PDA

View Full Version : Steelers Sign TE McHugh



BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 09:52 AM
Steelers Sign Tight End Sean McHugh


PITTSBURGH The Steelers added a third tight end to their active roster today as they signed veteran tight end Sean McHugh to a one-year deal.

McHugh (6-5, 265) spent the past three seasons with the Detroit Lions on both their active roster and practice squads. He was originally drafted by the Tennessee Titans in the seventh round (214st overall) of the 2004 NFL Draft out of Penn State. McHugh was cut by the Titans following their 2004 training camp and signed by the Green Bay Packers, where he spent the entire 2004 campaign.

In 25 career games (14 starts), McHugh has 20 receptions for 277 yards (13.9 avg.). He had his best season in 2007 for the Lions, playing in 15 games (12 starts) and making 17 catches for 252 yards (14.8 avg.).
http://news.steelers.com/article/95452/

I am officially SO FED UP with this front office. This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life.

We add SH*T to our practice squad...have HORRIBLE OL/DL...and then go out and trade a piece of sh*t and pick up ANOTHER TE EVEN THOUGH WE JUST ADDED ONE TO OUR PRACTICE SQUAD!

Please...people who keep defending Colbert and our front office staff tell me how this makes a ton of sense--I know you will come up with something--this is just insane.

Yeah the FO has a plan already...screw this team up horribly.

Iron Shiek
09-03-2008, 09:58 AM
Well he did play for the Lions so this was not out of my realm of thought. :roll:

He better be the best ever blocking TE in history...I don't get it either. How did this guy start all year and I've never heard his name in my life...

RuthlessBurgher
09-03-2008, 10:02 AM
Andy Alleman, Willie Anderson, Nick Hayden, Dre Moore

or

Sean McHugh

I guess since it was the Mahan trade the created the roster opening, we were now one short of our "Sean" quota.

Iron Shiek
09-03-2008, 10:05 AM
So next year will we trade this guy for an 8th rounder? Oh wait....

phillyesq
09-03-2008, 10:18 AM
I'm not really excited by this signing, but I don't really think that it's the end of the world either. I suppose the team needed a third TE, and they didn't think that Sherrod was ready to contribute yet.

I was foolishly hoping to see a LeCharles Bentley, Willie Anderson, or somebody on the DL not close to receiving social security. And, I suppose it's still not out of the realm that the Steelers will sign a veteran OL after week 1 (when the salary isn't guaranteed for a vested vet), though I'm not optimistic.

Benny, it could have been worse -- they could have activated Jeremey Parquet from the practice squad. :lol:

Oviedo
09-03-2008, 10:37 AM
I have to say this signing is a real head scratcher, but I won't quite become a knee jerk reactionary like some.

If they signed a OL or DL, they would unlikely be active on gameday. It is well known that Arians and Tomlin like to have 3 TEs on the field during games so McHugh will likely be active. From that perspective you can see some sense. I really see this guy as a stop gap for the first couple of games until Cody Boyd can be resigned.

Even though I tend to be a more than full half glass kinda guy the decisions on the practice squad have me wondering.

SteelerNation1
09-03-2008, 10:57 AM
Garbage

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 11:41 AM
Steelers sign tight end Sean McHugh
By Scott Brown
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Buzz up!
Post to MySpace!
StumbleUpon Toolbar


The Steelers have signed tight end Sean McHugh to take center Sean Mahan's place on the 53-man roster.

McHugh, a former Penn State standout, spent the previous three seasons with the Lions. His addition gives the Steelers three tight ends on their roster.

McHugh, who can also play fullback, appeared in 15 games last season and caught 17 passes for 252 yards.

A spot became available on the Steelers' roster Tuesday when they traded Mahan to the Buccaneers for a seventh-round pick in the 2009 NFL draft.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/06vAf6dc5j1su/610x.jpg

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 11:45 AM
[youtube:3vbavdgm]d3W0euJ5m4I[/youtube:3vbavdgm]

Iron Shiek
09-03-2008, 11:49 AM
[youtube:38ydvndq]d3W0euJ5m4I[/youtube:38ydvndq]


Lots of questions/comments raised with that one innocent video cos:

1.) Nice move he put on that DB.
2.) Who is the dude they kept showing on the bench spitting water out and why?
3.) Who posts a highlight of Sean on Youtube? Maybe his little brother...but that's it!

:|

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 11:55 AM
A more pass-catching than blocking TE? Why do we CONTINUALLY not address the OL/DL?

Why keep Sherrod if not to use him as the 3rd TE?

Im sorry but this signing makes zero sense and further justifies my suspicions about Colbert and the FO!

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 12:01 PM
[youtube:12pplfnt]sK5LjX9-BgM[/youtube:12pplfnt]

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 12:01 PM
[youtube:34kpfnb4]jsgYKvSpomk[/youtube:34kpfnb4]

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 12:03 PM
[youtube:3buuceb8]d3W0euJ5m4I[/youtube:3buuceb8]


Lots of questions/comments raised with that one innocent video cos:

1.) Nice move he put on that DB.
2.) Who is the dude they kept showing on the bench spitting water out and why?
3.) Who posts a highlight of Sean on Youtube? Maybe his little brother...but that's it!

:|

lol

actually I jipped the videos from nfl.com and in order to embed them I put them on youtube. for the record I'm not related to him...just bored today.

Iron Shiek
09-03-2008, 12:05 PM
Well those two other videos prove he can get open..I don't know if that just because of the scheme they were running. But geez, we have TE's that do this already... :?:


Hilarious that Denver was losing 23-0 to the Lions. What a debacle...

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 12:13 PM
Well those two other videos prove he can get open..I don't know if that just because of the scheme they were running. But geez, we have TE's that do this already... :?:


Hilarious that Denver was losing 23-0 to the Lions. What a debacle...

Our team doesnt believe in BLOCKING or playing in the trenches at ALL any more. That's why we will go after more pass catching etc players. Maybe we should go out and pick up another QB.

ikestops85
09-03-2008, 12:27 PM
Steelers Sign Tight End Sean McHugh


PITTSBURGH The Steelers added a third tight end to their active roster today as they signed veteran tight end Sean McHugh to a one-year deal.

McHugh (6-5, 265) spent the past three seasons with the Detroit Lions on both their active roster and practice squads. He was originally drafted by the Tennessee Titans in the seventh round (214st overall) of the 2004 NFL Draft out of Penn State. McHugh was cut by the Titans following their 2004 training camp and signed by the Green Bay Packers, where he spent the entire 2004 campaign.

In 25 career games (14 starts), McHugh has 20 receptions for 277 yards (13.9 avg.). He had his best season in 2007 for the Lions, playing in 15 games (12 starts) and making 17 catches for 252 yards (14.8 avg.).
http://news.steelers.com/article/95452/

I am officially SO FED UP with this front office. This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life.

We add SH*T to our practice squad...have HORRIBLE OL/DL...and then go out and trade a piece of sh*t and pick up ANOTHER TE EVEN THOUGH WE JUST ADDED ONE TO OUR PRACTICE SQUAD!

Please...people who keep defending Colbert and our front office staff tell me how this makes a ton of sense--I know you will come up with something--this is just insane.

Yeah the FO has a plan already...screw this team up horribly.

I have to agree with Benny on this one. It just makes you want to say

http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/1-14-05/yikes.jpg

or possibly

http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10158/WTF_2.jpg

or at the very least

http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/0822/hunh.jpg

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-03-2008, 12:42 PM
Not sure how things work, if somebody knows this, can you please help me out?

If an O-line prospect opens up at some point during the season, is the FO free to sign tnem, and fire whoever we want to make room?

Thanks -

Iron Shiek
09-03-2008, 12:48 PM
Well those two other videos prove he can get open..I don't know if that just because of the scheme they were running. But geez, we have TE's that do this already... :?:


Hilarious that Denver was losing 23-0 to the Lions. What a debacle...

Our team doesnt believe in BLOCKING or playing in the trenches at ALL any more. That's why we will go after more pass catching etc players. Maybe we should go out and pick up another QB.

Hmmmm....2 QB formation, no running back and 4 WRs!!!! Sounds tempting... :)

Discipline of Steel
09-03-2008, 01:19 PM
We have little depth on the interior of our offensive line and this signing puts Colon one step closer to his natural guard position should one of our interior linemen get injured. At that point, FatMaxx will have to start earning his money, and we will still have two backups at tackle.

SteelerOfDeVille
09-03-2008, 01:22 PM
Not sure how things work, if somebody knows this, can you please help me out?

If an O-line prospect opens up at some point during the season, is the FO free to sign tnem, and fire whoever we want to make room?

Thanks -
For that matter, we can actually take form someone's PS to make 'em Active... any team can do it to any other.

Oviedo
09-03-2008, 01:26 PM
To prove my earlier comments that taking a rational view and not be a knee jerk reactionary will likely provide some insight I did a quick Google and found this:

College Penn State
NFL Experience 3
Height 6-5
Weight 265
Birthdate May 27, 1982
Hometown University Heights, Ohio
How Acquired FA '05

PRO: McHugh is utilizing his versatility as a fullback and tight end, pulling in 17 receptions for 252 yards in 2007. He saw action at fullback in six games, during the 2006 season, with the Lions after being activated from the practice squad October 21, 2006.

IMO this may mean that his ability to play FB makes Carey Davis expendible and Gary Russell is active on game day. It also means that you can have 3 TEs on the field and not have good receiving TEs like Miller and Spaeth being held in to block.

Just my small attempt to put a bright ray of knowledge into otherwise dark and gloomy minds :D

SanAntonioSteelerFan
09-03-2008, 01:27 PM
Not sure how things work, if somebody knows this, can you please help me out?

If an O-line prospect opens up at some point during the season, is the FO free to sign tnem, and fire whoever we want to make room?

Thanks -
For that matter, we can actually take form someone's PS to make 'em Active... any team can do it to any other.

So, theoretically then ... this means the FO felt there wasn't ANYBODY out there at ANY position that was better for us NOW than McHugh at TE?

I don't doubt that could be possible, but it does seem unlikely that there wasn't a good O-line person out there who could at least give us depth, if not start. :?:

frankthetank1
09-03-2008, 01:29 PM
its nice he can play fb too. davis is ok at best. the other good thing about this move is what if either spaeth or miller got hurt? i dont want to see starks at te at all

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 01:44 PM
To prove my earlier comments that taking a rational view and not be a knee jerk reactionary will likely provide some insight I did a quick Google and found this:

College Penn State
NFL Experience 3
Height 6-5
Weight 265
Birthdate May 27, 1982
Hometown University Heights, Ohio
How Acquired FA '05

PRO: McHugh is utilizing his versatility as a fullback and tight end, pulling in 17 receptions for 252 yards in 2007. He saw action at fullback in six games, during the 2006 season, with the Lions after being activated from the practice squad October 21, 2006.

IMO this may mean that his ability to play FB makes Carey Davis expendible and Gary Russell is active on game day. It also means that you can have 3 TEs on the field and not have good receiving TEs like Miller and Spaeth being held in to block.

Just my small attempt to put a bright ray of knowledge into otherwise dark and gloomy minds :D

Yeah except for the fact that we've basically eliminated the FB position from the offense.

Then cut Carey Davis, since he'd be useless, and sign an OL.

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 01:45 PM
its nice he can play fb too. davis is ok at best. the other good thing about this move is what if either spaeth or miller got hurt? i dont want to see starks at te at all

Why is Sherrod on practice squad then? If one of those two got hurt then put Sherrod on the roster.

Jigawatts
09-03-2008, 02:16 PM
This signing is McStupid.

frankthetank1
09-03-2008, 02:20 PM
its nice he can play fb too. davis is ok at best. the other good thing about this move is what if either spaeth or miller got hurt? i dont want to see starks at te at all

Why is Sherrod on practice squad then? If one of those two got hurt then put Sherrod on the roster.

i forgot about sherrod. nevermind then.

SteelTorch
09-03-2008, 02:39 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

AkronSteel
09-03-2008, 02:46 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

:Agree

RuthlessBurgher
09-03-2008, 03:14 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

Remember, things could be worse. At this point yesterday, we had a different, suckier, whinier, more expensive Sean on our roster and one less draft pick in our pocket than we have today!!!

Oviedo
09-03-2008, 03:21 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

No screaming? No kicking the computer? No calling Colbert and Tomlin names? No spouting off how I would have done it differently and better? As my kids would say you are just a "fun sucker." :wink:

Rational, but a "fun sucker" nonetheless.

Slapstick
09-03-2008, 03:56 PM
Question #1: How many TEs do the Steelers normally carry on their roster?

Answer: 3

Question #2: How many TEs were on the Steelers' roster before McHugh was signed?

Answer: 2

Question #3: Did the Steelers have a backup FB in case Carey Davis tears an ACL?

Answer: No

Despite the fact that the Steelers are "phasing out" the Fullback position, it is important to note that Willie Parker ran the ball out of a Pro Set Formation or an I-Formation in approximately 130 of his 329 rushing attempts (close to 40% of the time)...I like Gary Russell, but I'd rather have a guy who has seen action at FB take over during the course of a game...

Now, the Steelers have added a player with both starting experience and position flexibility on the cheap...and this is a bad thing?

SteelTorch
09-03-2008, 04:11 PM
Now, the Steelers have added a player with both starting experience and position flexibility on the cheap...and this is a bad thing?
No. I think the problem is people were (for some reason) expecting us to sign an all-pro O-lineman or DE. :roll:

Oviedo
09-03-2008, 04:16 PM
Now, the Steelers have added a player with both starting experience and position flexibility on the cheap...and this is a bad thing?
No. I think the problem is people were (for some reason) expecting us to sign an all-pro O-lineman or DE. :roll:

:Agree Some people want to believe that OL and DLwho aren't on active rosters are better than what we have. Newsflash: They aren't on active rosters for a reason.

Need to get over this notion that other coaching staffs and FOs have this all figured out and we don't. You may not like what the FO does, but that doesn't mean you are right.

SteelStallion
09-03-2008, 05:01 PM
I see the strategy here. We keep McHugh for one year until we can draft a really good TE on the first day of the 2009 draft :P

Seriously, there's no great find on the waiver list and it's no big deal. They wanted their third TE and Boyd got cut and Mahan got traded so there it is.

I mean it's not like you can build your team from the waiver list. What kind of a GM, what schmuck, would think...oops...never mind :shock:

Les 74
09-03-2008, 05:11 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

Agreed on all points except for Starks.The only place he should be is the unemployment line.

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 05:25 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

Les 74
09-03-2008, 05:28 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.


Honestly,Benny,from what I've seen of McHugh and Sherrod,Sherrod can't hold a candle to McHugh.However,why Sherrod is occupying a PS spot is beyond me.Maybe we cut him now???

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 05:30 PM
Now, the Steelers have added a player with both starting experience and position flexibility on the cheap...and this is a bad thing?
No. I think the problem is people were (for some reason) expecting us to sign an all-pro O-lineman or DE. :roll:

No...I was expecting them to promote Sherrod if they wanted to have another TE and use another PS spot for someone on one of the lines.

The whole PS was put together as lazy as possible and so the whole thing needs redone anyone, but that's what I was expecting.

Again, all it does is further emphasize my rational point...that the FO doesnt have a clue what they are doing when it comes to the lines/trenches.

BigBen2112
09-03-2008, 05:31 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.


Honestly,Benny,from what I've seen of McHugh and Sherrod,Sherrod can't hold a candle to McHugh.However,why Sherrod is occupying a PS spot is beyond me.Maybe we cut him now???

Fine with me.

But the whole practice squat is basically a load of crap...so either promote Sherrod or cut him and sign someone else to the regular roster. Dont occupy both spots.

SteelTorch
09-03-2008, 06:05 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

No screaming? No kicking the computer? No calling Colbert and Tomlin names? No spouting off how I would have done it differently and better? As my kids would say you are just a "fun sucker." :wink:

Rational, but a "fun sucker" nonetheless.
Fun sucker? Fun sucker??? I'm a lot of fun, just give me a bottle of tequila and some sprite.

Switch the first two letters, and you have a very strange insult. :idea:

RuthlessBurgher
09-03-2008, 06:57 PM
I can't say I'm surprised at all by this signing. Those who are pulling their hair out over this need to look at the big picture:

Did you really expect us to go OL? The season is about to start; it's too late to be looking for a new starter. That's the only thing that would have justified the signing. And the FA prospects likely would have demanded a high salary anyway.

Our 3rd TE was Max Starks, who can't catch and needs to be on the OL now that Mahan was given the boot. And if Miller or Spaeth (god forbid) got injured, we'd only have one TE who was a receiving threat.

It's not as if we traded a starter for a scrub. We traded a scrub for a scrub, and probably a better one since we were in need of a good TE. The fact that he can play FB is an added bonus.

So my advice is: relax, everyone. :roll:

No screaming? No kicking the computer? No calling Colbert and Tomlin names? No spouting off how I would have done it differently and better? As my kids would say you are just a "fun sucker." :wink:

Rational, but a "fun sucker" nonetheless.
Fun sucker? Fun sucker??? I'm a lot of fun, just give me a bottle of tequila and some sprite.

Switch the first two letters, and you have a very strange insult. :idea:

Ouch, that would char faster than a blast of your steel torch to the genitals. Speaking of which, what is your alibi for the night that the picture for the latest "caption this" thread was taken?

SteelTorch
09-03-2008, 07:01 PM
Ouch, that would char faster than a blast of your steel torch to the genitals. Speaking of which, what is your alibi for the night that the picture for the latest "caption this" thread was taken?
She knew what she wanted, I knew what I wanted. Let's just leave it at that. :Cheers

Shawn
09-03-2008, 07:23 PM
Maybe just maybe...he is a FB guru...and we plan to cut Davis!

Oh ok...a man can dream. :D

mshifko
09-03-2008, 09:01 PM
why we did not address the oline/dline is beyond me...but oh well, lets see how this thing shakes up...

LasVegasGuy
09-03-2008, 10:25 PM
Another freakin' Lions castoff? I swear this is getting old now. It seems everyone we sign lately had a stint with the Lions before coming to us. Did I miss the memo that said the Lions are the farm team for the Steelers?

RuthlessBurgher
09-03-2008, 10:26 PM
Another freakin' Lions castoff? I swear this is getting old now. It seems everyone we sign lately had a stint with the Lions before coming to us. Did I miss the memo that said the Lions are the farm team for the Steelers?

If that's the case, I will personally throw the party for Megatron's arrival a few years from now. I drafted Calvin in another fantasy league, and I fully expect him to be a beast.

costanza2k1
09-03-2008, 10:47 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

papillon
09-03-2008, 11:10 PM
I didn't read through all the posts of this thread, but, I'm guessing some are taking a "wait and see" attitude and some are hating the signing. Count me in the latter of the two options (I'm hoping that no one is ecstatic about this one).

The Steelers have a defensive line that just received their AARP discount cards and an offensive line that really hasn't blocked anyone in the pre-season as of yet. So, the Steelers go out and sign a 3rd TE to the team. He'll probably see the field for 10 plays per game (if that), but we have zero depth at DL and not even an above average offensive lineman in the starting lineup.

This signing falls under the :wft category and I continue to be amazed at the moves the FO makes. :HeadBanger

Pappy

fordfixer
09-03-2008, 11:14 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

While I don't alway's agree with Bens post they do give me something to think about

Oviedo
09-04-2008, 08:02 AM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

No one ever called BB a whiner. Just pointed out that he is overreacting to something he has absolutley no control over. After 24 hours and when you find out that McHugh also plays FB the signing actually starts to make some sense. Sherrod was never an option. He is work in progress and blocking is not his strength as a rookie. McHugh is by all indications a very proficient blocker which is what the team wants for the 3rd TE.

It makes no sense name call ing the front office because they don't read this board and they really don't care. They have way more information than we do as casual fans so you have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Being a fan is like getting on a super coaster, just strap in and prepare for the ride because you ain't in control of that beast.

BigBen2112
09-04-2008, 08:34 AM
I guess I just disagree with the idea that being a fan means believing fully in the front office. I guarantee you that there are Lions fans who dont believe at all in their front office. My premise the whole time has been the lack of attention, CONTINUALLY, paid to the OL/DL under Colbert and his seeming inability to judge anyone good on the OL/DL will doom the Steelers if it continues. We have one of the best QBs in the NFL, but he also takes more hits than any of the other elite QBs. And that's just the breaks? That's ok? Hell no that is not ok. It is something fixable.

On PittLive when we were arguing about the Starks signing some of the same people here were telling me, GUARANTEEING ME, that Starks would start, play well, play a vital role, AND be signed to an extension. So far, they are 0-4. Furthermore, those people argued "we need the depth and who else is there out there who could come in and be a starter? Noone, so it was just 7 million of our extra money and we guaranteed ourselves of having a starter/depth" Yeah and I can name probably 2-3 guys who are out there right now who would provide this team more than Starks, who could possibly come in and start right away, and wouldn't cost 7 million. But I suppose that is ok because the FO has more information than we do and they know what they are doing. I mean they clearly understood that SO MANY teams had invited Starks in for interviews etc. that he was going to be such a hot commodity that we had to give him the 7 million. I mean all of these teams were scared off by the non-compensatory Transition Tag title that they just didn't make a play for Starks...and thank god b/c now we have him! We got lucky to get him for 7 million b/c if another team hadn't been scared off by the lack of compensation needed he could be the highest paid lineman in the league. Well actually he does have that title...Highest paid BACKUP in the NFL!

But you know, in the end it doesnt matter because I really do believe that my opinion will show itself as valid, although many will somehow put me in the category of "nutsack" for whatever reason--basically because I dont fall in line with their opinions, what sense that makes I dont know--and even though my opinion will probably show itself as valid it will be written off by the opinions of so many others as "The FO knows what its doing..." or some other excuse. When Ben gets sacked 30-40 times this year and we're near the top of the league again in sacks allowed it will again show how incapable the line is. And then when we fail to address the lines as we should--and it will take much more than 1-2 picks, more like 1-2 picks on each side of the line if not more--the line will continue to implode...sooner or later those hits take a toll. Without a doubt in my mind if Ben keeps consistently taking the hits that he's been taking year after year his playing career will be shortened. It has happened to other players and to other good QBs. Our line is as bad as a sieve...and we have a good enough team outside of the trenches to be not just a contender but a super bowl champion again. The players were available in the 3-6th rounds this year to add good depth to the team. We went different directions, and we probably shouldn't have. Now, some players are available and again we go different directions.

I could careless if McHugh is the best gem we ever find and he turns into a Cooley. My point isn't about only HIM. Its about the fact that we basically have a PS full of hold-overs who consistently aren't good enough to make the team and contribute next to nothing when there are other options out there. Keeping the same players year after year on the PS when they aren't good enough to make the team is not the smartest decision in the world. And who cares? I do. We all should. Why? Because some of these other players could matter. Grant Mason, Jeremy Parquet, Scott Paxson, and Justin Vincent have zero reason to be on our practice squad. Maybe they should be on someone elses, but not ours. We are stacked at RB, Mason/Parquet/Paxson are not as good as some other players available. Convenience is not an excuse---and lets face it that's what our FO goes for MANY times. We sign our own players instead of FA because of convenience, we signed Starks because of convenience, and we kept certain players on the PS because of convenience. But convenience doesnt build a good football team. And the PS does matter. Sherrod doesn't need to be on there either.

I am just stating an alternate view to the things that have transpired. People dont have to agree with it and that's fine, but nonetheless it does represent a VALID concern about the FO...one that needs to be thought about as the season progresses and as we go into next offseason. If next offseason they prove me wrong then I will be the first one to say HEY...at least we tried (even if the players dont turn out well) to get 5 linemen to build the trenches. But as we sit here right now our OL is a sieve with zero quality backup, even though one of them is getting paid more than I believe all of our starters (except Smith maybe?) and our DL is one injury (Smith) away from being such a problem that we would go 4-12. With our schedule if Aaron Smith gets hurt we're screwed. We saw last year clearly what happens when he's hurt and this year's schedule is insane. If he got hurt early in the season, we would REALLY struggle. And why? Because we didnt even TRY to get some good depth in here.

Anyways, that's all I have time for, and many of you will be HAPPY that's all I have time for, but like I said just because someone has a different opinion doesn't make them any less a fan or a troll--and I cant believe I was called the same as nutsack in another thread...what a load.

Oviedo
09-04-2008, 08:56 AM
I guess I just disagree with the idea that being a fan means believing fully in the front office. I guarantee you that there are Lions fans who dont believe at all in their front office. My premise the whole time has been the lack of attention, CONTINUALLY, paid to the OL/DL under Colbert and his seeming inability to judge anyone good on the OL/DL will doom the Steelers if it continues. We have one of the best QBs in the NFL, but he also takes more hits than any of the other elite QBs. And that's just the breaks? That's ok? Hell no that is not ok. It is something fixable.

On PittLive when we were arguing about the Starks signing some of the same people here were telling me, GUARANTEEING ME, that Starks would start, play well, play a vital role, AND be signed to an extension. So far, they are 0-4. Furthermore, those people argued "we need the depth and who else is there out there who could come in and be a starter? Noone, so it was just 7 million of our extra money and we guaranteed ourselves of having a starter/depth" Yeah and I can name probably 2-3 guys who are out there right now who would provide this team more than Starks, who could possibly come in and start right away, and wouldn't cost 7 million. But I suppose that is ok because the FO has more information than we do and they know what they are doing. I mean they clearly understood that SO MANY teams had invited Starks in for interviews etc. that he was going to be such a hot commodity that we had to give him the 7 million. I mean all of these teams were scared off by the non-compensatory Transition Tag title that they just didn't make a play for Starks...and thank god b/c now we have him! We got lucky to get him for 7 million b/c if another team hadn't been scared off by the lack of compensation needed he could be the highest paid lineman in the league. Well actually he does have that title...Highest paid BACKUP in the NFL!

But you know, in the end it doesnt matter because I really do believe that my opinion will show itself as valid, although many will somehow put me in the category of "nutsack" for whatever reason--basically because I dont fall in line with their opinions, what sense that makes I dont know--and even though my opinion will probably show itself as valid it will be written off by the opinions of so many others as "The FO knows what its doing..." or some other excuse. When Ben gets sacked 30-40 times this year and we're near the top of the league again in sacks allowed it will again show how incapable the line is. And then when we fail to address the lines as we should--and it will take much more than 1-2 picks, more like 1-2 picks on each side of the line if not more--the line will continue to implode...sooner or later those hits take a toll. Without a doubt in my mind if Ben keeps consistently taking the hits that he's been taking year after year his playing career will be shortened. It has happened to other players and to other good QBs. Our line is as bad as a sieve...and we have a good enough team outside of the trenches to be not just a contender but a super bowl champion again. The players were available in the 3-6th rounds this year to add good depth to the team. We went different directions, and we probably shouldn't have. Now, some players are available and again we go different directions.

I could careless if McHugh is the best gem we ever find and he turns into a Cooley. My point isn't about only HIM. Its about the fact that we basically have a PS full of hold-overs who consistently aren't good enough to make the team and contribute next to nothing when there are other options out there. Keeping the same players year after year on the PS when they aren't good enough to make the team is not the smartest decision in the world. And who cares? I do. We all should. Why? Because some of these other players could matter. Grant Mason, Jeremy Parquet, Scott Paxson, and Justin Vincent have zero reason to be on our practice squad. Maybe they should be on someone elses, but not ours. We are stacked at RB, Mason/Parquet/Paxson are not as good as some other players available. Convenience is not an excuse---and lets face it that's what our FO goes for MANY times. We sign our own players instead of FA because of convenience, we signed Starks because of convenience, and we kept certain players on the PS because of convenience. But convenience doesnt build a good football team. And the PS does matter. Sherrod doesn't need to be on there either.

I am just stating an alternate view to the things that have transpired. People dont have to agree with it and that's fine, but nonetheless it does represent a VALID concern about the FO...one that needs to be thought about as the season progresses and as we go into next offseason. If next offseason they prove me wrong then I will be the first one to say HEY...at least we tried (even if the players dont turn out well) to get 5 linemen to build the trenches. But as we sit here right now our OL is a sieve with zero quality backup, even though one of them is getting paid more than I believe all of our starters (except Smith maybe?) and our DL is one injury (Smith) away from being such a problem that we would go 4-12. With our schedule if Aaron Smith gets hurt we're screwed. We saw last year clearly what happens when he's hurt and this year's schedule is insane. If he got hurt early in the season, we would REALLY struggle. And why? Because we didnt even TRY to get some good depth in here.

Anyways, that's all I have time for, and many of you will be HAPPY that's all I have time for, but like I said just because someone has a different opinion doesn't make them any less a fan or a troll--and I cant believe I was called the same as nutsack in another thread...what a load.

I love your thoughts and always read whatever you write. That is why the board exist, but in the end it is what it is. The Rooney's aren't ever calling me to guage what I think or feel. I just know I'll be in front of the TV for every game and see how it all plays out. If we go 0-16 I will be angry, disappointed and unhappy, but I'll still go and watch my kids play soccer every weekend, go to work every week, etc. I would also choose to look forward to the #1 draft choice and the lively debate leading up to that on this great board.

costanza2k1
09-04-2008, 09:02 AM
I guess I just disagree with the idea that being a fan means believing fully in the front office. ...

I don't fully believe in them, but I understand I have no control over them...that's all I'm saying. I think you have some great football knowledge especially draft type knowledge...not many will doubt that. I wouldn't worry about what people say just keep on keepin on brother football starts tonight whether we like what the FO did or not. It will be good at times and it will be bad too, but at the end of the day we're still all Steelers fans.

:Cheers

BigBen2112
09-05-2008, 11:32 AM
You mean he is going to play and a DL/OL wouldnt like this:


McHugh won't face Texans

Sean McHugh, signed two days ago as the third tight end, will not play against the Texans -- and not just because he hasn't practiced with his new teammates because of an ankle injury.

Tomlin said McHugh, who spent the past three seasons with the Detroit Lions, will be given another week to learn the offense.

"He could probably fight through it if he were capable of playing, but he's not ready from an assignment standpoint," Tomlin said.

"We'll let him be all eyes and ears ... and get started fresh with him next week."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08249/909626-66.stm

At least it is only one week. Maybe he will play more in the end than a DL/OL.

Or maybe this post is beating a dead horse as well.

steelblood
09-05-2008, 01:02 PM
I guess I just disagree with the idea that being a fan means believing fully in the front office. I guarantee you that there are Lions fans who dont believe at all in their front office. My premise the whole time has been the lack of attention, CONTINUALLY, paid to the OL/DL under Colbert and his seeming inability to judge anyone good on the OL/DL will doom the Steelers if it continues. We have one of the best QBs in the NFL, but he also takes more hits than any of the other elite QBs. And that's just the breaks? That's ok? Hell no that is not ok. It is something fixable.

On PittLive when we were arguing about the Starks signing some of the same people here were telling me, GUARANTEEING ME, that Starks would start, play well, play a vital role, AND be signed to an extension. So far, they are 0-4. Furthermore, those people argued "we need the depth and who else is there out there who could come in and be a starter? Noone, so it was just 7 million of our extra money and we guaranteed ourselves of having a starter/depth" Yeah and I can name probably 2-3 guys who are out there right now who would provide this team more than Starks, who could possibly come in and start right away, and wouldn't cost 7 million. But I suppose that is ok because the FO has more information than we do and they know what they are doing. I mean they clearly understood that SO MANY teams had invited Starks in for interviews etc. that he was going to be such a hot commodity that we had to give him the 7 million. I mean all of these teams were scared off by the non-compensatory Transition Tag title that they just didn't make a play for Starks...and thank god b/c now we have him! We got lucky to get him for 7 million b/c if another team hadn't been scared off by the lack of compensation needed he could be the highest paid lineman in the league. Well actually he does have that title...Highest paid BACKUP in the NFL!

But you know, in the end it doesnt matter because I really do believe that my opinion will show itself as valid, although many will somehow put me in the category of "nutsack" for whatever reason--basically because I dont fall in line with their opinions, what sense that makes I dont know--and even though my opinion will probably show itself as valid it will be written off by the opinions of so many others as "The FO knows what its doing..." or some other excuse. When Ben gets sacked 30-40 times this year and we're near the top of the league again in sacks allowed it will again show how incapable the line is. And then when we fail to address the lines as we should--and it will take much more than 1-2 picks, more like 1-2 picks on each side of the line if not more--the line will continue to implode...sooner or later those hits take a toll. Without a doubt in my mind if Ben keeps consistently taking the hits that he's been taking year after year his playing career will be shortened. It has happened to other players and to other good QBs. Our line is as bad as a sieve...and we have a good enough team outside of the trenches to be not just a contender but a super bowl champion again. The players were available in the 3-6th rounds this year to add good depth to the team. We went different directions, and we probably shouldn't have. Now, some players are available and again we go different directions.

I could careless if McHugh is the best gem we ever find and he turns into a Cooley. My point isn't about only HIM. Its about the fact that we basically have a PS full of hold-overs who consistently aren't good enough to make the team and contribute next to nothing when there are other options out there. Keeping the same players year after year on the PS when they aren't good enough to make the team is not the smartest decision in the world. And who cares? I do. We all should. Why? Because some of these other players could matter. Grant Mason, Jeremy Parquet, Scott Paxson, and Justin Vincent have zero reason to be on our practice squad. Maybe they should be on someone elses, but not ours. We are stacked at RB, Mason/Parquet/Paxson are not as good as some other players available. Convenience is not an excuse---and lets face it that's what our FO goes for MANY times. We sign our own players instead of FA because of convenience, we signed Starks because of convenience, and we kept certain players on the PS because of convenience. But convenience doesnt build a good football team. And the PS does matter. Sherrod doesn't need to be on there either.

I am just stating an alternate view to the things that have transpired. People dont have to agree with it and that's fine, but nonetheless it does represent a VALID concern about the FO...one that needs to be thought about as the season progresses and as we go into next offseason. If next offseason they prove me wrong then I will be the first one to say HEY...at least we tried (even if the players dont turn out well) to get 5 linemen to build the trenches. But as we sit here right now our OL is a sieve with zero quality backup, even though one of them is getting paid more than I believe all of our starters (except Smith maybe?) and our DL is one injury (Smith) away from being such a problem that we would go 4-12. With our schedule if Aaron Smith gets hurt we're screwed. We saw last year clearly what happens when he's hurt and this year's schedule is insane. If he got hurt early in the season, we would REALLY struggle. And why? Because we didnt even TRY to get some good depth in here.

Anyways, that's all I have time for, and many of you will be HAPPY that's all I have time for, but like I said just because someone has a different opinion doesn't make them any less a fan or a troll--and I cant believe I was called the same as nutsack in another thread...what a load.


Benny,

Don't take homerism personally. Often, it is a comforting, yet irrational response. I don't blame anyone for blind homerism. But, it does make actual football discussions difficult sometimes.

steelblood

Shawn
09-05-2008, 02:06 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

Nahhh...he's a whiner. :D

RuthlessBurgher
09-05-2008, 02:20 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

Nahhh...he's a whiner. :D

And Senor Pimp Cup is a wino. :Beer :Cheers

Oviedo
09-05-2008, 02:32 PM
You mean he is going to play and a DL/OL wouldnt like this:


McHugh won't face Texans

Sean McHugh, signed two days ago as the third tight end, will not play against the Texans -- and not just because he hasn't practiced with his new teammates because of an ankle injury.

Tomlin said McHugh, who spent the past three seasons with the Detroit Lions, will be given another week to learn the offense.

"He could probably fight through it if he were capable of playing, but he's not ready from an assignment standpoint," Tomlin said.

"We'll let him be all eyes and ears ... and get started fresh with him next week."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08249/909626-66.stm

At least it is only one week. Maybe he will play more in the end than a DL/OL.

Or maybe this post is beating a dead horse as well.

The horse is now glue from being beaten so much

RuthlessBurgher
09-05-2008, 02:53 PM
You mean he is going to play and a DL/OL wouldnt like this:


McHugh won't face Texans

Sean McHugh, signed two days ago as the third tight end, will not play against the Texans -- and not just because he hasn't practiced with his new teammates because of an ankle injury.

Tomlin said McHugh, who spent the past three seasons with the Detroit Lions, will be given another week to learn the offense.

"He could probably fight through it if he were capable of playing, but he's not ready from an assignment standpoint," Tomlin said.

"We'll let him be all eyes and ears ... and get started fresh with him next week."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08249/909626-66.stm

At least it is only one week. Maybe he will play more in the end than a DL/OL.

Or maybe this post is beating a dead horse as well.

The horse is now glue from being beaten so much

I call this horse "Elmer" :lol:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/unclespellbinder/Animated/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

Shawn
09-05-2008, 05:19 PM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

Nahhh...he's a whiner. :D

And Senor Pimp Cup is a wino. :Beer :Cheers

Hey that's a recovering wino...thank you very much. :D

RuthlessBurgher
09-06-2008, 01:41 AM
So lets not pick up OL or DL so we can pick up a 3rd TE when we simply could have kept Sherrod?

I love how those of us who disagree with things the FO do are whiners and irrational. The thought is completely rational. If you need a TE then use Sherrod so you aren't wasting another damn PS spot.

If not, then dont sign another TE and instead go OL or DL which are clear areas in needing of upgrade.

I don't recall people calling you a whiner. You may be a little too passionate about our FO that's about it. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Truth is we'll never be able to figure out the logic to what the FO does. Bottom line, sometime things are out of our control so there's no point blowing a gasket over it. This doesn't make me a lemming, homer, or anything else. I am a fan of who the Steelers put on the field I really don't have a choice. Maybe it's just my personality.

Nahhh...he's a whiner. :D

And Senor Pimp Cup is a wino. :Beer :Cheers

Hey that's a recovering wino...thank you very much. :D

So is that Welch's grape juice in your chalice o' pimp? :lol: