Steve McLendon

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Steve McLendon

SUNDAY, 23 OCTOBER 2011

WRITTEN BY ED BOUCHETTE



- Steve McLendon looked pretty good in his first NFL start, at nose tackle. The Cardinals had 73 yards on 19 carries and McLendon was involved. He was second on the team, unofficially, with five tackles and also had one for a loss. (First was Woodley with seven).

"He is new but he is not new to us,'' Tomlin said. McLendon was an undrafted rookie from Troy State in 2009 and made their practice squad. He mad ethe squad again last year but when Aaron Smith was hurt, they signed him and he played in seven games. He made the team this year and looks like someone who might play the position for them in the future.

"I have a lot of respect for what he is capable of in that locker room,'' Tomlin said. "Our offensive line, that is one of the guys they kind of whisper about, being tough to block. He had an opportunity to step in and do it today, and I think he represented himself very well.''

[url="http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/pro-sports/steelers/112729-ed-aaron-smith-says-hes-disappointedq"]http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/inde ... appointedq[/url]

[SteelCrazy]

Re: Steve McLendon

We haven't seen any real drop off with either Hoke or McLendon in there. You gotta start thinking Big Hamp is way overpaid and/or his days are numbered.

Pahn, you're the Grim Reaper, man.

Seriously, I see your point here. Alot of such evaluation is going to happen in the front office after this season.

Yeah I hate to be so negative with players who have contributed much to the Steelers organization, but enough is enough. They've got too many old guys who are way overpaid and injured too often. I wanna see them have enough money to sign guys like Mike Wallace next year.

Whether Mike Wallace signs a long term contract or a tag is placed on him, he'll be wearing a Steelers uniform next year.

[SteelCrazy]

Re: Steve McLendon

If Hampton, Hines and Farrior would retire we would save somewhere around $16,000,000
in 2012. That doesnt include money borrowed from the 2012 cap if that still affects us cause I dont know. All 3 are deeply loved, but the young guns are ready to take over and they're not needed. McLendon is a FA next year along with Wallace, Legrusky, Redman, Ramon Foster,Keenan Lewis, Ryan Mundy and Mr. insignificant David Johnson.

[Eich]

Re: Steve McLendon

He had a nice game. But shouldn't we wait until we play an actual good team before we say that we don't miss Big Snack & Hokie?

[fezziwig]

Re: Steve McLendon

I like what I see from McClendon and Hoke. Big Snack played hard prior to a new contract but, has given much less than any other season that I can remember.

I've always felt Hoke did better than Hampton and now, so does McClendon.

[Pahn711]

Re: Steve McLendon

Just in the past decade, the Steelers lost Plaxico Burress, Antwan Randle El, and Nate Washington to free agency (and probably would have lost Santonio Holmes too if he got that far). I think my concern about the Steelers not paying big name wide receivers is pretty warranted.

I don't really see how you're comparing Burress, El and Nate Washington with what Mike Wallace brings to the table. El and Washington wanted ridiculous money and the Steelers were right in letting them go. You will have a hard time defending a stance that says the Steelers made a mistake letting those two walk. Burress may be a bit easier to defend, but, he hasn't been anything special since his departure and the Steelers replaced him with Holmes.

Sure, Wallace is showing to have more upside than any of them, but I still say all three of those guys showed promise with the Steelers, and had respectable careers with their new teams. Who is to say in hindsight they wouldn't have continued to be successful with the Steelers. And it wasn't so much that they wanted outrageous amounts of money, but that other teams were willing to pay it.

Burress had 2 (almost 3) thousand yard seasons with the Giants, not to mention helping them win a Super Bowl. So to say he hasn't "been anything special" since leaving the Steelers is outright false. He also left the Steelers in 2004, so he was NOT replaced by Holmes (who was drafted in 2006).

Randle El was averaging around 500-600 yards a season in Washington. Thats about what he did in Pittsburgh, and I agree he was overpaid, but he still made enough big plays that I would have liked the Steelers to keep him in his prime.

Washington is averaging 600 yards the last two seasons along with 6 touchdowns each (all with weak play at qb, this year with Hasselbeck hes already on pace to go over 1,000). He wasn't paid such an outrageous sum as to be unaffordable, the Steelers could have kept him. Hindsight is always 20-20, but if the Steelers didn't draft Brown and Sanders when they did, we could still be talking about how it was a mistake to let Washington go.

My point is, even if the Steelers guessed right in letting these guys go, it does prove they aren't afraid to let receivers who want too much money walk. I don't want money to be the reason for any of the three young guys we got, but it seems inevitable.

[Slapstick]

Re: Steve McLendon

He had a nice game. But shouldn't we wait until we play an actual good team before we say that we don't miss Big Snack & Hokie?

No. There are two reasons for this:

1) The Cardinals are an NFL team and are on the Steelers' schedule, whether or not you think they are a "good team".

2) The Cardinals are exactly the kind of team that Hampton has been underperforming against so far this season.

[chiken]

Re: Steve McLendon

Just in the past decade, the Steelers lost Plaxico Burress, Antwan Randle El, and Nate Washington to free agency (and probably would have lost Santonio Holmes too if he got that far). I think my concern about the Steelers not paying big name wide receivers is pretty warranted.

I don't really see how you're comparing Burress, El and Nate Washington with what Mike Wallace brings to the table. El and Washington wanted ridiculous money and the Steelers were right in letting them go. You will have a hard time defending a stance that says the Steelers made a mistake letting those two walk. Burress may be a bit easier to defend, but, he hasn't been anything special since his departure and the Steelers replaced him with Holmes.

None of those receivers we let go of were the best receiver on our roster at the time.. Hines made them expendable.. Wallace is the best in the best in the business taking the top off.. It would be a huge mistake to let him walk. (it wont happen) They will find his money. (It will cost them Sanders or Brown but Ben to Wallace will be a staple)

Sure, Wallace is showing to have more upside than any of them, but I still say all three of those guys showed promise with the Steelers, and had respectable careers with their new teams. Who is to say in hindsight they wouldn't have continued to be successful with the Steelers. And it wasn't so much that they wanted outrageous amounts of money, but that other teams were willing to pay it.

Burress had 2 (almost 3) thousand yard seasons with the Giants, not to mention helping them win a Super Bowl. So to say he hasn't "been anything special" since leaving the Steelers is outright false. He also left the Steelers in 2004, so he was NOT replaced by Holmes (who was drafted in 2006).

Randle El was averaging around 500-600 yards a season in Washington. Thats about what he did in Pittsburgh, and I agree he was overpaid, but he still made enough big plays that I would have liked the Steelers to keep him in his prime.

Washington is averaging 600 yards the last two seasons along with 6 touchdowns each (all with weak play at qb, this year with Hasselbeck hes already on pace to go over 1,000). He wasn't paid such an outrageous sum as to be unaffordable, the Steelers could have kept him. Hindsight is always 20-20, but if the Steelers didn't draft Brown and Sanders when they did, we could still be talking about how it was a mistake to let Washington go.

My point is, even if the Steelers guessed right in letting these guys go, it does prove they aren't afraid to let receivers who want too much money walk. I don't want money to be the reason for any of the three young guys we got, but it seems inevitable.

[LouSteel]

Re: Steve McLendon

1) The Cardinals are an NFL team and are on the Steelers' schedule, whether or not you think they are a "good team".

Every team can certainly win any day, but it's disingenuous to claim that a win over an 0-6 or 1-5 team is as significant as a win over a playoff caliber team. Beating up on the dregs of the league does get you a win, but doesn't say anything about the talent level of your players.

2) The Cardinals are exactly the kind of team that Hampton has been underperforming against so far this season.

The whole DL is going to be tested against the Pats. I'm looking forward to it.

[Slapstick]

Re: Steve McLendon

Every team can certainly win any day, but it's disingenuous to claim that a win over an 0-6 or 1-5 team is as significant as a win over a playoff caliber team. Beating up on the dregs of the league does get you a win, but doesn't say anything about the talent level of your players.

Again, I disagree...I don't think that you can have it both ways...

Either a team can win on any given Sunday and, therefore, no opponent can be taken lightly or there are games that can be considered wins before they are even played...

I choose to believe the former...therefore, I have not written off next Sunday's game as a loss...

[papillon]

Re: Steve McLendon

Just in the past decade, the Steelers lost Plaxico Burress, Antwan Randle El, and Nate Washington to free agency (and probably would have lost Santonio Holmes too if he got that far). I think my concern about the Steelers not paying big name wide receivers is pretty warranted.

I don't really see how you're comparing Burress, El and Nate Washington with what Mike Wallace brings to the table. El and Washington wanted ridiculous money and the Steelers were right in letting them go. You will have a hard time defending a stance that says the Steelers made a mistake letting those two walk. Burress may be a bit easier to defend, but, he hasn't been anything special since his departure and the Steelers replaced him with Holmes.

Sure, Wallace is showing to have more upside than any of them, but I still say all three of those guys showed promise with the Steelers, and had respectable careers with their new teams. Who is to say in hindsight they wouldn't have continued to be successful with the Steelers. And it wasn't so much that they wanted outrageous amounts of money, but that other teams were willing to pay it.

Burress had 2 (almost 3) thousand yard seasons with the Giants, not to mention helping them win a Super Bowl. So to say he hasn't "been anything special" since leaving the Steelers is outright false. He also left the Steelers in 2004, so he was NOT replaced by Holmes (who was drafted in 2006).

Randle El was averaging around 500-600 yards a season in Washington. Thats about what he did in Pittsburgh, and I agree he was overpaid, but he still made enough big plays that I would have liked the Steelers to keep him in his prime.

Washington is averaging 600 yards the last two seasons along with 6 touchdowns each (all with weak play at qb, this year with Hasselbeck hes already on pace to go over 1,000). He wasn't paid such an outrageous sum as to be unaffordable, the Steelers could have kept him. Hindsight is always 20-20, but if the Steelers didn't draft Brown and Sanders when they did, we could still be talking about how it was a mistake to let Washington go.

My point is, even if the Steelers guessed right in letting these guys go, it does prove they aren't afraid to let receivers who want too much money walk. I don't want money to be the reason for any of the three young guys we got, but it seems inevitable.

We can debate whether Holmes was Buress' replacement or not, because of the years between Burress leaving and Holmes signing. But, I do know that when Holmes was drafted he was drafted because of the void at WR that Burress left after he was gone. Burress is the only one that is close to being a mistake and I don't believe he was showing the upside that Wallace is currently showing.

El and Washington were solid dime-a-dozen receivers and letting them walk and finding replacements wasn't difficult. If Wallace isn't willing to accept a fair offer and wants to be the number one paid WR in the league, my guess is that he'll get to go and test the FA waters and get his big payday. It will be a shame, but its how the Steeler do business. Sanders and Brown will hold down the fort and the Steelers will go looking for another WR to replace Wallace.

If the Steelers want to retain Wallace and he's willing to give a little bit, he'll be a Steeler. If he isn't willing to give a little (Ben did, Woodley did, Harrison definitely did) then he'll probably be playing in a different uniform.

Pappy

[RuthlessBurgher]

Re: Steve McLendon

Just in the past decade, the Steelers lost Plaxico Burress, Antwan Randle El, and Nate Washington to free agency (and probably would have lost Santonio Holmes too if he got that far). I think my concern about the Steelers not paying big name wide receivers is pretty warranted.

I don't really see how you're comparing Burress, El and Nate Washington with what Mike Wallace brings to the table. El and Washington wanted ridiculous money and the Steelers were right in letting them go. You will have a hard time defending a stance that says the Steelers made a mistake letting those two walk. Burress may be a bit easier to defend, but, he hasn't been anything special since his departure and the Steelers replaced him with Holmes.

Sure, Wallace is showing to have more upside than any of them, but I still say all three of those guys showed promise with the Steelers, and had respectable careers with their new teams. Who is to say in hindsight they wouldn't have continued to be successful with the Steelers. And it wasn't so much that they wanted outrageous amounts of money, but that other teams were willing to pay it.

Burress had 2 (almost 3) thousand yard seasons with the Giants, not to mention helping them win a Super Bowl. So to say he hasn't "been anything special" since leaving the Steelers is outright false. He also left the Steelers in 2004, so he was NOT replaced by Holmes (who was drafted in 2006).

Randle El was averaging around 500-600 yards a season in Washington. Thats about what he did in Pittsburgh, and I agree he was overpaid, but he still made enough big plays that I would have liked the Steelers to keep him in his prime.

Washington is averaging 600 yards the last two seasons along with 6 touchdowns each (all with weak play at qb, this year with Hasselbeck hes already on pace to go over 1,000). He wasn't paid such an outrageous sum as to be unaffordable, the Steelers could have kept him. Hindsight is always 20-20, but if the Steelers didn't draft Brown and Sanders when they did, we could still be talking about how it was a mistake to let Washington go.

My point is, even if the Steelers guessed right in letting these guys go, it does prove they aren't afraid to let receivers who want too much money walk. I don't want money to be the reason for any of the three young guys we got, but it seems inevitable.

