Steelers sign Booger

by steeler lifer on Mar 26, 2008 2:25 AM EDT

News that the Steelers have signed veteran DT Anthony McFarland, who had been released by the Colts after failing a physical. Didn't see any contract details. McFarland had missed the entire 07 season after tearing a tendon at training camp. McFarland is 30, 6-0 300 pounds. Solid veteran for many years in TBay before joining the Colts in 06. A good inside pocket pusher and decent against the run in his prime. Colorful guy, good in the locker room, part of two SB champs and was particularly good for the Colts in their playoff run. Not really any experience in the 3-4 but he figures to share time with Kiesel or perhaps even Hampton. Not sure how healthy he is or how much he has left in the tank. Perhaps this is an indication the Steelers will play more 4-3 than they have before.

This could be the end of FA acquisitions. Four signees, all in areas of obvious need: RB-Returner Moore, LB Fox, C Hartwig and DL McFadden. By Steeler standards a very busy FA period and high marks for the FO responding to Tomlin's wishes. They're obviously committed to his vision of how he wants to build and improve his team. The guy wants to win right now. I don't know how Colbert did it within a tight cap. Now they turn all their attention to unsigned RFAs (especially Washington), Starks and of course the draft. I think each NFL team is permitted 30 visits by draft eligible players and we'll get a good idea of who the Steelers are targeting in early, mid and late rounds.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Oops

The Tomlin reference above should of course read: :''The guy DOES want to win right now.''!!! Herbally enhanced faux pas.

by steeler lifer on Mar 26, 2008 2:29 AM EDT reply actions

fixed for ya

by Michael Bean on Mar 26, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions

thanks blitz

by steeler lifer on Mar 26, 2008 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Thanks for the break Lifer

I am always leery when I read that a guy "doesn't pass his physical," but the Steelers aren't stupid, so we'll see.

I am still disappointed that we never heard back from Donnie Nickey. He's special teams tackling machine, and it seems to me that we need that more than we need anything.

by maryrose on Mar 26, 2008 8:19 AM EDT reply actions

No lose situation

I like signings like these. The guy is a veteran and was probably signed for the league minimum or close to it. It sounds like a no lose situation to me.

by cgolden on Mar 26, 2008 9:37 AM EDT reply actions

Heard

I heard the McFarland will be out at least 2 or 3 games at the start of the year. If true, how can this unproven as a steelers make the cut without practicing? If this rumor is true i think its a dumb move by the steelers but again you know rumors, i found the rumor on an indy site stating how glad they were getting rid of him because they save like 3.4 million of cap room doing that, and it was a good move because this guy is not even expecting to play the first 3 to 4 games. I dont know about you but i thought Tomlin was all about battling position s on the field at camp and in practice, how can a guy get a roster spot if hes going to be drinking water and riding a stationary bike all camp?

Well that was my 2 cents.

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on Mar 26, 2008 9:43 AM EDT reply actions

Where did you hear the rumor?

According to this article, at least, from the Pittsburgh Trib Boog could be 100% by the start of training camp.

by cgolden on Mar 26, 2008 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions

i could not find the first

place i went to but another place i found where he has less of a chance of being ready is here http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_relatednews.aspx?sport=Nfl&id=311

Though they talk about other player they mention Booger and state that he has a less likely chance to returning for week one.

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on Mar 26, 2008 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions

i meant

2 to 3 games not 3 to 4 as a stated in the second part of my comment

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on Mar 26, 2008 9:44 AM EDT reply actions

warren signed as well

According to to the Post-Gazette we signed Greg Warren (our long-snapper) to a three-year deal, so that should lower his cap number as he had been on a one-year tender for 900K I believe, he'll be closer to 700K cap hit now. Also mentions that we signed McFarland, after he took a physical, so our medical staff must think he's ok, and considering we may have the best med. staff in the league (with the UPMC connections) I'll take it. Colts probably did cut him more for financial reasons as they had to re-sign Bob Sanders and Dwight Freeney to huge deals in the past year.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Mar 26, 2008 10:42 AM EDT reply actions

The Experts Take on Booger (ESPN)

The Colts traded for McFarland from Tampa Bay, but have gotten very little out of this once-productive defensive tackle. He missed the entire 2007 season with a torn patella tendon and has to be considered a durability risk at this point of his advanced career. Making matters worse, he is known to carry too much weight and has some stamina issues late in games. When right and fresh, McFarland can be very disruptive. He is an excellent natural athlete who gets off the ball low and with furry. The problem is that this type of performance is now few and far between. He can be a very effective interior pass rusher and utilizes a wide array of pass rush moves and countermoves. He is low and powerful with the ability to absorb a double team. If asked to play a limited number of snaps per game, he could still be productive, but there is a lot of risk associated with signing McFarland at this point.

by maryrose on Mar 26, 2008 10:44 AM EDT reply actions

Level of risk

I think the level of risk in this signing is directly correlated to the amount he's going to be paid. If this is a short term contract (1-2 yrs) for a relatively low amount (850K to 1.5 million), I'd consider the risk to be very low to non-existant. After all if he proves to not be healthy or effective he can be cut and cost the team very little in 'dead money.' If he was signed to a deal with any length or serious dollars then I would be worried.

by cgolden on Mar 26, 2008 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions

doubtful

that our FO would sign him to a deal like that. he probably got numbers just like you mentioned with a very minimal signing bonus. and with the players in front of him he'll just be a sub, so as the ESPN scouts said, he should be disruptive for us in limited action. having him behind Hampton and Smith should help extend their careers by keeping them fresh. this potentially could be a great signing. we'll still draft DT in 1st or 2nd round and have even more depth, even if McFarland doesn't work out.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Mar 26, 2008 11:09 AM EDT reply actions

No lose

The guy has been a good player and been part of two championship teams. If he's healthy and rotated into the line, he should be a good contributor. He was great for the Colts in the playoffs two seasons ago after a regular season in which that defense could not stop anyone on the ground. He still has a lot of recupe time ahead of him and he's a veteran, so if he wants to earn any money he'll make sure he's ready when it counts. He doesn't need to be ready for training camp. He's also another quality guy who wants to play for Tomlin.

If he can play 20 snaps a game and give the other guys enough of a rest so that they can be more effective, then it's a good situation for everyone at probably minimal financial obligation. It's getting a bit crowded on d-line with Hoke, Kirschke, McBean and McFarland backing up the starters. We'll probably draft another d-lineman, so someone in that group is not going to make the team if everyone is healthy. McBean also is reportedly on crutches right now with a foot injury.

by steeler lifer on Mar 26, 2008 12:18 PM EDT reply actions

Great Point Lifer

We talked about the OL getting crowded after Hartwig was signed but not the DL is in the same position. With McFarland, the DL now has any many people as they did last year (basically trading Eason for McFarland). McBean started the year on the practice squad and was only moved up after Smith's injury so he doesn't even count yet. With both lines full, I'm starting to think it could be a surprising draft. Could Tomlin and the FO be trying to fill those needs with free agents so that they can go after a WR or CB with the first couple of picks? Any draft pick used on the OL or DL means that someone has to go unless the rookie starts the season on the practice squad (which an early pick couldn't do). Camp is starting to look more and more interesting.

by cgolden on Mar 26, 2008 12:37 PM EDT reply actions

OL and DL

I still believe we take B. Albert in the first and look to cut someone down the line. Plus the OL depends, what is happening with Starks? Might we release the transition tag and just let him go now that we've butchered his chance of getting a good deal. Still probably take DL in the early rounds, as McBean could be cut for cheap, and you can never have enough good young talented defensive linemen. I'd be fine stashing a rookie or McBean on the practice squad for depth. We are going to have great depth this year, much more so than last year either way.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Mar 26, 2008 12:51 PM EDT reply actions

BPA

More and more it looks like the FO is preparing themselves to be ready to take the best player available in the first round. They probably foresee some considerable talent at positions other than the need positions.

