Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: These Steelers Better Than Those Steelers

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by eniparadoxgma View Post
    2 games. While he didn't register a sack he was in the backfield all day today and definitely made his presence felt by the Browns' QBs.
    Woodley was getting pressure but not sacks. People were bitching because of it. Now that Worilds is getting pressure and not sacks he's seen as playing great.

    Also Steelbuckeye please show me where I ever defended Woodley's contract. You can't so take your strawman argument elsewhere.

  2. #12
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    13,124
    Yes... trade Woodley, sign Worlids and then b#tchabout Worlids once he gets signed. Next man is always the best man. Smh...

    Why can't we enjoy our wins? lol...

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Woodley was getting pressure but not sacks. People were bitching because of it. Now that Worilds is getting pressure and not sacks he's seen as playing great.

    Also Steelbuckeye please show me where I ever defended Woodley's contract. You can't so take your strawman argument elsewhere.
    Understand that I wasn't attacking you "personally" ... I am however attacking anyone who still believes that Woodley is a valuable contributor to this defense over the long haul (read "worth his contract"). Three years in a row that this guy is missing important games because of injury (call it like it is; he's brittle) .... if it was you, me, or even a Head Coach, we'd be fired for this type of crap. And I realize that the collective bargaining agreement/salary cap "may" keep us from firing Woodley's underperforming overpaid butt ... however, a guy can dream can't he?!!!

    btw, this is NOT a strawman argument ... it's me standing front and forward saying Woodley has not/is not and will not live up to the amount of money he is being paid.
    Last edited by SteelBuckeye; 11-24-2013 at 07:54 PM.

  4. #14
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,901
    If a team is paying a guy $60M, he had better be a gamechanger in every sense of the word. Woodely can be called many things, but one thing he is not is a gamechanger. And it's been a while since his play has said so.

  5. #15
    This ^^^^^^

  6. #16
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Woooooo!
    Posts
    1,259
    All I know is that most teams demonstrate a noticeable difference when a playmaker is taken from the lineup. When Aaron Smith went down (for example) the difference was striking.

    I'm not hating on Lamar - but there has been no noticeable decrease in production with him out of the lineup and in fact an argument could be made for just the opposite.

    So at some point the front office has to decide if they're getting bang for their buck. That's not to say Worilds is the answer - but Woodley (for whatever reasons) the past few seasons has not put a stranglehold on the left side position. If fans like us are questioning it - you can be sure the front office is as well.

  7. #17
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,148
    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz View Post
    Yes... trade Woodley, sign Worlids and then b#tchabout Worlids once he gets signed. Next man is always the best man. Smh...

    Why can't we enjoy our wins? lol...
    Some people are not happy unless they find something to complain about.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by SteelBuckeye View Post
    Understand that I wasn't attacking you "personally" ... I am however attacking anyone who still believes that Woodley is a valuable contributor to this defense over the long haul (read "worth his contract"). Three years in a row that this guy is missing important games because of injury (call it like it is; he's brittle) .... if it was you, me, or even a Head Coach, we'd be fired for this type of crap. And I realize that the collective bargaining agreement/salary cap "may" keep us from firing Woodley's underperforming overpaid butt ... however, a guy can dream can't he?!!!

    btw, this is NOT a strawman argument ... it's me standing front and forward saying Woodley has not/is not and will not live up to the amount of money he is being paid.
    It's a strawman argument because you set up a strawman (Woodley contract) then tear it down when that wasn't what I was arguing. It would be like me taking you to task for saying that you wanted Redman to start when you never said that.

    Fact is that Worilds hasn't done anything of note for 3 1/2 years. He got benched earlier in the year because he was playing so bad. But now that he has played almost exactly the way Woodley was playing against 2 rookies last week and the clowns this week everybody loves him.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    It's a strawman argument because you set up a strawman (Woodley contract) then tear it down when that wasn't what I was arguing. It would be like me taking you to task for saying that you wanted Redman to start when you never said that.

    Fact is that Worilds hasn't done anything of note for 3 1/2 years. He got benched earlier in the year because he was playing so bad. But now that he has played almost exactly the way Woodley was playing against 2 rookies last week and the clowns this week everybody loves him.
    Ahhh, I see your point. Now, riddle me this Batman .. and I'm not saying you have said this in the past ... Has Worilds, over the last year and a half played at roughly the same level as Woodley? If you agree that this is so, who has given you/us more "Bang" for the buck?
    Because where I'm sitting, Woodley hasn't given us much since he put his John Hancock on that nice FAT contract. So, if a cheaper player is playing (this year) at the same level as a FAT cat contract player ... well for me, I'm wondering why the FAT cat has such a large piece of the pie (especially if he's proving himself to be either brittle or unmotivated since getting his $$$$$).

    On a serious note, I think Woodley's HUGE contract is the prism through which most of us are viewing his play vs Worild's play; and the view ain't so pretty through that looking glass.
    Last edited by SteelBuckeye; 11-24-2013 at 11:41 PM.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by SteelBuckeye View Post
    Ahhh, I see your point. Now, riddle me this Batman .. and I'm not saying you have said this in the past ... Has Worilds, over the last year and a half played at roughly the same level as Woodley? If you agree that this is so, who has given you/us more "Bang" for the buck?
    Because where I'm sitting, Woodley hasn't given us much since he put his John Hancock on that nice FAT contract. So, if a cheaper player is playing (this year) at the same level as a FAT cat contract player ... well for me, I'm wondering why the FAT cat has such a large piece of the pie (especially if he's proving himself to be either brittle or unmotivated since getting his $$$$$).

    On a serious note, I think Woodley's HUGE contract is the prism through which most of us are viewing his play vs Worild's play; and the view ain't so pretty through that looking glass.
    Woodley has done 100X more for this team than Worilds. He helped win a SB in 2008 and get back there in 2010. Why not look through that prism? How much of Worilds rookie contract has he earned? What exactly has he done? He was benched THIS year. Now he's had two good games and people love the guy. He's beaten two rookies and the clowns. I'll take one SB win and another showing over what Worilds has done against Detroit and the clowns.

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
  •