Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 65 of 65

Thread: Tomlin-era bad personnel decisions

  1. #61
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Pittsburgh View Post
    Throw in dropping a 1st round pick on Mendenhall.....what a waste of a pick.....

    I'll admit that I was super excited about the Mendenhall and Sweed picks. Boy, were the Steelers and myself wrong. Mendenhall is a decent player but NOT a good 1st round pick.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    Hampton was put on the PUP by Tomlin because of his weight issues and he didn't lose 6 weeks. Why would Starks lose 6 weeks?

    http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/08210/900038-66.stm

    And btw, no other team wanted James Harrisons either (on multiple occasions) but he turned out ok.

    I can't imagine what last year would have looked like without Starks returning. Did you not watch the 2 games w/ J. Scott starting?

    And I was a fan of J. Scott because I thought he would step up. I don't know if it was nerves or just talent but he was absolutely terrible the 1st 2 games. TERRIBLE. I swear you could have placed 2 lawn chairs in place of J. Scott and the defenders would have had a more difficult time.
    Hampton didn't start the season on the PUP. He started the PRESEASON on the PUP. We didn't cut Hampton because he was a probowler who would have been picked up in a second. We did cut Starks because he couldn't play at the time. NO OTHER TEAM felt he was capable of playing in the league when we cut him. If he wasn't capable of playing at the start of the season we would either have to keep him and cut someone else, or put him on the PUP (can't play or practice for 6 weeks).

    Starks DID return when he was capable of playing. Why would we be thinking about what the season would have looked like if he didn't?

  3. #63
    Administrator steelz09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    3,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    Hampton didn't start the season on the PUP. He started the PRESEASON on the PUP. We didn't cut Hampton because he was a probowler who would have been picked up in a second. We did cut Starks because he couldn't play at the time. NO OTHER TEAM felt he was capable of playing in the league when we cut him. If he wasn't capable of playing at the start of the season we would either have to keep him and cut someone else, or put him on the PUP (can't play or practice for 6 weeks).

    Starks DID return when he was capable of playing. Why would we be thinking about what the season would have looked like if he didn't?
    Now, I feel a alot better..... We cut Harrison and no other team thought he was capable of playing including the Ravens who also cut him. Good thing we didn't base all of our decisions on how other teams evaluate players.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by steelz09 View Post
    Now, I feel a alot better..... We cut Harrison and no other team thought he was capable of playing including the Ravens who also cut him. Good thing we didn't base all of our decisions on how other teams evaluate players.
    So, you're saying that Starks would have been ready to play at a high level in week 1. I'm saying he wasn't ready to play in the NFL at the beginning of the year and that he needed time to continue his rehab and get in shape. I support my argument with the fact that no one else wanted him (despite the fact that he plays the second most important position on O and has 2 SB rings). You support your argument with...well nothing, except some comments about Casey Hampton and James Harrison which aren't related to the Starks situation. Then you try to refute the only fact we have about his readiness to play in the NFL by arguing that no NFL football team is qualified to evaluate LT play.

    Even if Harrison thing was relevant to the discussion, cutting him when we did was a good decision. He couldn't stay with a team because he was not coachable (he has said this himself). Perhaps cutting him helped him realize that he couldn't get by on talent alone. After he got that feedback from us and from the Ravens, maybe Harrison learned from the experience. If your argument is that the Steelers and the Ravens can't evaluate LB talent, I don't know who you think would be qualified to do so.

    I think that cutting Starks made him realise that he had to do more than show up to be good. I haven't seen him admit this publicly, but it seems like he was working much harder after he was cut than he is generally known for doing in the off-season. Maybe the fact that no one else in the league thought he was good enough made him work his ass off to get in game shape. If so, that's good motivation by Tomlin and cost savings to boot. I guess there was risk that he would get signed by someone else (just as there would be risk that he wouldn't get back into game shape if we kept him). We took that risk and it worked out because we signed him back (I haven't checked, but I would imagine that he was resigned at a lower number than he was cut at).

    At the worst, this decision cost us one game in a season that we went 12-4. If that's the "worst personnel decision under Tomlin", I guess it's another way we can show that we're incredibly spoiled as Steelers fans.

  5. #65
    Legend RuthlessBurgher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Where the Rubber Meets the Road (in NEPA)
    Posts
    21,601
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Blitz View Post
    I haven't checked, but I would imagine that he was resigned at a lower number than he was cut at)
    I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but I think Starks was scheduled to make something like $7 million when we cut him, and we signed him back for around $800,000 or so.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •