Vikings bringing in Max Starks

[steelerkeylargo]

per PFT

[steelerkeylargo]

In July, the Vikings gave up on a left tackle who had weight and conditioning issues. Now, the Vikings are taking a look at a left tackle who has weight and conditioning issues.

Tom Pelissero of 1500ESPN.com reports that the Vikings will visit with free-agent Max Starks, who was dumped earlier this year by the Steelers. Starks was attempting to recover from a neck injury that ended his 2010 season prematurely.

The Vikings cut Bryant McKinnie days after he showed up pushing four bills. He has since landed with the Ravens, and he has started all three games.

The Vikings replaced him with Charlie Johnson, who has struggled at times.

Frankly, we’re not sure that beefing up the tackle position will help the Vikings not blow double-digit leads. But it can’t hurt.

[Pahn711]

I would have thought that report would be about the Steelers this morning...If they are interested at all they better get moving.

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

[hawaiiansteel]

Report: Former Steelers OT Max Starks Working Out For Vikings

by Neal Coolong on Sep 26, 2011

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/1972579/GYI0062087876.jpg

Tom Pelissero of AM 1500 in Minneapolis is reporting the Vikings brought in Former Steelers OT Max Starks for a workout Monday.

Starks is a hot name in Pittsburgh after Colts DEs Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis had their way with a variety of tackle combinations in the Steelers 23-20 (OT) win Sunday night.

If any team is struggling more with protection than Pittsburgh, it's Minnesota. The Vikings are coming off their third consecutive loss - all three where they held double-digit leads at halftime before their offense self-destructed. The latest, a 26-23 overtime loss to Detroit, where LT Charlie Johnson and RT Phil Loadholt struggled greatly with the Lions edge rushers.

Starks, a third-round pick of the Steelers in 2004, is the only player in NFL history to start at left and right tackle on Super Bowl championship teams. Both came with Pittsburgh.

Starks was cut this preseason by the Steelers, one season after he was put on injured-reserve with a neck injury.

http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/20 ... ta-vikings (http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2011/9/26/2450956/steelers-tackle-max-starks-minnesota-vikings)

[kindlecatsb'ng]

Ed Brouchette from PG this am on 93.7 says the front office has absolutely no interest in Max Starks with no other explanation as to why.

Kindle

:tt1

[Pahn711]

I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

[hawaiiansteel]

MarkKaboly_Trib RT @claytonESPN:

Max Starks had good workout with Vikings. Weighed in around 350. Teams are getting interested in the former Steelers tackle.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu ... z1ZDnOWpTS (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/#ixzz1ZDnOWpTS)

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

Yes was given a franchise tag for IIRC around $9M and then shown the bench. He had been the starting RT on a SB winning team and then practiced most of the pre season at LT even though we had Marvel Smith still there. Without having much of a chance to see him at RT, the coach gave his starting RT job to Colon. That does not sound to me like the FO and HC are on the same page.

Once again, IIRC Max was forced back onto the field due to injury to Smith and became our starting LT due to his play there. Had Smith not been injured, chances are that a backup has been named Max would have been let go after Tomlin's first season. This because he was barely allowed to compete for his own starting job. FWIW I said all of this back then as well.

[phillyesq]

[quote="steeler_fan_in_t.o.":2v90l781]I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

Yes was given a franchise tag for IIRC around $9M and then shown the bench. He had been the starting RT on a SB winning team and then practiced most of the pre season at LT even though we had Marvel Smith still there. Without having much of a chance to see him at RT, the coach gave his starting RT job to Colon. That does not sound to me like the FO and HC are on the same page.

Once again, IIRC Max was forced back onto the field due to injury to Smith and became our starting LT due to his play there. Had Smith not been injured, chances are that a backup has been named Max would have been let go after Tomlin's first season. This because he was barely allowed to compete for his own starting job. FWIW I said all of this back then as well.[/quote:2v90l781]

I can get the coaching staff not caring for the play of Max Starks. He was above average at his best, but he wasn't always at his best.

In a world where there are options, you'd ideally like to do better than Max Starks as your left tackle. He looked better at LT than he did at RT, and he was a playable option.

I wouldn't expect Starks to come in and be the second coming of Orlando Pace, but if he is able to perform adequately, that his a huge step over what we've seen so far this year from Scott.

I don't get why the Steelers would want to continue adding "practice options" or whatever at OT if there is somebody out there who could perform adequately. If they don't like Starks, that's fine, but I'd like to at least hear that they are open to any option on the offensive line.

[papillon]

[quote="steeler_fan_in_t.o.":2y7bwzk5]I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

Yes was given a franchise tag for IIRC around $9M and then shown the bench. He had been the starting RT on a SB winning team and then practiced most of the pre season at LT even though we had Marvel Smith still there. Without having much of a chance to see him at RT, the coach gave his starting RT job to Colon. That does not sound to me like the FO and HC are on the same page.

Once again, IIRC Max was forced back onto the field due to injury to Smith and became our starting LT due to his play there. Had Smith not been injured, chances are that a backup has been named Max would have been let go after Tomlin's first season. This because he was barely allowed to compete for his own starting job. FWIW I said all of this back then as well.

I can get the coaching staff not caring for the play of Max Starks. He was above average at his best, but he wasn't always at his best.

In a world where there are options, you'd ideally like to do better than Max Starks as your left tackle. He looked better at LT than he did at RT, and he was a playable option.

I wouldn't expect Starks to come in and be the second coming of Orlando Pace, but if he is able to perform adequately, that his a huge step over what we've seen so far this year from Scott.

I don't get why the Steelers would want to continue adding "practice options" or whatever at OT if there is somebody out there who could perform adequately. If they don't like Starks, that's fine, but I'd like to at least hear that they are open to any option on the offensive line.[/quote:2y7bwzk5]

Could the salary cap be coming into play? The Steelers are currently over the cap or will be nest year until they jettison some salaries, I think. Maybe, they can't fit him under the cap due to the contract extensions given out this year.

Pappy

[hawaiiansteel]

"Another option at tackle appears to be ready to sign a deal.

KDKA-TV Sports believes that former Steeler tackle Max Starks is close to signing a contract with the Minnesota Vikings.

Starks worked out for the Vikings and weighed in at 350 pounds on Monday."

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2011/09/ ... ams-starks

[fordfixer]

Max said in a tweet last night that he would be playing in the NFL very soon

[BradshawsHairdresser]

If Max plays well for the Vikings, how bad is that going to make Tomlin and Co. look?

It seems to me that they have a difficult time evaluating OL talent, for whatever reason.

[fezziwig]

If Max plays well for the Vikings, how bad is that going to make Tomlin and Co. look?

It seems to me that they have a difficult time evaluating OL talent, for whatever reason.


I think your exactly correct about them having a difficult time evaluating OL-Men. What else could it be other than, they just don't place a high priority at that position. Having said that, I doubt they want to place bums in front of Ben and allow him to get murdered on the field so, I would have to say they, don't know crap about picking OL-MEN.
They also don't know **** about picking an OC but, I'm sure that is being knocked around on another thread.

They did pick the obvious in Pouncey.

I always liked Starks and thought he would have become more than what he was but, he's only better than what we have now and to me, he was never worth the franchise tag or the money they had given him in the past.

Isn't Max and Ben very good friends ? It surprises me that Ben didn't insist upon having Starks and maybe he did and maybe Ben doesn't get all that we believe he has asked for ?

[fezziwig]

I just went over to the Vikings board to see how they feel about Max Starks. First off, thats one purple freaking headache to even look at their site let alone, trying to read purple words on black background.

Anyway, they seem suspect about Max and figure if he couldn't make it here on a team that has lousy OL-Men then, how much help could he be ?

They did mention he would be better than the coatrack that they have now.

Their board compliants are similar to ours with, their team did nothing in the off season to help their crummy o-line.

[Pahn711]

[quote="steeler_fan_in_t.o.":2tvbc9l7]I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

Yes was given a franchise tag for IIRC around $9M and then shown the bench. He had been the starting RT on a SB winning team and then practiced most of the pre season at LT even though we had Marvel Smith still there. Without having much of a chance to see him at RT, the coach gave his starting RT job to Colon. That does not sound to me like the FO and HC are on the same page.

Once again, IIRC Max was forced back onto the field due to injury to Smith and became our starting LT due to his play there. Had Smith not been injured, chances are that a backup has been named Max would have been let go after Tomlin's first season. This because he was barely allowed to compete for his own starting job. FWIW I said all of this back then as well.[/quote:2tvbc9l7]

Granted, my memory of this situation is a bit hazy now, but looking at his Games Started stats, he was benched in favor of Willie Colon in 2007 but that wasn't the year he was paid $9M. The transition and franchise tags were given in 2008 and 2009 respectively, and in those two seasons he started all but 5 games (which I'm assuming was due to injury).

So unless my statistics are off, I don't buy that this is an indication of a rift between Tomlin and the FO.

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

[quote="steeler_fan_in_t.o.":yzy4zy7b]I said it when he arrived and still believe this:

Mike Tomlin does not like and not want Max Starks on his team.

Interesting then, that Starks was offered a transition and franchise tag in consecutive years, and then a four year deal for good money. All of which were under Tomlin I believe.

Was all that Front Office? I doubt it...

Yes was given a franchise tag for IIRC around $9M and then shown the bench. He had been the starting RT on a SB winning team and then practiced most of the pre season at LT even though we had Marvel Smith still there. Without having much of a chance to see him at RT, the coach gave his starting RT job to Colon. That does not sound to me like the FO and HC are on the same page.

Once again, IIRC Max was forced back onto the field due to injury to Smith and became our starting LT due to his play there. Had Smith not been injured, chances are that a backup has been named Max would have been let go after Tomlin's first season. This because he was barely allowed to compete for his own starting job. FWIW I said all of this back then as well.

Granted, my memory of this situation is a bit hazy now, but looking at his Games Started stats, he was benched in favor of Willie Colon in 2007 but that wasn't the year he was paid $9M. The transition and franchise tags were given in 2008 and 2009 respectively, and in those two seasons he started all but 5 games (which I'm assuming was due to injury).

So unless my statistics are off, I don't buy that this is an indication of a rift between Tomlin and the FO.[/quote:yzy4zy7b]

Sorry, my memory was a bit hazy, and timelines were off, but the right idea.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09050/950325-100.stm


It is the second year in a row the Steelers have used a tag to keep Starks from becoming an unrestricted free agent. He was named a transition player last season, even though he wasn't a starter, and was paid $6.9 million.

In 2008 he was given the transition tag and paid $6.9M. That same year he lost his starting job while not having a fair chance to compete for it. He worked all throughout camp at LT and then Willie Colon was able to slide in and take the RT position. Smith started the first five games until injury sidelined him. Max then took over the LT spot and was there as we won our sixth.

[Pahn711]

In 2008 he was given the transition tag and paid $6.9M. That same year he lost his starting job while not having a fair chance to compete for it. He worked all throughout camp at LT and then Willie Colon was able to slide in and take the RT position. Smith started the first five games until injury sidelined him. Max then took over the LT spot and was there as we won our sixth.

Okay, but that makes your theory that Starks was in Tomlin's doghouse weaker. Whether you think his chance to compete for either tackle spot was fair or unfair (what btw makes you think that?), the team obviously felt Marvel Smith and Willie Colon were the better linemen at the time, but that Starks was good enough to keep around in case of injury (and if you recall that was a smart move, Smith was having problems with his back for several years). Its just as easy to assume they were paying him all that money because they envisioned he was their LT of the future and Smith's status was uncertain.

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

In 2008 he was given the transition tag and paid $6.9M. That same year he lost his starting job while not having a fair chance to compete for it. He worked all throughout camp at LT and then Willie Colon was able to slide in and take the RT position. Smith started the first five games until injury sidelined him. Max then took over the LT spot and was there as we won our sixth.

Okay, but that makes your theory that Starks was in Tomlin's doghouse weaker. Whether you think his chance to compete for either tackle spot was fair or unfair (what btw makes you think that?), the team obviously felt Marvel Smith and Willie Colon were the better linemen at the time, but that Starks was good enough to keep around in case of injury (and if you recall that was a smart move, Smith was having problems with his back for several years). Its just as easy to assume they were paying him all that money because they envisioned he was their LT of the future and Smith's status was uncertain.

Starks was the starter at RT in '05 and '06. You would think that a brand new coach would like to see what he has. On top of that, the Steelers also had a new OL coach that same year - Larry Zierlein. Two coaches with no prior experience with these players. Do they not want to take a look at their starters? Apparently not. They gave Starks almost no looks at RT. By the time camp broke they had no choice with Starks since they barely got a look at him, and what they did see was a guy struggling to master a new position - the toughest position on the OL.

So my original feeling that he was unfairly benched came from him not being able to compete for his own job. He ended up starting four games at LT after Smith was hurt.

Then, in the off season, they were faced with a situation in which they did not know how Smith had healed and Colbert made the decision to extend the Transition Tag. At this point you must remember that Tomlin was just coming off of his rookie season as the coach. He did not have the kind of influence that Cowher had before him. It was generally acknowledged at the time that this was a Colbert move.

Tomlin entered camp by saying that the only open OL position was at G (the year that Faneca left). So, Cobert just gave this guy close to $7M and he was not even given the opportunity to compete for a starting spot? Does this sound like the two of them were on the same page?

Once again, injury gave him the starting LT job and he did well enough to help lead us to another SB victory. So, a player who was unable to compete for a starting OT job is capable of starting at LT on a SB winner.

So, IMO, had it not been for the fate of Marvel Smith injuries twice, Max would have sat down for the full season and never brought back. And I think that Coach Tomlin would have been fine with that.

[feltdizz]

salary cap is probably #1.... but OL evaluation is #1.01

Not sure if Tomlin doesn't like Starks but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. Sometimes coaches can't put their ego aside when a capable player rubs them the wrong way.

We have watched old vets get outplayed by younger guys and not lose their starting position.... on both sides of the ball. Coaches have favorites whether we want to admit it or not.

[LouSteel]

We have watched old vets get outplayed by younger guys and not lose their starting position.... on both sides of the ball. Coaches have favorites whether we want to admit it or not.

Unfortunately, starting vets a season or two past their sell-by date has become the Steelers Way...

I'm not sure if it's favoritism by the coaches or an inability to coach up the younger guys. Either way, it's becoming a real concern for me.

[Pahn711]

Starks was the starter at RT in '05 and '06. You would think that a brand new coach would like to see what he has. On top of that, the Steelers also had a new OL coach that same year - Larry Zierlein. Two coaches with no prior experience with these players. Do they not want to take a look at their starters? Apparently not. They gave Starks almost no looks at RT. By the time camp broke they had no choice with Starks since they barely got a look at him, and what they did see was a guy struggling to master a new position - the toughest position on the OL.

So my original feeling that he was unfairly benched came from him not being able to compete for his own job. He ended up starting four games at LT after Smith was hurt.


You mean you know for sure that in training camp and preseason he got zero snaps at RT or LT? Cause thats what "no looks" means. Since obviously that is not the case, why is it so out of the question that Colon just outplayed him and that Smith was still considered the better Left Tackle? You haven't sufficiently explained to me why you think this couldn't possibly be the case.

New coaches aside, they had plenty of tape on Starks already, Colon was the only guy they didn't know a lot about which explains why he would get more snaps as well.



Tomlin entered camp by saying that the only open OL position was at G (the year that Faneca left). So, Cobert just gave this guy close to $7M and he was not even given the opportunity to compete for a starting spot? Does this sound like the two of them were on the same page?


No, it sounds like they valued him enough to pay him that much as the top backup in the probable event Smith couldn't play.

Its obvious we aren't gonna agree on this, I just think your statement implies too many assumptions on what Tomlin is thinking when this situation could be explained as simply as both Colbert and Tomlin agreed that Starks was worth enough to keep around as an insurance policy. If they thought Starks was an eventual starter waiting in the wings, that money makes sense.

[Pahn711]

Not sure if Tomlin doesn't like Starks but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. Sometimes coaches can't put their ego aside when a capable player rubs them the wrong way.

We have watched old vets get outplayed by younger guys and not lose their starting position.... on both sides of the ball. Coaches have favorites whether we want to admit it or not.

Starks was paid what, like $20 million over a three year span? And this is an indication that Tomlin had an ego and wanted Starks gone? C'mon dude get real. Sure they have favorites and dog house candidates, but if there was truly such a divide between what Tomlin and the FO thought of this guy....it just defies logic.