QB Position

by PsycoSalameh on Aug 11, 2008 8:56 PM EDT Comment 21 comments

i think big ben will be number 1, followed by either daunte culepepper, or byron leftwich, ( whichever 1 pittsburgh doesn't choose to release ) i think they will keep dennis dixon as a third stringer, release mike potts, and finally release charlie batch.....the reason i think pittsburgh will choose dennis dixon instead of batch, is because i think dixon has a potential at the QB position, batch broke his collarbone, ( which seems more serious than they say it is ) dixon is younger, dixon can run fast and elude defenders more often.....i think batch is good...and i like him, but he has 2 go.

feel free 2 say anything u want....i want 2 know what ur thinking : )

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

batch

could be, but I think they’d trade batch before cutting him.

by 36chambers on Aug 11, 2008 11:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

hmm

not sure anybody would give up anything for Batch. If Moss gets a 4th rounder, whats C Batch command?

I’m against bringing in Leftwich or Culpepper to be stop gap #2. What’s the point? It’s not real long term that Batch is expected to be out.

Your logic is correct that there’s no room for Dixon, Potts, and Batch if Leftwich or Culpepper is here. I’m fine with Potts going, I’m not as fine with Dixon or Batch being cut for some unecessary insurance hire.

by Blitzburgh on Aug 12, 2008 7:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

I have been thinking.
Let’s say around week 4-5 a team is extremely unhappy with their QB play. *(Looking at you Bears, 49’ers, Lions, etc.) While the Steelers are sitting pat with 3 effective QB’s.
We may have trade bait. Since only a few teams could pick up Culpepper and Holcomb, there’s bound to be one team with a need for a QB. Maybe an injury or two and next thing you know teams are active on the trading blocks. Let’s say Batch comes back healthy and proved to be recovered to the fullest, why not trade him or Leftwich to a team in big need of a QB (as long as it won’t help a rival or playoff contender) in return for a 3 or 4th round pick.
I think that’s reasonable.

by iBleedBlack&Gold on Aug 12, 2008 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what about Dixon?

The problem with that scenario is if we keep both Batch and Leftwich on the roster, that means we have no place for Dixon. We won’t keep 4 QBs on the roster because that’s taking away depth at another position. We also won’t release Dixon-it’s way too early to just give up on him-and if we try to put him on the practice squad he’ll probably get claimed by someone else and we’ll lose him. I think there is no way that we keep both Batch and Leftwich on the roster.

The most likely scenarios are:
1. Dixon shows the coaching staff enough that they’re comfortable with him as the No. 2 QB until Batch recovers, so they release Leftwich.
2. Dixon doesn’t show enough, so they decide to keep Leftwich, and Batch goes on IR. The advantage of putting Batch on IR is that they can then decide after the season whether they want to bring him or Leftwich back as the No. 2 QB next year.

by nycsteeler on Aug 12, 2008 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Without equating the situations...

...Moss was only worth a fourth rounder because Oakland didn’t want to pay the $9M called for in his contract that season and every other team knew it.

by HinesField on Aug 12, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They wouldn't release Batch

I’d be surprised if they were even interested in trading him. He’s got little to no trade value, as Blitz said, but he’s got more value to the Steelers than a 6th or 7th round pick (if they could even get that for him). Not to mention that he wants to be here, knows the offense and is completely satisfied with being a backup.

Lefty won’t be in the Burgh once Batch is healthy, you heard it here first.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 12, 2008 9:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Whats Funny

I heard on ESPN radio that Culpepper said if he signed with the Steelers he would have a shot to unseat Roethlisberger as the number 1 QB. I found that funny.

by jason97673 on Aug 12, 2008 10:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

that guy

is in his own world. his comments in the papers here when he was with the raiders were nothing short of absurd.

"If you hit .440 with 20 bombs, you don't have to do s---. You don't have to bring a glove to practice, just hit and leave whenever you want. You can bring a 40 and smoke a cigarette and call me from the parking lot asking me what time the game is, and I'll tell you. You can even say 'F--- you, Steve!' Actually, don't say that, that wouldn't be very nice." -Steve Friend, Head Coach, Chabot College Gladiators Baseball

by flipgatey3 on Aug 13, 2008 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lefty won't

stay as a back-up with the Steelers. My sense is that he still wants to start and probably can start in this league. He will play out the year, gain high marks for being a solid and hopefully invisible back-up and then test the market again next year.

Of all the possibilities that I see as most likely regarding trades – are that Batch comes back healthy and we are able to get a low to mid-level draft pick for Lefty. Who knows maybe the Chicago Bears will wake up one morning and realize that Rex Grossman is not and has never been an NFL quarterback and we get a young back-up DE or draft pick in return

by SteelerBuddha on Aug 12, 2008 11:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

Like cgolden and Blitz said they will not trade Batch. Lefty will want to go. This is only week 1 of preseason. There will be injurys or ineffective QBs and Lefty might have a chance to start. This is just a job for him until someone needs him to start. However if Dixon is terrible the rest of the preseason I would get rid of him. Remember Omar Jacobs. He was a higher draft pick. We cut him and didn’t even have him on the PS. Yeah Dixon is better but he is not guarenteed a spot. (Fred Gibson). If Dixon is no good Lefty might stay all year then we get a vetern or draft a QB not a major project QB. I am think do much ahead but this is what this is about.

