Don't resign Shazier save for Tuitt

[Shoe]

Difference between the two?
ONE is a game changer.

Without Shazier we would STILL be looking for our first playoff win since our last super bowl season.

Just because they are a game-changer, doesn't mean it is the better choice. The question is whether you want a Bob Sanders for three great years, or an Aaron Smith for 8 or 9 years.

[NorthCoast]

Vince Williams has more tackles in his first 3 yrs than James Harrison or Ryan Shazier. Timmons had 9 more tackles than Williams.

I saw nothing wrong with the defense when Williams was playing in the last game.

Which brings up an interesting question; was it the players or the scheme that changed the defense so much last week?

[phillyesq]

Vince Williams has more tackles in his first 3 yrs than James Harrison or Ryan Shazier. Timmons had 9 more tackles than Williams.

I saw nothing wrong with the defense when Williams was playing in the last game.

Which brings up an interesting question; was it the players or the scheme that changed the defense so much last week?

I think Vince Williams is and will be a valuable cog on defense. He probably won't be a star, but he is a solid tackler and he can deliver a punishing hit. Not everybody on defense can be a star. I see him as a Larry Foote or Earl Holmes type - a good, complimentary ILB.

Shazier is on the 3rd year of his rookie contract. You have him on another year of his rookie deal next year. After that, you can keep him for a 5th year by exercising the option. So there is no imminent decision coming on his contract.

Tuitt is also in his third year. You can keep him on a rookie deal through the season. Typically, I'd expect the Steelers to rework his deal in training camp, but with AB and LB likely to be extended, that may wait.

[BradshawsHairdresser]

Vince Williams has more tackles in his first 3 yrs than James Harrison or Ryan Shazier. Timmons had 9 more tackles than Williams.

I saw nothing wrong with the defense when Williams was playing in the last game.

Which brings up an interesting question; was it the players or the scheme that changed the defense so much last week?

That is an interesting question. Some of the posters on here always want to put all the blame on the players when the D doesn't perform well. But I think that the defensive changes made for the Chiefs game shows us that the scheme can also be an important factor. For whatever reason, the coaches went with a bland, no-pressure scheme the first three weeks, which led to the stinker in Philly. A more aggressive scheme definitely helped the D vs. KC.

[Starlifter]

That is an interesting question. Some of the posters on here always want to put all the blame on the players when the D doesn't perform well. But I think that the defensive changes made for the Chiefs game shows us that the scheme can also be an important factor. For whatever reason, the coaches went with a bland, no-pressure scheme the first three weeks, which led to the stinker in Philly. A more aggressive scheme definitely helped the D vs. KC.

Sometimes coaches can outsmart themselves. We sat back and hoped the rookie in Philly would make mistakes. He didn't. We should have learned that lesson when we inexcusably did the same to Tim tebow in a playoff game and allowed him to have his best passing game ever. The following week bellichick showed us how much a difference coaching can make.

[SanAntonioSteelerFan]

Sometimes coaches can outsmart themselves. We sat back and hoped the rookie in Philly would make mistakes. He didn't. We should have learned that lesson when we inexcusably did the same to Tim tebow in a playoff game and allowed him to have his best passing game ever. The following week bellichick showed us how much a difference coaching can make.

I don't have a problem at all with that as an initial strategy against a rookie QB. But it would be an unforgivable travesty to not make in-game adjustments if that didn't work.

Was anyone able to tell, did Butler and co. stubbornly stick with the same scheme, or did they try to change (to put more pressure on QB) but the personnel just couldn't get done?

[Shawn]

sigh.......

this is why there's not a lot of competition to be an NFL GM.

Look, I understand the concern over Shaziers injuries. But when the guy is healthy he is a game changer. Just like last year when he stripped the ball in the bungles playoff game with 1:50 left and GAME CHANGED the outcome.

If he can't stay healthy, so be it. But to dump him because of previous injuries seems very short sighted to me.

I think you are over reading the OPs point. It's all dependent on asking price. Is Shazier worth 8-10 million a year? Heck no. Is he worth 2-4? Yes. It's all dependent on asking price and I wouldn't drop that big money on a guy who cant stay on the field.

[Shawn]

we could have had a guy who plays just like that a couple of years ago

his name is cj mosely

You are preaching to the choir.

[K Train]

I highly doubt it comes down to deciding between one or the other...its not really Mike Wallace vs Antonio Brown. Really no reason they cant keep both, I imagine Timmons will be gone by then and if hes not he will be back on a much more cap friendly deal. They just signed vince to a team friendly deal that provides quality depth

Shazier is a complete monster even if you are mad that he gets hurt, he gives it his all on every play and makes a difference

[RuthlessBurgher]

Should never have resigned Troy Polamalu to a big contract. He's hurt too much.
Should never have resigned Ben Roethlisberger to a big contract. He's hurt too much.
Should never have resigned Maurkice Pouncey to a big contract. He's hurt too much.

[squidkid]

Should never have resigned Troy Polamalu to a big contract. He's hurt too much.
Should never have resigned Ben Roethlisberger to a big contract. He's hurt too much.
Should never have resigned Maurkice Pouncey to a big contract. He's hurt too much.

the organization agreed with this also. thats why they were hoping he would retire so they didnt have to cut him

[RuthlessBurgher]

the organization agreed with this also. thats why they were hoping he would retire so they didnt have to cut him

Yeah, sure...after he was in the league for over a decade...well into his 30's when he was a fraction of his former self. He earned his rookie contract in 2003. He earned the 4 year extension he got in 2007. He earned another 4 year extension he got in 2011. The mistake was his FOURTH contract with the team, another 3 year extension signed in 2014.

This thread is advocating letting Ryan Shazier in his prime walk after his FIRST contract with the team is up when his rookie deal expires because they are concerned that he is hurt too much. Just a slight difference there, eh?

[squidkid]

Yeah, sure...after he was in the league for over a decade...well into his 30's when he was a fraction of his former self. He earned his rookie contract in 2003. He earned the 4 year extension he got in 2007. He earned another 4 year extension he got in 2011. The mistake was his FOURTH contract with the team, another 3 year extension signed in 2014.

This thread is advocating letting Ryan Shazier in his prime walk after his FIRST contract with the team is up when his rookie deal expires because they are concerned that he is hurt too much. Just a slight difference there, eh?

actually no.
polamalu played in all 16 games his first 3 season and played 13 of the 16 in his fourth season. (95%)
whereas shaxier has played in 9 out of 16 in 2014, 12 out of 16 in 2015 and 3 out of 4 (and soon to be 3 out of 5) this year.........(66%)
so this is a HUGE difference eh?

[NorthCoast]

actually no.
polamalu played in all 16 games his first 3 season and played 13 of the 16 in his fourth season. (95%)
whereas shaxier has played in 9 out of 16 in 2014, 12 out of 16 in 2015 and 3 out of 4 (and soon to be 3 out of 5) this year.........(66%)
so this is a HUGE difference eh?

I agree. It's the early history comparison that is relevant for Shazier. Maybe he can strengthen and beef up to avoid getting nicked up but so far he seems to be playing a style that doesn't bode well for a long term career in the NFL.
As others have pointed out, gotta decide what his contract is worth for playing 12 games a year. $5M/yr might be tops in my mind.

[BradshawsHairdresser]

I agree. It's the early history comparison that is relevant for Shazier. Maybe he can strengthen and beef up to avoid getting nicked up but so far he seems to be playing a style that doesn't bode well for a long term career in the NFL.
As others have pointed out, gotta decide what his contract is worth for playing 12 games a year. $5M/yr might be tops in my mind.

$$$$$$$$$$$$