Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Dan Conner

  1. #11
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Oviedo View Post
    The answer with Connor is clear. He'd have to wait a year or two before he would be deemed knowledgeable enough to play in the defense so they did what they always do--default to the player who "knows" the defense whether he has less talent or not.
    By what measure is Dan Connor the more talented player? He has 123 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 1 sack and 2 passes defensed - in 4 years.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...C/ConnDa99.htm

    He has also never started 16 games. He has either a talent problem or a durability problem. He might have been a decent depth signing, but Foote, for all his flaws, is still the better player.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyesq View Post
    By what measure is Dan Connor the more talented player? He has 123 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 1 sack and 2 passes defensed - in 4 years.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...C/ConnDa99.htm

    He has also never started 16 games. He has either a talent problem or a durability problem. He might have been a decent depth signing, but Foote, for all his flaws, is still the better player.
    And an experienced starter on this D. That has to count for something.

    And as to whoever earlier said that he signed for $2.5, that is incorrect, that is the guaranteed money. He will count $1.83M against the cap each season he is on the team. That is a number that allows him to either start at tremendous value, or be a backup at a reasonable price. If we cut him after the season, the hit is only $666K, after the following year only $333K

    Like him or not, this contract is a good deal for the team. It allows a starter to be brought in via draft or FA, or, if your starter is only on the cap at $1.83, it allows money to be spent elsewhere.

  3. #13
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hotlanta
    Posts
    1,875
    Foote: (from Bleacher report - the seventh worst rating is from profootball focus)

    "The re-signing of Larry Foote does little to help fortify the interior of the Steelers’ defense. In addition to bringing a nearly 33-year-old player back to the NFL’s oldest defense on a per-snap basis, Pittsburgh also gave another go to 2012’s seventh-worst inside linebacker at stopping the run. Even playing next to one of the league’s best inside linebackers may not be enough to conceal Foote’s weaknesses."

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
  •