Now where are some of you hearing about Culpepper coming back. I posted a couple days ago that he could be signed but I found out they interview him and Lefty and signed Lefty. Culpepper is NOT coming to the Burgh. He wants to have a chance to start somewhere. ESPN radio must be out of there minds. Big Ben is one of the best in the league, and no way will Culpepper (who is not coming here) ever replace Ben here. Plus that huge deal he got. No STARTING QB compitition here for awhile.

by steelcitykid on Aug 12, 2008 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't forget about Green Bay as potential QB buyer

As I’m sure everyone who watched last nights game last night knows, the Packers depth chart doesn’t include a single QB who has a NFL start. If Rodgers goes down early (he’s ended the past two seasons on the IR with very limited playing time) they’ll be in the market considering that they’re a solid contender for a playoff spot. I could see them getting desperate and trading a 4th or 5th rounder for an experienced veteran like Lefty if Rodgers goes down and they realize the Brohm isn’t ready to be an NFL starter…..It’s a long shot but hey it could happen.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Aug 12, 2008 11:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Lolley is starting to make the case that if Leftwich is happy with a backup role – which he may or may not be – then the Steelers really ought to cut Batch for him. Apparently his throws are crisp, accurate, and more importantly throws that Charlie usually doesn’t or almost never could make. Also, given that Ben has yet to play 16 games in a season there is a pretty fair chance that the backup will see some significant playing time in a couple of games later in the year.

I’m not sure I agree, but seening as Charlie’s future with the organization has been questionable from the moment Dixon was drafted it wouldn’t surprise me to let him go after the season. Of course, that’s all dependent upon Leftwich understanding his place as a second stringer that will never compete for the starting job as long as Ben is healthy – no matter how much he shows in his on the field play.

Also, if i were Chicago/San Fran i’d be begging Tampa for Chris Sims rather than chasing after Leftwich. Lefty has already shown he’s too injurty prone to be a real starter in the league, but might do very well in the limited capacity as a backup. Sims, if he truly is recovered from his spleen injury, he’s still young enough wtih enough of an upside to be decent starter.

by BluegrassSteeler on Aug 12, 2008 12:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Too early to tell...

I just don’t know what I think might happen here, but I suppose going ahead and bringing in Lefty now means that we don’t have to expose Ben or Dixon (sorry Potts) to too much preseason play – where they might get injured too.

If Lefty comes out like a stud and throws all over the place, they might really consider keeping him, but I agree that they probably won’t be keeping 4 QBs – what other roster spot has slack depth? None I can think of. If they keep Lefty till Charlie comes back they’ll owe him the veteran minimum anyway, so I think that as you guys said they’ll put Charlie on PUP, and then the big decision comes whether they trade Charlie or IR him or try to shop Lefty. Odds are he uses this opportunity to showcase his talents and probably moves on to another needy team. At any rate, I hope Charlie gets a chance to come back. He’s been good to us, and I’d hate him to go out this way.

Just thinking about the way Leftwich and Culpepper were on a plane the next day…do Colbert and co watch the games with a rolodex and a cell phone at the ready the second one of our guys goes down? You don’t ever hear about that side of things much, but as soon as someone is injured, guys appear from seemingly nowhere. I suppose they must constantly keep tabs on the available market of players. Just never really thought about it.

by SCSteeler on Aug 12, 2008 2:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sure, good GMs always have scouting material on available players, other teams’ players, etc. just in case. Look at the Rossum trade last year. We wouldn’t have gone after him if the FO didn’t have him scouted even though he was on another team.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 12, 2008 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wish they had more punters on their rolodex.

by steelguy99 on Aug 12, 2008 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

QB Situation

I would like to keep Batch as long as he wants to play (within reason). A solid backup who isn’t looking to jump at the first opportunity to start is rare commodity, and he’s not that old yet. But, I guess I agree with bringing in Leftwich. He may be willing to take Charlie’s place if we decide to go in that direction. But, remember, he was only signed to a one year deal, so it’s not like they’ve decided that he’s our backup of the future.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Aug 12, 2008 2:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

QB's

It’s early but here’s what my crystal ball says:

Leftwich- our number 2 for the whole year

Batch- placed on IR

Dixon- number 3

by SteelerMike on Aug 12, 2008 4:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Lefty

is a younger version of Batch. He’s a veteran that was never good enough to be a full time starter, but he could be a suitable backup. If you ask me, that’s what we want in a backup: a guy who’s been around the league but knows his place. I’m all for keeping Dixon if he continues to show life, but I’d rather have a vet backup until Dixon gets a few years under his belt.

by BadMaafala on Aug 13, 2008 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i was wondering........

what if we keep batch, release potts, have leftwich at #2, batch at #3 ( or the other way around ), and put dennis dixon at the WR position??? he has good hands, he has speed, he has height, he could be a great threat in the redzone!!! yah sure he is meant to be a QB, but think about it….he could be a great WR!!!

thoughts???

by PsycoSalameh on Aug 13, 2008 8:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, we already have Ward, Holmes, Sweed, an improved (in training camp at least) Washington, and a promising youngster in Baker – I really doubt we want to cut any of those guys.

On the other hand, i think we should put Dixon in the competition for RT – i bet he gives up fewer sacks than Colon.

by BluegrassSteeler on Aug 14, 2008 2:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well, we already have Ward, Holmes, Sweed, an improved (in training camp at least) Washington, and a promising youngster in Baker – I really doubt we want to cut any of those guys.

you are right Blugrass, but we dont have to cut any1 and dixon could be great at redzone, leaving 2 redzone players 4 big ben. We could just use dixon in redzone.

by PsycoSalameh on Aug 14, 2008 11:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs