View Full Version : Would we take Plax just to keep him from signing with the Patriots?

08-13-2012, 06:47 PM

With Wallace still out, we could do worse than sign Ben's old buddy, might even give the Offense what looks like could be a much needed shot in the arm (from what I've read about the 1st pre-season game). I hear he's willing to sing for vet minimum.

I admit I do have an irrational loathing of all things Pats*, but I just couldn't stomach the idea of his catching a pass against us in a key situation and giving them a leg up in a tight playoff game.


Discipline of Steel
08-13-2012, 06:52 PM
No cause the Pats* arent going to sign him.

08-13-2012, 09:46 PM
I hope that they do sign him. He will do worse than Ocho Ego did.

08-13-2012, 10:11 PM
If Tomlin or Colbert thought that Plax was any type of threat, we'd probably sign him ourselves.

So no.

08-14-2012, 12:41 AM
Many like to pretend that Plax has no value. But, Plax is still a great red zone threat. And, we need that right now.

08-14-2012, 05:55 AM
I woulda signed Plax long ago.

08-14-2012, 09:28 AM
Plax would be a situational player only.......I really dont think the Steelers will burn a WR spot on someone that is only used in the redzone only and that will not be able to contribute on special teams.

Why has he not been signed by another team up to this point?

08-14-2012, 11:54 AM
Agreed SF...why would we take away a spot from a bright young WR for a 35 yo situational WR?

D Rock
08-14-2012, 12:20 PM
If you want a redzone target, throw the ball to Leonard Pope. No need to bring in Burress for that.

08-14-2012, 12:50 PM
If you want a redzone target, throw the ball to Leonard Pope. No need to bring in Burress for that.

Hell, why don't they try throwing the ball to Heath Miller? That worked well in the past, before Arians and Ben became enamored with deep passes...

08-14-2012, 02:59 PM
why would we sign someone just to keep them from the Pats?