Hell, a 5th round guy held him out of the starting lineup for a year at his new position. Your argument is simple, the Steelers can draft OLBs and have them be successful, they do not need to pay them. Yet, Timmons is NOT a successful OLB. He is entering his 5th season and cannot lock up a starting spot there.

So, we cannot draft RGs. How many 1st,2nd, or 3rd round picks have we spent on the offensive line in the last 10 years? So, why don't we run down the offensive linemen drafted in the first three rounds since 2000.
2000-Marvel Smith-started 108 games, made a Pro Bowl.
2002-Kendall Simmons-started 83 games
2004-Max Starks-started 68 games, won 2 Super Bowls as a starting OT
2005-Trai Essex-started 25 games in 6 years.
2010-Maurkice Pouncey-Pro Bowler and rookie phenom
2011-Marcus Gilbert-yet to be determined.

Using some of your standards, you would have to call them 100% at drafting offensive linemen in the first three rounds. I mean, each guy has started at some point, two are Pro Bowlers. Why are you not advocating drafting offensive linemen in the first round? Furthermore, with the FA signings on the offensive line, guys like Sean Mahan and Jonathan Scott, I would think that advocating the draft here would be much smarter. But, you go in a completely different direction.

As for Woodley's hit effecting the cap in future years, it won't effect it much. I have pointed this out ad nauseum. The Steelers are estimated to have $3-5M in cap space right now. They could have easily opened another $5M when they restructured Roethlisberger's deal. Space is not an issue, yet they STILL do not chase the free agent tackles or guards you propose, most would easily come cheaply now as they are begging for work. Nada.

As for the future, Wood's cap hit next year probably won't climb over $7.5M. But, I guess I have to do this all over again. A conservative estimate for the cap climb is 6.5% each year. In 2013 (maybe 2012), the NFL will renegotiate the TV deals and the smallest increase to the cap of any season when a TV deal was redone was 16%. So, using those conservative estimates, the salary cap should be:
2012-$128M
2013-$136M
2014-$157M
2015-$167M
2016-$178M

Those are conservative numbers. If the total revenue climbs as expected (going by rumored increased in TV deals, the new Thursday night package, and the new cable package just inked), I would think the cap could climb like this:
2012-$135M
2013-$141M
2014-$189M
2015-$196M
2016-$204M

The current talk is ALL the TV contract may double. They currently comprise $5B of the $9.4B pie that is being sliced up. But, that does not include the new cable TV deal that puts the NFL Network in 26.7 million new homes. It also does not include the new Thursday Night Football package they expect to kick off this season. If they keep it on NFL Network, it means they charge more to cable companies for the package and they will pay. Otherwise, they sell it. The MNF package gets $1B a year. So, you could see TV jump as high as $11B by 2013 but I estimated it between $8-$9B. If you use the conservative numbers, the top set, Woodley's impact over the course of the new deal is 2-3% less than the cost of the franchise tag this season and if they expand like the bottom set, it is a non-issue.

Now, your statement about my hoping our LT gets hurt borders on laughable. I guess since we want to be cute, I can state that you THINK Aaron Smith, Troy Polamalu, James Farrior, Casey Hampton, and others will continue to play for ever and eat up that cap number with it never, ever dropping off. The cap numbers for each of those 30-something year old guys are:
Farrior-$3.825M
Foote-$3M
Hampton-$8.057M
Harrison-$8.365M
Polamalu-$8.595M
Aaron Smith-$6.1M
Hines Ward-$4.6M

That is $42.542M in cap space. And, that does not include knocking $10M off next season's books by dumping Starks and ARE. So, next season, we have Polamalu, Wallace, and Timmons as guys needing new deals. They can high RFA tender Wallace. They can franchise Timmons. I think Polamalu can be inked for less than his $8.5M cap hit. Other than that, nobody is critical. They do not have to ink Pouncey, he has 4 more years left right now. The rest of the line can walk. They do not have to sign Brown or Sanders, both have 2 years left now and can be hit with the RFA tag cheaply. Miller is locked in. Ben is locked in. Mendenhall is locked up through 2012, but I would not call him a must sign. That is the whole offense. On defense, they have Hood with 3 more years. Which corner behind Ike needs a big deal? Is there a safety I am not seeing? Both OLBs are inked.

Who the hell do we have in the tubes that is so pressing we need $50M to sign in one season? Nobody.

This is much ado about nothing.

[SteelMember]

If we do not lock up Woodley, who starts next year?

I do not see the depth there to make for a viable candidate. I believe if Worlids finds time on the field, most of it will be on Harrison's side. So after him, where's the next guy to take over in a single year? No one, imo.

That is the same predicament we found ourselves needing to re-sign Ike. We have nobody "proven" to be the #1 CB. If we don't sign him and go FA, the cost would be even higher for someone of comparable quality.

It was Woodleys turn, and he got paid... maybe more than some of us can accept and/or rationalize, but comparable to his peers none-the-less.

Just my .02

[Butch]

I can say I'm happy about this. I like to think we got him for a Steal on his last contract and he never made a big deal about being under paid. He's been very stoic and has consistently impressed me. IMHO he's earned his paycheck and I'm happy as Hell he's still here!!!

[86WARD]

If we do not lock up Woodley, who starts next year?

I do not see the depth there to make for a viable candidate. I believe if Worlids finds time on the field, most of it will be on Harrison's side. So after him, where's the next guy to take over in a single year? No one, imo.

That is the same predicament we found ourselves needing to re-sign Ike. We have nobody "proven" to be the #1 CB. If we don't sign him and go FA, the cost would be even higher for someone of comparable quality.

It was Woodleys turn, and he got paid... maybe more than some of us can accept and/or rationalize, but comparable to his peers none-the-less.

Just my .02

lol...it doesn't matter. it's plug and play...why ask such a silly question. ;)