First, I didn’t have much of a problem with not franchising Faneca. He’d been a soldier for the Steelers, restructuring his deal numerous times, so I was fine with them showing him the same courtesy that he showed the Steelers throughout his career. I understand the NFL is a business but I admire the fact that the Steelers still have some class.

Second, I’m withholding judgment on Starks until we find out if he gets signed to a long term deal. If he does either before, during or after the season, I’m ok with it. In that case, they used the transition tag in order to secure the future, and I understand that. If they pay Starks 7 million for one year and then he walks though, I think it has to be considered a disappointment at best. They could have gotten a player of his caliber signed to a much more cap friendly deal, not to mention longer deal, with 7 million guaranteed.

First, I think that the organization did essentially the same thing for Faneca that they did for Porter the year before. They saw that both were in positions to get big paydays, but that a couple more years of declining productivity would reduce that potential.

Second, from all that I’ve read here the last few months, the team has more depth/talent at guard than tackle. Therefore, even though Faneca has been and may still be the better player, Starks was more valuable to the team this year.

I agree that Faneca would suck it up and play his best if slapped with the franchise tag, but the Steelers chose not to do that for a reason. Either it was because they wanted to reward him in some way by allowing another team to overpay for him, or they felt that his replacement wouldn’t be as big of a dropoff as many others believe. Or, both.

I think the real question the article has is this: If you could have Faneca for $7.5M or Starks for $7M, why would you pick Starks? A good question when you word it that way, but as cgolden pointed out, it’s not apples to apples. Starks is younger and at a position of greater need, and Faenca was already not happy. You can say what you want about Faneca’s locker room presence, but he was a distraction last year, even if it could have been a lot worse. It might have gotten much uglier had we franchised him.

I think we did the right thing (for both parties) by letting him go, but we’re all in the dark about Starks, so that may yet be a great or terrible decision. I wouldn’t put it in the top ten worst moves yet, but it definitely makes the top 5 most confusing moves.

To take the conversation in another direction. 2008 was too late for Faneca to remain a Steeler. Even 2007 was too late. Once the Bills started over paying lesser talents like Dockery it was too late. In looking back, the ideal move would have been a 4 year deal in 2006 that would lock Faneca up through the 2010 season. I think a 4 year $25 million deal would have been near the top of the list that year and a bargain now. He may be on the decline, but there is no reason to think he couldn’t be valuable for another two years.

Also, aside from a great payday, Faneca will be playing along mangold and d’brickashaw- guys who may respond well to a veteran presence.

And the other worst moves are puzzling, blaming mcnair? making the bengals sound completely innocent in the chad chaos? every team that passed on dockery?

And I agree with every one of you…I would bet the Steelers verbally told Faneca that they would not slap the Franchise tag on him, and at some point he thanked them for that in advance, quit griping and then played his very best last season. Who knows if we would have gotten as much productivity if he was internally worried about getting Franchised?

Moreover, their unwritten practice of not Franchising, coupled with their verbal promise to players and agents to not do so (assuming that happens), might help them in the big picture to signing guys in general. It is consistent with the Rooney mantra to treat players the right way and to honor handshakes and verbal agreements as a way of doing business. That word gets around and helps them in the long run.

was a joke. I never saw a lineman’s face from the camera angle behind the QB MORE. He was constantly turned around facing the QB with his or Mahan’s guy in hot pursuit of the Steelers QB. His Pro Bowl recognition was nothing more than name recognition. I respect his tenure and years of solid play but it was time to move on.
As Stated above I will miss the Faneca circa 2000-2005. Of course I miss the Larry Brown of the late 70’s and Dawson circa 1990-1997.

Hell’s yeah! My man’s getting 40 million, half of it guaranteed! That’s the pay day for a decade of hard work. He already has a ring. Time to cash in and check out.

While it’d be nice to have him for one more run, I’m glad the Steelers had class about it. That kind of showing will hopefully make the younger players more loyal to the team.