Climbing the stairway to SEVEN
Well the ascent has not started yet, but Tomlin is already looking up the stairwell. I’m sure he’s paying close attention to the steps immediately in front of him, but he knows there are many steps in this journey. I’ve seen many posts already talking about the first steps which include free agency and the draft. I want to take a little more time to reflect. We will be ascending that stairway to Seven soon enough. While the questions about that journey are being thrown around, I want to look at some of the answers from the year of the 6-pack, as well as some random info for you thinkers out there.
I will do this in my signature bullet format. You may ask why I do this. Ok maybe you don’t, but I’ll tell you anyways. It comes from having to write performance reports in the military in bullet format and writing résumés. You know what I mean about résumés right? White space is good for easy reading. It works well if you are reading a speech as well. Anyhow on with the post.
1. A big question early in the season was; why pay Starks 7 million who is a backup? I think the answer was; because it was money well spent. Looks like they knew he wouldn’t be a backup all year. Not only that he doesn’t cost anything on this year’s salary cap. They also still have the option to offer him a contract or go a different route in free agency. It was a pretty smart move.
2. I remember people wondering out loud if Santonio Holmes was worth a first round pick. My thought early in the year was that most receivers in the NFL don’t reach their full potential until their 4th year. Holmes has shown flashes of his game breaking skills in his first two years already. In my mind he was right on time. He really grew up in the postseason this year. Ben’s confidence in him really blossomed as well. This bodes well for us. Don’t sleep on Sweed either. You might think it’s easy to catch a football, but when you add the speed of the NFL it can translate to a loss of focus due to brain overload. Some can handle it early and some need to get comfortable.
3. When Mewelde Moore signed there were only ripples of conversation. By midseason those ripples became a tsunami. There was also the Fox signing that triggered some feel good posts but nothing more. These acquisitions were small blurbs in the Manifesto of Steeler nation. They were both declarations that the quality of special teams will improve. Little did we know, but Mewelde Moore would stop the bleeding when Willie and Mendenhall went down. Oh and the special teams did improved. They would probably have improved even more if we didn’t lose our long snapper and two punters. Great job of maximizing every single spot on the roster.
4. Many said we couldn’t win a Super Bowl with the line that we have. We lost an All-Pro, in Alan Faneca to free agency from a line that was already described as porous. Then it lost it’s starting left tackle and right guard in Marvell Smith and Kendall Simmons, respectively to injury. You add on the disbelief from fans that Larry Zierlein can even coach and it manufactured a huge question mark hanging over the Steel City. Can we win a Super Bowl with this line? I think the resounding answer spoke for itself. By the way I am disappointed that people booed Willie Colon at the parade. That’s like booing the reserves at a “welcoming the troops home” parade. They are a band of brothers that set out together to win and did it: all are equally deserving. Tsk Tsk.
5. Ryan Clark’s return was much anticipated, but did anyone think he would come back the way he did? He was truly a force to be reckoned with. Earlier in 2008 he was 170 lbs. He had two surgeries in 2007 to have his spleen and gall bladder removed. In less than a year he went from the 170 lbs to 205 and a dangerous projectile for NFL receivers in the middle of the field. In numerous games he was always around the ball. He made big plays that made me take notice. He made a huge difference in the Giants game. As a matter of fact after he left, his void allowed the Giants to score the game winning TD. He may have played in Polamalu’s shadow, but Polamalu couldn’t do what he does if Clark wasn’t there.
6. Tell the truth. Did you really think that we would win the Super Bowl this year? I have to tell you, I made a prediction in August last year and posted it in my office. It said Steelers and Eagles in Super Bowl, but didn’t say who would win it. I think I didn’t pick a winner because it was my heart saying that. My head was trying to catch up. I really didn’t start to fully believe we’d get there until we won that second Baltimore game.
7. How many teams do you know of that have fans that call for the heads of coaches when they just won the Super Bowl? Amazing…..I’ll leave it at that.
8. Did you know the Steelers didn’t cut any of their 2008 draft class? Don’t close the book on them. It’s funny I have to say that.
9. Remember these guys? Lawrence Timmons, LaMarr Woodley, Matt Spaeth, Daniel Sepulveda, William Gay and Dallas Baker? That’s the 2007 class players left on the roster/practice squad/IR. Gone are Ryan (Steely) McBean (Broncos) and Cameron Stephenson (Jags) (round 4 and 5 respectively). Ok we will see how it all pans out but I think Tomlin (and Colbert) has (have) done well his first two years drafting.
10. Here’s 2006 Santonio Holmes, WR, Anthony Smith, S, Willie Reid, WR, Willie Colon, G, Orien Harris, DT, Omar Jacobs,QB, Charles Davis, TE, Marvin Phillips, C and Cedric Humes, RB. Just in case you were wondering.
11. One reason the Steelers are successful is they get the most out of their first rounders. Take a look at our last 8 first rounders.
First rounders since 2000:
a. 2000 – Plaxico Burress
b. 2001 – Casey Hampton
c. 2002 – Kendall Simmons
d. 2003 – Troy Polamalu (got Ike in the 4th round)
e. 2004 – Ben Roethlisberger
f. 2005 – Heath Miller
g. 2006 – Santonio Holmes
h. 2007 – Lawrence Timmons
12. It will be nice when we get to the twelve pack.
0 recs |
52 comments
Comments
I need to check my grammer
Gee whiz
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 5, 2009 9:14 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
check your grammar sir...
but don’t change your logic. love it.
by NoCal-SteelCity on Feb 6, 2009 6:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Love the tagline-
“Stairway to Seven”
It fits a “classic rock” town like my ‘Burgh beautifully! Haven’t actually read the article yet, but i’m about to. Awesome concept, tho. I’ll make a mental note of having seen it here first!
by tobiathan on Feb 5, 2009 9:38 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Queue the music Bob!
http://richbanks.com/uploads/Stairway_To_Seven.mp3
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 5, 2009 10:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Love The Title
But I disagree with your comments about the Offensive Line. (I do agree booing Colon was classless…)
We did not win this Super Bowl because of the Offensive Line — we won it in spite of them. I STILL don’t think Max Starks was worth what we paid for him.
And, in fairness to the fans questioning Santonio — I think he was on the edge, and could have gone either way. Clearly he has gone the way which is best for him, and best for our team. It’s great to see… but you can understand why the Nation was worried about him. I think we can officialy take him off the “Bust Watch” now. I am happy for him. Hearing the MVP saying he spent the evening of the biggest night of his life with his kids, says volumes about the change in him. Kudos to him for it.
Limas Sweed is sort of there now. It wasn’t just that he missed the pass in the Championship game (after having missed one from the week before) it’s the “injury” that cost us a timeout (and ultimately three points) .
Here is something worth considering for those optimists: At least Sweed was open. And I mean REALLY open twice in championship games. Maybe he just surprised the defense, but he got more separation than any other Pittsburgh Receiver I have seen in a very long time.
If he can catch the damn thing — and toughen up like Hines Ward, he may end up being better than Santonio.
As for the coaches, I am willing to give Bruce Ariens the benefit of the doubt after the opening drive of the Super Bowl. That was masterful. But if someone doesn’t fix the offensive line fast, somebody’s head needs to roll.
Ben’s health is too important to have him get sacked like that another year.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 5, 2009 11:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Appreciate the feed back
Just want to clarify some things, so you know where I’m coming from.
I didn’t say the line won it. I said we won with that line. Big difference.
Also notice where I directed the part about Holmes. Not everyone makes an immediate impact even as a first round draft pick. This is especially true of first round draft pick recievers. They take a little time. Sure there are numerous exceptions but it’s pretty much that way.
Take a look at these first rounders and the year they were drafted.
Larry Fitzgerald – 2004
Andre Johnson – 2003
Javon Walker – 2003
Roddy White – 2005
These guys are top recievers but it took awhile. You have to be patient with receivers. My point is people get too impatient.
Starks helped us win a Super Bowl that’s why I say he’s worth the money. They play the game to win a championship. It was accomplished so that’s my reason. I’m just curious as to why you think he wasn’t worth it? Just curious.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 5, 2009 11:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As stated above
It takes a good 3 to 4 years to see what you have in a reciever. Holmes is right on time.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 5, 2009 11:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
2006 draft was weaaaaak
But good point about the 1st Rounders. Mendenhall will hopefully carry on that torch.
by Michael Bean (Blitz) on Feb 5, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
As a matter of fact some people think that a lot of first rounders don’t make it because they can’t handle being thrust into the spot light too early. While some that come in with low expectations and are given time to develope work hard to prove their worth. Not excusing 1st round busts but there may be it makes sense to me.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 5, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe so
but it produced at least 1 Super Bowl MVP
by NoCal-SteelCity on Feb 6, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts
7. How many teams do you know of that have fans that call for the heads of coaches when they just won the Super Bowl? Amazing…..I’ll leave it at that.
Just because we won the Super Bowl does not mean we have no weakness or room to improve. There were way too many games this year, including the Super Bowl, where we started strong on offense then did absolutely nothing on offense until the end of the game.
The beginning of the game is scripted, Ben and Tomlin know the script and make adjustments to it as they see fit. The end of the game, including the Super Bowl, Ben is calling the plays, not Arians. I think we’ve talked enough here about how ridiculous it is to constantly run the empty backfield sets when we only have 2 or 3 yards to go.
The bottom line is we need to improve on our offensive play calling. It is a weakness for this team that we overcame this year. Maybe Arians can do that and maybe he can’t. Every single one of our playoff games could have been lost due to the same weaknesses we’ve had all year namely, offensive line issues, not being able to run when we need to, punt coverage, poor play calling and poor clock management. The only way to get better is by identifying the problems and then fixing them.
by schnifin on Feb 5, 2009 1:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You just talked around the issue
Sure everyone can get better. The defense can get better too. You’re not really saying anything. Getting better and learning from your mistakes is different than calling for someone to get fired. You can nit pick and find problems with anybody that coaches. If they put a product out that’s not perfect and it still gets the job done then what’s the problem? You name me a coach that is perfect.
Get me some stats on how often the empty backfield didn’t work in said situations. I bet you don’t realize how many times it did work. I know you don’t because it worked a lot. It seemed not to because when it doesn’t work people notice. When it does they don’t.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 5, 2009 2:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Max Starks
Why do I think Max Starks wasn’t worth it? Why do you think he is…?
Look around the league. Other guards made less and performed better.
Max made $689800 last year. He started in 11 games and played in all 16. He gave up 49 sacks.
The Cowboys picked Leonard Davis up from Arizona. They paid him $6255000. He started all sixteen games and gave up 31 sacks.
And that is only one example. Why do you think Max Starks was worth almost $7 million? Because he wears black and gold? Not good enough. You need to be objective.
The point is other teams seem to be able to find Offensive Line talent in FA. The Steelers — since Russ Grimm left — can’t.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 5, 2009 8:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Max Starks gave up 49 sacks?
That must be a record or something.
by worldtrip on Feb 5, 2009 8:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's how it is Recorded
When you give up a sack, the whole line gets the “stat”. My point is that we pay Starks good money and get mediocre performance.
The fact is tha the Steelers line was 29th in the league in yards per rushing attempt, and 29th in the league in sacks allowed.
If we paid our guys 29th in the league prices, I guess I could understand that. But we don’t. Let me put this in persepctive for you:
Our offensive line had a worse season than the Detroit Lions — who gave up fewer sacks, and who had a better yards per rushing attempt average.
So, yeah, I think Max Starks is over-paid.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
But the Lions went 0-16
and we won the Super Bowl. As much as you want to blame them you have to give them credit too.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
So, EVERY player on our team is better than EVERY player on the other 29 teams because we won the super bowl?
We won in spite of spotty Offensive Line play. I’ll go one step further — any other quarteback would have lost that super bowl. ONLY because Ben can make plays when the line breaks down did we win.
Being worse than the Lions is nothing to be proud of…
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 9:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
I see now that there’s no reasoning with you. You implied and speculated a lot.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 9:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hehehe You crack me up
You’re such a fanboy.
I implied and speculated? I’m the only one who has used any facts and statistics to back up my arguments. The sum of your whole argument seems to be that we won the Super Bowl, therefore the Offensive line is great and above reproach…
Yeah… don’t cloud the issue with facts… I’m just being unreasonable…
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 11:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I do believe I disagree with you
One fact that you got way off was that Starks gave up 49 sacks. First of all since he didn’t start right away he was not playing during the games that they gave up those sacks. And secondly, it is hard to argue that the line didn’t improve that the line didn’t improve as the year went along. And it could be easily argued that the line particularly improved once Starks became a starter.
The point that Arn was making, as best I can tell, is that in hind sight, franchising Starks and keeping him on the team turned out to be the right move because after Smith got hurt , Starks became a pretty vital part of the team winning the super bowl. And that is pretty factual.
When looking at sacks given up, you often can identify specifically which player is to blame based on who got the sack. My guess is that if we find this stat Starks will grade out as one of the better lineman on the team
This is not to say he wasn’t overpaid as compared to other lineman in the league. He probably was. But the fact remains is that if the only way the Steelers could have kept him for one more year was to overpay him, then it turned out to be the right decision, because the Steelers did win, and I think Starks actually played pretty well.
So yeah, Mark, I think you are being pretty unreasonable when your only argument is: Starks got paid this amount of money, and this other lineman got paid less, but the other linemans team gave up less sacks and ran better than the Steelers, so therefore Starks was overpaid.
Again, it can easily be argued that the line was playing much better later in the season than they did earlier in the season. They had four new starters, and they had to learn to play together. They are young, and they can improve. I actually think they have a chance to grow into a pretty good line together.
It was a one time decision to franchise Starks because they line was such an iffy proposition coming into the season. Smith was coming off back surgery, Colon hadn’t played well his first year, Essex didn’t look like a player at tackle (still doesn’t), and they didn’t get any other players from free agency to bring in. They needed someone who could play both tackle positions, and they couldn’t take a chance on losing Starks to another team, and so they franchised him. And they won the super bowl in some part because Starks was signed, available, and played the position capably.
Being the fucking point (Al Swearengen)
by worldtrip on Feb 6, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you. LOL
You nailed it.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I love deadwood....swearengen is the man
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by drinkyourmilkshake on Feb 6, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought you were sleeping?
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 6, 2009 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Here is my point which you clouded up with your rhetoric
They had a 7 million dollar insurance policy in Starks. They used a rule to secure him as insurance. He knows the offense and they know he could do the job. The 7 mil kept him there. he did his job and they won a Super Bowl. Did I ever (go back and read) say that the line was great? No it was about Starks. He did well enough for them to win a Super Bowl. That’s a fact. 7 Mil well spent. I doesn’t impact the cap this year either. That’s my point.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
In this case the question becomes what else could we have done with 7 Million dollars that would have made this team considerably better? There’s no tackles sitting around that could have played better than Starks, and now we’ve got no ties to him. If we feel we can replace him (i don’t think we can) then he’s gone and no financial loss.
So I agree with hindsight being 20/20 it was a wise move.
by Chicago Steeler on Feb 6, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Maybe I wasn’t clear enough earlier.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 1:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
chiiillll out
the total line gave up 49 sacks not one person a collective group the exact same at the other team that gave up 31 was the total line not one person makes up a line its the sum of its parts there were injuries that affected both lines especially the pitt line with 4 new starters!!!!! dallas did not have that adversity thrust on them look what happened to jax when they had half of those losses they folded we did not because we are a team the sum of all of its parts
sid
Hey you, dont help them to bury the light
Dont give in without a fight.
by sidster69 on Feb 5, 2009 11:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
As a matter of fact. They just won the Super Bowl. How many times was Ben sacked? If 7ish mil is what it took to keep him it was worth it because he DID help the Steelers win a Super Bowl.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 7:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I meant to say how many in the playoffs
sacks. He had a really good pass rusher coming at him in the Super Bowl.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 7:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a silly defense
So, it’s OK to give up sacks when you have a good defense coming at you? And, exactly when did Arizona have a better defense than the Ravens?
Arizona had a pretty good defense coming at them, too… and they gave up fewer sacks.
I’m a Pittsburgh fan, but I don’t think that waving the Terrible Towel more will overcome all probelms. We have huge issues in the Offense Line… and they need to get fixed.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 9:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Talk about silly? You don't comprehend very well do you?
Read what I wrote again. By the way the Cardinals gave up a hugs fumble to lose the game. Ok, I’ll stop before you start in about the worst line in the league.
I want to know something. Can you even admit that the line helped them win a Super Bowl?
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Line helped?
If, by that you mean that having our line was better than having no line at all, then yes… the line helped.
If, OTOH, you mean that we have a “Championship” Offensive line that deserves to be up there with Mike Webster and Company — or even Demonti Dawson and Company — I say no. (Also not as good as any Offensive line that won the super bowl in recent memory… not as good as the Giants last year, the Colts the year before… not even as good as the line we fielded on 2005…)
You coud give us the Offensive line from 20 other teams and we would have done just as well or better than the one we used to win the Championship. You can’t say that about our QB, Defensive front 7, or even receivers.
But you can say that about the O-Line. We won in spite of our O-Line — not because of them.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please show me two things
Where I said the line was great or even good…besides saying good enough to win the Super Bowl. The fact is this was about paying Starks 7 mil as an insurance policy.
Second Show me where I said Starks wasn’t overpaid. If I need a glass of water in the desert and I pay 100 dollars but it saves my life and i say that was 100 dollars well spent and I saying it wasn’t overpriced? No, but I had the money and it saved my life so why cry about the 100 dollars? It did the job.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 12:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not all of Big Ben’s sacks were because of the O line…some were coverage sacks and some he just hung onto the ball too long trying to make the big play.
by montanaeasy56 on Feb 12, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
the line needs to be improve and there is no way we win the super bowl without a better line, any one who don’t think we need a better line isn’t paying attention
by tannofsteel84 on Feb 6, 2009 11:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Tell me what you mean
You said “there is no way we win the super bowl without a better line”. You mean this year? It’s not probably but you can’t say no way because they already did.
Then you said “any one who don’t think we need a better line isn’t paying attention.” This is true. Is this just a genral statement or did someone say we didn’t need a better line?
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
We won it this year with this line. Why wouldn’t we be able to do it again? Ben takes a lot of punishment, but not so much so that he wouldn’t continue to find success behind this line.
by Chicago Steeler on Feb 6, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There does come a tipping point
Steve Young took punishment and kept on going… right up until he didn’t.
Concussions are cumulative. You are playing with fire by letting Ben get sacked fifty times a season.
How will we fare if Ben has to retire in two years because of concussions?
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Question for Mark Joe
Here, Mark, I have a question for you. Play Steelers front office for a minute.
Here it is a year or so ago. You have a decision to make regarding Starks. He is a free agent, and there are other teams that are sniffing around, looking to offer him a contract. You have three choices. 1) Let him go and count on Marvel Smith and Willie Colon being able to do the job, and if they don’t Trai Essex or Tony Hills can fill in because you have no other tackles. 2) Sign him to a long term deal at a decent amount of money because you are pretty sure there are a few other teams out there willing to pay him 3) Franchise him for one year, pay him a ton of money for that one year, and then decide again the next year after you see how the line and he perform in 2008
Those are your only choices. You can’t say “bring in some other free agent lineman” or “trade him for the best lineman on the Giants” or anything like that. What do you do? What do you do?
The Steelers decided choice 3, and it worked out. Smith got hurt, Starks filled in, the Steelers won the super bowl. Would they have won the super bowl if they let him go and Essex played? Maybe. What if they signed him to a long term deal? Well, they would have paid less, but you had a lot of unknows going on at this time last year. So it kinda looks like franchising him, in hindsight, made a lot of sense.
by worldtrip on Feb 6, 2009 12:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Why are those my only three choices?
Why can’t I trade him? Why can’t I look at other free agent signings?
The Cowboys signed Leonard Davis last year. Why couldn’t the Steelers? We over-paid Max Starks. Was there NO other guard on the market that we could have paid less for? Come on… uards sign with new teams every year. Why are my choices Max Startks or nothing?
More to the point, we (apprently) don’t have anyone who can evaluate offensive line talent or teach it once it is here. WE MISS RUSS GRIMM. We needed someone in the organization who could say: “Nope, that’s too much for Max. We can get more for less somewhere else…”
And I DO think the franchise tag is a mistake on a so-so offensive guard. The Raven’s putting a franchise tag on Suggs or Lewis makes sense. Us putting the franchise tag on Max Starks makes no sense at all…
PittsburghArn used the illustration of paying $100 for a glass of water in the desert. He said it did the job, so he thinks it was $100 well spent…. But that assumes that you couldn’t have bought that same glass from someone else for $55 and have enough left over to buy a steak, too.
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 3:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
I think I’m done
By the way Starks is not a guard.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And it wasn't a franchise tag
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Feb 6, 2009 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No it was a Transition Tag
Similar, but not exactly the same.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 6, 2009 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's not a tackle either
Now we’re seeing eye to eye ;-)
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Those are the only choices because that was the scenario the Steelers found themselves in. They didn’t get any other tackles signed (Starks is a tackle, not a guard, by the way).
And that is the point that Arn is making. When the Steelers were left with those choices, it looks like they made the right choice.
I feel like I’m talking to a five year old who stuck their feet in the sand and won’t move. Nobody is disagreeing that Starks is overpaid at 7 mill. But you just keep repeating that, as if we are debating that. All we are saying is that in hindsight, based on the scenario the Steelers found themselves in because they didn’t get any free agents, they made the right choice in franchising him for the one year based on the results.
by worldtrip on Feb 6, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And by the way
By the time the Steelers signed Starks, they pretty much did have to choose between paying the $100 for the glass of water, because there were no $55 glasses of water and steaks available. That is simply the reality of the situation as it existed at the time.
Which remains the whole point of this. You want to completely re-write history. You might as well start saying that the Steelers should have drafted a tackle rather than Mendenhall. Maybe it is true, but has nothing to do with the fact that the Steelers, based on the scenario they found themselves in, made the right decision by bringing Starks back for one more year, even at the outrageous price tag.
So unless you have something new to add other than “the Steelers should have picked up someone else in the free agent market or simply paid Starks less money”, then I am also done.
by worldtrip on Feb 6, 2009 3:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope, that's about it
Yeah. that sums it up. But that’s been the discussion all along. PittsburghArn asked why I thought we paid too much, and I told him… dunno… I think I’ve been clear on that from the beginning…
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Did beerman change his name to MarkJoel66 and decide that since Ben had a good superbowl that he will now attack the o-line?
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by drinkyourmilkshake on Feb 6, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
beerman no talkie with punctuationy
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 6, 2009 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dunno Beerman
But I don’t think Ben had a good Super Bowl.
I think he had a great Super Bowl. My pick for MVP…
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 6, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















