PDA

View Full Version : OT: Clowns thinking of releasing Steinbach?



Jom112
05-04-2009, 12:10 AM
And my sources in Cleveland tell me that Eric Steinbach is in deep trouble. Eric Mangini likes big, bruising maulers on the offensive line.

Steinbach doesnít fit the mold. Heís more finesse. I look for Steinbach to get released after the 2009 season. If fact, with his fat contract, heíll be fortunate to make the 53-man roster. Donít be shocked if he gets terminated before the Ď09 opener.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/co ... comin.html (http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/chickludwig/entries/2009/05/03/keep_those_cards_letters_comin.html)


Mangini is an idiot if he releases Steinbach. He's the best run blocking guard in the division. If this does happen, I can only laugh at how the Clowns are falling apart.

Of course Chick Ludwig the author of the article is an idiot as well, so it's probably not true...

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
05-04-2009, 09:05 AM
If this is true then it does have a note of irony for the Steelers and the way that they dealt with the Alan Faneca situation.

In 2006 Minnesota signed Steve Hutchinson to his 7 year, $49M contract. At that point all was still well in Steeler/Faneca land. As the two consensus best guards in the league, it would have been reasonable to assume that Faneca would have received a very similar deal the following off-season, even though it took a transition tag and poison pill to consumate this deal for Hutch.

In 2007, the guard market went insane. Two teams - Buffalo and Cleveland signed guards with much lighter resumes to similar contracts to the one that Hutch signed the year before. This is what set off Faneca. I could have seen him accepting a deal like this prior to these two signings, but he was not going to settle for the same amount received by two guys who were several notches below him on the accomplishment scale.

So, essentially the market was set by two of the worst franchises in the league, and the Steelers refused to accept their actions, thus insulting Faneca and assuring his departure the following year.

In retrospect, the Browns did make a nice signing. Steinbach has played very well for them and helped solidify their O line. Dockery on the other hand was already released earlier this off-season and was signed by the Skins for a much lower price.

So, it looks like we were the smart ones in sticking by our guns. The market has gone down on guards and we don't have an aging one eating up such a huge chunk of our cap.

Oviedo
05-04-2009, 09:26 AM
If this is true then it does have a note of irony for the Steelers and the way that they dealt with the Alan Faneca situation.

In 2006 Minnesota signed Steve Hutchinson to his 7 year, $49M contract. At that point all was still well in Steeler/Faneca land. As the two consensus best guards in the league, it would have been reasonable to assume that Faneca would have received a very similar deal the following off-season, even though it took a transition tag and poison pill to consumate this deal for Hutch.

In 2007, the guard market went insane. Two teams - Buffalo and Cleveland signed guards with much lighter resumes to similar contracts to the one that Hutch signed the year before. This is what set off Faneca. I could have seen him accepting a deal like this prior to these two signings, but he was not going to settle for the same amount received by two guys who were several notches below him on the accomplishment scale.

So, essentially the market was set by two of the worst franchises in the league, and the Steelers refused to accept their actions, thus insulting Faneca and assuring his departure the following year.

In retrospect, the Browns did make a nice signing. Steinbach has played very well for them and helped solidify their O line. Dockery on the other hand was already released earlier this off-season and was signed by the Skins for a much lower price.

So, it looks like we were the smart ones in sticking by our guns. The market has gone down on guards and we don't have an aging one eating up such a huge chunk of our cap.

We were absolutely right not to do the wrong thing and sign Faneca. That would have been a cap disaster that may have prevented us from resigning the Defensive Player of the Year.