We can debate whether Holmes was Buress' replacement or not, because of the years between Burress leaving and Holmes signing. But, I do know that when Holmes was drafted he was drafted because of the void at WR that Burress left after he was gone. Burress is the only one that is close to being a mistake and I don't believe he was showing the upside that Wallace is currently showing.

El and Washington were solid dime-a-dozen receivers and letting them walk and finding replacements wasn't difficult. If Wallace isn't willing to accept a fair offer and wants to be the number one paid WR in the league, my guess is that he'll get to go and test the FA waters and get his big payday. It will be a shame, but its how the Steeler do business. Sanders and Brown will hold down the fort and the Steelers will go looking for another WR to replace Wallace.

If the Steelers want to retain Wallace and he's willing to give a little bit, he'll be a Steeler. If he isn't willing to give a little (Ben did, Woodley did, Harrison definitely did) then he'll probably be playing in a different uniform.

Pappy

I'm with Pap on this one. Burress and Holmes were supremely talented, and justified where we took them in the first round. However, they both diva-ed their way out of Pittsburgh. Don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya.

Randle El and Washington were both excellent role players for us, but that's all they were. They had success in our system as #3 WR's, and other teams paid them as if they were elite-level starters. Randle El probably would have had continued success with us if he never left us for Washington as slot receiver, return specialist, and trick play expert, but I can't blame the guy for leaving for much $GREEN$-er pastures. Nate is starting for Tennessee right now by default. Britt's hurt this year, Moss failed there last year, they are signing guys like Donnie Avery off the scrap heap, etc. If he were on the Steelers this year, do you seriously think he'd be starting? Not only wouldn't he be starting, he'd be holding the Jerricho Cotchery role as veteran insurance...nothing more.

Plax and Stonio were big-time pains in the ass (their antics were no longer welcome), and ARE and Nate were expendable depth (nice to keep around, but not worth paying as if they were top notch starters). That is why those 4 guys are no longer here. Mike Wallace doesn't fit into either of these categories. He isn't the diva that Plaxico and Santonio were, and he's arguably more talented than both of them as well. There is no reason for the Steelers not to extend him to a long-term big money contract (which we will be able to afford once a number of our aging overpriced vets start retiring).

[Pahn711]

Re: Steve McLendon

We can debate whether Holmes was Buress' replacement or not, because of the years between Burress leaving and Holmes signing. But, I do know that when Holmes was drafted he was drafted because of the void at WR that Burress left after he was gone. Burress is the only one that is close to being a mistake and I don't believe he was showing the upside that Wallace is currently showing.

Technically, Holmes replaced Randle El, but yeah you could argue he was ultimately the spiritual successor to Burress.

As far as comparing Burress to Wallace, he had 2 1,000 yard seasons along with 2 seasons where his yards per catch were similarly high. Until Wallace has a larger body of work under his belt, I think their upside can be compared, but thats just my opinion.

[Pahn711]

Re: Steve McLendon

Nate is starting for Tennessee right now by default. Britt's hurt this year, Moss failed there last year, they are signing guys like Donnie Avery off the scrap heap, etc. If he were on the Steelers this year, do you seriously think he'd be starting? Not only wouldn't he be starting, he'd be holding the Jerricho Cotchery role as veteran insurance...nothing more.

We can't know for sure how Washington would have done here. You admitted El could have been more successful staying in Pittsburgh, its very possible Washington could have done the same. The Titans passing attack has been horrible due in part to its qb situation the last few years, now with Hasselbeck, Washington may break 1,000 this year. So I don't think its far-fetched to say if Washington stayed with the team they might not have drafted both Sanders and Brown, and he might have evolved in the offense enough to start. Theres alot of "ifs" there but I don't think its an unreasonable prediction.

In principle I agree with both you and pap, all I'm really trying to express is my concern that the Steelers will carry these policies forward with guys like Wallace and Brown in the future.

There is no reason for the Steelers not to extend him to a long-term big money contract (which we will be able to afford once a number of our aging overpriced vets start retiring).

But see thats what sparked this conversation, the Steelers ineptitude at letting go of overpriced vets. I don't think it will be as easy as you imply, but lets hope so.

[Slapstick]

Re: Steve McLendon

But see thats what sparked this conversation, the Steelers ineptitude at letting go of overpriced vets. I don't think it will be as easy as you imply, but lets hope so.

The Steelers are very "ept" at letting go of high priced vets...

The vets that they keep are either still productive or important for other reasons...