I like Booger. Watching Indi quite a bit in 2006, their defense shored up considerably with the aquisition of Booger. Don't know if his injury last year will noticably slow him down or not.

by Chicago Steeler on Mar 26, 2008 1:36 PM EDT reply actions

Draft

I think they're positioning themselves to take the BPA in the 1st by putting decent players in the holes. We still need a young DL, but not desperately. We still need a future for our OL, but this signing makes someone like Quentin Groves or Jonathon Stewart a more rational pick for us in the first if the OL's we want are gone.

by BadMaafala on Mar 26, 2008 1:43 PM EDT reply actions

McFarland

The Colt's SBN guy had some nice things to say about McFarland:

http://www.stampedeblue.com/story/2008/3/26/101448/647

by BadMaafala on Mar 26, 2008 2:03 PM EDT reply actions

Some of you miss the point

The purpose of the exercise is to insure that no one knows exactly what the Steelers intend to do in the first round of the draft. This is how Colbert likes to roll. Right now they have positioned themselves so that a best player available scenario is plausible. If they got a WR or CB it would not be cause for panic. But most importantly the teams drafting before them will have no idea what they are likely to do, which makes the likelihood of them getting exactly who the want (whoever that might be) that much greater.

by Ivan Cole (RickVa) on Mar 26, 2008 8:27 PM EDT reply actions

Exactly Rick

Anything that confuses the opposition is good. I'm not so much worried about the teams drafting ahead of Pittsburgh as those drafting behind. If it's known for example that we will in all certainty draft Albert, then anyone who wants him would be motivated to move up in the draft ahead of our position. If we seem equally likely to draft a Groves, Kelly or Talib, then a team targeting those guys may move up, and a team wanting Albert may take a chance on him getting past the Steelers.

by steeler lifer on Mar 27, 2008 1:00 AM EDT reply actions

Even if McFarland's a red herring

It still covers the DL more because top DEs should be off the board by pick 23. This also gives us a tough 4th and inches D line with two strong fatties front and center.

At any rate, I remember last year that Steelers/Tomlin was instituting a stricter nutritional regimen during spring training. Who knows if that could improve McFarland's energy issue.

by betelgeuse on Mar 27, 2008 2:05 AM EDT reply actions

So...

Did we actually sign him? PG said we did, but the Trib didn't say we did, and now they're saying we didn't.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_559227.html

I can't tell if it's a done deal but not official (a la Hartwig) or if he really might sign with us.

by BadMaafala on Mar 27, 2008 10:08 AM EDT reply actions

I don't think it's done yet

I read somewhere that he failed the physical but it didn't have any links to validate the story.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions

article

I just found this. Doesn't sound too certain, but it's evidence against the signing.

http://www.timesonline.com/articles/2008/03/26/sports/doc47eabf3ce7383168875825.txt

by BadMaafala on Mar 27, 2008 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions

doesn't sound good for Boog

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh Well,

my little nephew eats Boogers like him for breakfast!

"It's time to plant some seeds. What that means is, hit them in the mouth. Ya know, plant some seeds. Show 'em what time it is." --Levon Kirkland

by steelerinchicago on Mar 27, 2008 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions

+1

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Thats what i was trying to say

Hes hurt, not point of putting someone that cant even compete on the team if he is hurt. If there was a shadow of a doubt i rather sign someone else or move someone up from the practice squad. Like you guys said injuries happen they are a part of the game so we should pass on the guy and get someone we know can compete day in and day out.

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on Mar 27, 2008 11:18 AM EDT reply actions

health

I understand what you're saying but just because he's signed doesn't mean he's guaratneed a roster spot. He would still have to compete to make the team and it's not like this team hasn't made that type of signing in the past (Kevan Barlow). He's the kind of guy that when healthy, he could be a valuable situational player for a cheap price. With the age and injury history of the DL, it's not a bad idea to try and stockpile some warm bodies in case someone goes down again.

If they absolutely wanted to sign him but didn't think he would be healthy at the start of the season, they could also put him on the PUP list. Then he wouldn't count against the 53 man roster and he'd have the first six weeks to get healthy. The Chiefs and Broncos did that last year with accomplished yet injured veterans (Priest Holmes & Rod Smith, respectively) so it's probably something that crossed thier mind.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions