George Foster?

by 36chambers on Jun 2, 2009 9:56 AM EDT

George Foster was just cut today by the Lions as they bring in Jon Jansen from the Redskins. Foster used to play very well during his time in Denver, starting for 3 seasons. He was a part of that Shanahan O-line school that seemed to be very consistently good with solid fundamental techniques. I believe they stressed a lot of zone blocking and mobility.

However, his playing time diminished when he went to Detroit. It may have been because of injury or because he was bitter about being traded from a playoff team to the Lions. However, the Steelers have a weird habit of picking up former Lions. Does anybody know anything about this guy? He was first-round talent, has good size and is still young. We could bring him in for next to nothing, even if it's just to spark a bit of competition among the tackles.

Click Here for the link.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Interesting

I was against bringing Jansen in a week or so ago, so I’m not excited to pick up the guy the worst team in football cut so they could pick up Jansen. He could be a okay depth signing, but if he had any upside I’d think the Lions would have at least waited until training camp to cut him. He just signed a cheap one year deal with them a few months ago, so he was basically a training camp body. It’s notable that of all the filler on their 80 man roster, Foster was the guy they cut to give Jansen a spot. That’d be like us cutting Steve McClendon or Andrew Schantz.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jun 2, 2009 10:55 AM EDT reply actions

Jim Wexell is reporting that he is riding with LeCharles Bently to the south side facility as we speak.

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by Frank Mineo (DYMS) on Jun 2, 2009 11:18 AM EDT reply actions

best news I've heard all day

by Chicago Steeler on Jun 2, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions

i would not be suprised to seethem adding a veteran OL before camp. If the Steelers do not then that has to say they have alot of Faith In Hills and capizzi

by steelmann58 on Jun 2, 2009 11:49 AM EDT reply actions

i dunno

They tend to just be happy with the scrubs they’ve got. Granted those scrubs can do “enough”, and perhaps another year of play together could help them out a lot.

by Chicago Steeler on Jun 2, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Strange

It seems that the FO has consistently added depth at positions in which we had at least some degree of excellence (WR, RB, DB, LB). Our O-line is universally regarded as being among the weakest in the league and yet we haven’t brought anyone in to compete apart from Ubrik.

That tells me on of two things:
1. There were no good deals out there that the Steelers could afford.
2. The FO is comfortable with the guys they have both as starters and as back-ups.

I am inclined to believe that it is more of the first and less of the second, due to the very poor performance of the line last year. Still I think that the FO is much more positive about these guys then I am. Let’s hope that they are right.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 2, 2009 12:23 PM EDT reply actions

I think there was a pretty weak crop of OL’s on the market this year. A few good (and expensive) ones at the top, but not much depth. There are usually deals to be had (say what you will about Hartwig, but I’d make that signing any day) but that doesn’t make finding them easy, particularly in a poor market.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jun 2, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions

I think (perhaps against some of our best wishes) the FO and coaches really believe that this o-line will be better this year with the extra experience. Otherwise you don’t resign Kemo. God help them (and Ben)if they’re wrong.

by Chicago Steeler on Jun 2, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, I don’t know. The line should improve this year, but they can’t expect it to go from “absolute piece of shit at run blocking and pass protection” to “average” without some player and/or coaching changes. I think a lot of the Kemo signing (and keeping A&Z) was risk mitigation, which the Steelers do fairly frequently. If you know that you can win the Super Bowl with the line you have, why risk changing things?

I don’t fully agree with every move they make or even their overall philosophy when it comes to taking chances occasionally, but it’s hard to argue with their track record. I think the overall status of our defense (including depth and future outlook) is better this year than last year, and we have plenty of talent at skill positions. If we would have signed an expensive free agent (as I suggested a couple months ago) or used a high pick on the OL, our line might have improved, but we may be in the middle of a holdout with our DPOY, or still be 1 injury away from disaster on our DL.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jun 2, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions

tough

Don’t get me wrong. I am not complaining about the FO. If it was easy to do this then the Browns would be winning SuperBowls.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 2, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah, I’m somewhere between blind trust and outright questioning.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jun 2, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I think we add a veteran OL at some point

It’s not so much a question of upgrading the starters at this point, it’s having adequate depth behind them. Last year the backup OTs at the start of the season were Starks and Essex. Now the backups are Essex and either Hills or Capizzi. The backup guards (on paper) are Urbik and Parquet (or Essex on game days depending on how many OL are active). The returning starters as a group should improve, even if only slightly, but what happens when (more likely than if) one of them gets injured? Foster might not be the right guy but I think the Steelers will eventually sign someone like him, even if it means waiting until final cuts. It won’t be hard to find cap space for the relatively low salary they will cost, it’s just a question of whether the Steelers wait for an injury to force their hand or for preseason evaluation to tell them what kind of shape they are in concerning OL depth, or if they should act preemptively to cover their bases ahead of time and give a new guy a chance to work with his new teammates. There will be other veterans similar to Foster who will be looking for work during the next three months. Right now there is probably no need to act and obviously cap space is tight but I’m guessing the Steelers sign somebody with OT experience just before training camp.

by steeler.lifer on Jun 2, 2009 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions

+1

I think that if they find someone they like they bring them in to compete….

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 3, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions

The FO knows what its doing

I think the front office is keeping this o-line to keep the games interesting. image if Ben never got sacked or we never got penalties. the games would be completly ridiculous. our swiss cheese line gives our opponents a chance which in turn keeps us glued to our seats.

by GMSteel on Jun 2, 2009 2:31 PM EDT reply actions

LOL

A theory I hadn’t considered. But a good one. The O-line is just there to make Ben look like a hero.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 2, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Here's another one:

FACT: Good offensive lines are expensive
FACT: Ben doesn’t need a nice pocket like a lot of QB’s
FACT: Ben just won a Super Bowl with an offensive line that consisted of 1 transition player plus 4 guys who combined for less than the transition tag.

Conclusion: We might get more return for our money by investing elsewhere.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Jun 2, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Great theory

However:
1. FACT: Human beings need heads to live
2. FACT: 45 Sacks plus 200 hits a year can knock a human beings head off
3. Theory: Ben Roethlisberger is at least partially a human being
Conclusion: If we don’t want Ben’s head knocked off we might need some better linemen.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 2, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions