Thoughts on team turnover 2024-'25

A few weeks ago OTC published an article on team turnover this offseason. They basically took a look how much total turnover each team experienced as a function of their retention rates - offense, defense, and overall - then drilled down on players they deemed as significant contributors (30% snap share or greater), and finally, looked at what percentage of each team's losses were currently out of the NFL. The caveat I'd add with the final table is that there will be some picked up between now and September, but the general trend shouldn't change significantly.

The Steelers retention rate on offense was 62.1%, tied with the Jets for eighth-lowest in the league. On defense they tied with the Patriots for tenth-lowest at 67.7%, giving them the tenth-lowest amount of players retained at 67.2%

Top contributor retention was worse. Here, the Steelers were tied with the Titans for the bottom in the league on offense keeping 53.3%, while on defense the climbed to 11th with 73.3% of the players retained. Overall, they tied with the Raiders for the fourth-worst retention of significant contributors last season, at 63.3%.

Finally, looking at how the players lost were viewed by the rest of the league, only 10.3% of their total players lost are currently out of the league, tied with the Seahawks for twelfth-lowest. Similarly, they were tied at eleventh-lowest in significant contributors lost, with 3.3% currently unsigned.

There are a couple of ways of looking at this. Obviously, continuity within a roster is a good thing, assuming you've done well in constructing it. But that doesn't mean our low retentions are a bad thing within the context of a new GM who only just completed his third draft. And Colbert & Co. did not do well constructing much of anything foundational in his final years.

Similarly, that the bulk of the players lost are still in the league can be viewed as good thing if one assumes that means they were quality players. But believing that then raises the question of why they weren't retained. For me, the reality is somewhere in the middle.

The team needed an overhaul of both of its front lines. The poor returns of 2018-2022 drafts set the stage for some fallout in retention as Khan and Weidl were brought in. Khan isn't without fault - his missing out on the Aiyuk acquisition last summer came back to bite the team hard when Pickens went down for three games during a rougher stretch of the schedule.

Still, there's no magic wand for conjuring a franchise-level QB. Wilson and Fields were both misses (though it can be argued that with a better WR2 last year Wilson may still be around, for better or worse), and not having a backup plan to Aiyuk was disastrous. Khan is setting himself up to grab his QB and more in next year's draft through his stockpiling of picks, while Rodgers now serves as the bridge.

Unfortunately for him, keeping the team's head just above water while executing this plan isn't well received from segments of the fanbase who've grown fatigued at seeing similar results in the years before he assumed the GM role. That two of the three top figureheads still remain a part of the decision process doesn't help matters (nor does the fact that Khan himself was an internal promotion). All of which sets the stage for next offseason being a pivotal moment in Khan's GM career.

 

Still have the same HC. As long as the owners insist on just putting lipstick on the pig, the mediocre results will continue regardless of the players on the field.

 

The high percentage of lost contributors on iffense is I guess explained by losing both starting QBs, starting RB and no.1 WR.

I don’t feel particularly bad about any of those releases though. The offense needed to retool. If Kaleb Johnson steps up and Metcalf plays like he can then it’s like for like or improvement.

 

Just my thoughts on our roster pre-TC. Keep in mind I will assume players will work out until they simply don't.


The OL is rebuilt and younger. Now just has to get better and more consistent.


The DL is younger. Replacements should make this group stronger and with better depth.


I know many do not, but I like the RB, WR, and TE rooms. Could they be improved? Always. But I don't think they are bad.


QB room is wait and see. Barring injury I feel good about it.


LBs are a stronger group now than for most of the recent past.


Secondary is full for a change. We may actually have a good rotation this season.


Personnel turnover can be challenging when it takes guys a longer time to become unit and working together smoothly. But there's always going to be some element of chaos on a football field.


Let's GO!

 

Not worried about any of the players they lost. The only one they’ll miss on the field is Pickens but he had to go for obvious reasons. Najee was incredibly durable but not very efficient or dynamic and I don’t think it made any sense to pay him long term. DMJ was always going to be gone with Fautanu coming back and the two QB’s were placeholders really.

Im happy with how the team is being built from the inside out and it was always going to take time. Khan inherited a fairly depleted roster in 2022 and he had to deal with the Pickett mess which wasn’t of his making, albeit he was a senior figure in the front office.

It would be nice to have a franchise QB but I am not seeing any opportunities missed in that respect since Khan took over. They haven’t been in a position to draft one and they had to give Kenny some time to show them that he wasn’t the answer. They’ll take another swing soon.

They have a lot of picks next year and will be able to add real depth to the roster. One of the things that frustrated me a little in the latter Colbert years was that they were continually trading away picks in-season for veteran players to plug roster gaps. Every team does this to an extent but for several years it seemed like they down a couple of picks going into the draft. This reduces your chances of finding a late round gem or development player and erodes roster depth over time. Khan seems to value picks more and is taking a different approach.

 

holy fuk n sh!t

i was thinking fumbles and ints the whole read.

 

d.moore jr.
l.ogunjobi
j.daniels
g.pickens
d.kazee
d.jackson
m.adams
n.harris
k.allen
j.fields
r.wilson
v.jefferson
t.matakevich
e.roberts
m.pruitt
d.rush
p.smith
m.williams
r.willams
j. elliott
t.edmunds
a.shampklin
a.ogundeji
t.graham
c. sutton

all loses. probably not done yet.

 

First off, the fact that players were not retained but still playing in the league is an indicator that the Steelers scouting has improved (although it's tough to say without studying the released players' current team statuses). Secondly, good teams with good coaches not only expect turnover, but know how to deal with it. Savvy GMs can turn turnover into draft capital, keep the roster from aging out, and remain competitive with good scouting. Rooney needs to treat the coaching like the coaches treat the players regarding turnover. It's a bottom-line business, and the bottom-line hasn't improved much in the last decade.

 

When I look at this list I'm thinking good riddance. I'm glad they're gone.

 

If any one of them was worth keeping they would still be here

(at the price)

 

Ah .....there are a few good players on there.

 

At the price is the key sentence, and also because they.... think(which is also a keyword) that they may have someone better, just as good, and,or cheaper.

 

agreed. i don't see too many we can't live without. i did like elandon roberts.

 

I feel Jackson should have been kept one more year. We may have let a decent/cheap player go.

 

He wasn't good in man coverage and got nicked up too often.

 

My statistics professor used to say "Statistics, those damn statistics". He would then point out how the same data set can be used to support multiple viewpoints. I think this article fits into that same area. It is just data. You can use it to argue that we have bad retention, or that we don't recruit quality players that we want to retain, or that we have a bad front office and people don't want to stay here, or that we don't pay quality players so they leave. So many ways to interpret the data.

Me, I feel that we got rid of some people that were going to cost far above their value, some that were underperforming or not fitting into the Arthur Smith plan, and some with behavior problems. Nobody that we got rid of is someone that I would fall on my sword to retain. I would have liked to have kept GP, but his antics and lack of effort on plays he was not the receiver being targeted also keep me from being overly upset about it.

On a side note, I hate data sets that say '4th lowest' or something like that. Because that same data set will also have points that say '7th highest'. What is the relation between 4th lowest and 7th highest? Who is better, the tied for 14th highest, or the tied for 14th lowest? They are better off just saying 1st, 2nd, 23rd.....etc. It provides a better comparison of the data.

 

I get what you're saying here, but since we all know how many teams are in the NFL, it's kind of a half-dozen of one, six of the other argument.

As for what you (and your stats prof) say about these type of data sets, I agree. That's why I noted there were 'a couple' of ways at looking at what was being presented. I've seen many similar presentations over the years. (Not that I'm saying I think OTC was slinging a narrative off of this; I don't.)

 

he is not bad. injured a good deal when he was here. he got a two year 13 mil, deal. pierre played a good bit later in the year when he was injured. i liked him though.

 

This is a QB league. The rules enforce that, the NFL coverage drives that agenda, it is a QB centric sport.
The Steelers are missing that, not as bad as some teams but still missing it.
Colbert is viewed as a pretty good GM in the sport. He does have respect.

I view him as above the watermark, but not great. He's had some bad misses and taken some risks.
I think he did see the end of Big Ben coming and did attempt to prepare but missed on the Mason Rudolph pick though he did pick him in the 3rd and Rudolph did have some cred.
So I view Mason as one of those picks that is a risk that could have paid off.
But there were other moves that were inconsistent.

Omar on a good day is at best average. Most of the time he operates below the watermark.
Omar is on the same path as Colbert, career-wise. Omar started a year after Colbert so he's been part of the process since 2001.
The Steelers like that 'Tribal Knowledge."

In the NFL, the better teams 'retool' which means a certain amount of turnover.
Maintaining a winning record carries some credibility and deserves some merit.
Where they seem to fail is that yes, they can field a winning team but fail to rise and address that ability to adjust to the next level.
Bell and Brown were superstars that went absolutely Bat*** nuts. I wish they had better brains as this team could have really been tough to beat.
But that's seems to be a regular thing, we pick up these nutbags and think 'we can fix him.'

I would like to fire that entire front office and bring a strong, young and promising GM with more backbone.
I would like for this GM to evaluate this coaching staff and make those tough decisions.
You have to adapt. You can't live in the 70's.

 

This is a QB driven league. Always has been. There have been great players at other positions throughout the history of football, but it's always been the QB that drives it. I totally agree about Mason Rudolph. He was a swing at finding an heir to Ben.

I don't understand your Omar Kahn remarks. He's had 3 drafts. So far, every player he's drafted is still with the team other than Watts, who had to retire from football due to an injury. Also, what 'tough decisions' has Kahn had to make up to now?

EVERY TEAM has it's share of 'nutbags'. We have seen plenty of other guys from other teams in the news for negative reasons. This is no choirboy league by any means. No pro sports league is. It just happens that most of our 'nutbags' seem to be WRs.

I read your plan. I see there what you would like to do. I would like you to elaborate. Can you provide a list of names of front office people you want to hire? Maybe just to bring in for interview? Who is this strong, young, and promising GM with more backbone you speak of? I thought you were doing well until that paragraph. It's your basic, 'I don't like it, redo it' chant. I don't have a better idea, I just don't like that idea.
I have looked into OL coaches. I searched college programs that have had good OL consistently every year. I looked at their coaches and assistants that moved on to other programs and how they have fared at new places. I actually compiled a list of candidates I would at least bring in to interview for the OL coach job. I did the same with guys in the NFL. There is another OL or coaches thread somewhere in which I listed some names. The point is there has to be a plan. Fire them all and hire better, is not a plan.

I know most people nowadays have no patience, and don't want to be part of any process. That just takes too long. I think patience is warranted right now.

 

"Patience has its limits. Take it too far, and it's cowardice" - G. Jackson

 

Read my last sentence again.

 

Fair enough.
It's not my job to evaluate the potential candidates. Now days, I am just a fan with a few perks.
Howie Roseman has spent his career in Philly. As much as that name makes me want to vomit, he has done a magnificent job and turning over players and even coaches instead of clinging to them too long. He's kept the team relevant.
Lynch is pretty awesome, doing same. He has a challenge this year so his story is incomplete for now.
Washington's Adam Peters is magnificent..

Those are the stronger guys. I'm sure there is more.

As far as firing this bunch, some times you just have to cut ties and move on to force change.
The 3 drafts thing does not hold water for justification, remember I said he's been here since 2001 and has worked with Colbert all along.
I completely understand and somewhat subscribe to the 'promote from within' culture.. it's not bad as we see in Roseman.
But mediocre is just that, mediocre.

I rate Omar mid pak. As I've said many times, he's not horrible but just weak.
I've gotten so that I can't stand his press conferences. He looks smart and should just not talk and let the others do that.
And he does have a rep for low-ballin.
All that could be fine if he just had a backbone. What does that mean?

Well, how many posts here whine about Tomlin? countless.
If the coaching cannot produce, then the GM is supposed to remedy that with the owner.
If go out a draft Peyton Manning and Tomlin and company pull off the mess they did with their last 1st round pick... that's a huge problem.
The coach and GM are supposed to be on the same page and get players to win games.
Now I know it's rare that NE and KC conditions happen,, sometimes, like 49ers, even Dallas and the Steelers of the 70s. But you can at least try.
My frustration with the front office boils over as they are a source and I am not dismissing Rooney... if he lets it fester then well... it is rinse and repeat.

I agree with you but our front office is performing at a mediocre level.

 

True, it's not our job to do anything when it comes to the Steelers.

This was a pretty simple search to find an article where someone I don't know personally(Albert Breer) is discussing this very topic back in January. This is apparently his 16th annual version of this article. Would even be easy to go back and look at previous articles and look at his track record with these opinions. I'm not going to do that. But if I were looking to replace the GM, I might try to come up with who I liked with this type of search.
https://www.si.com/nfl/future-nfl-general-managers-list-candidates-2025-offseason-beyond

Could come across snark but none intended.

One thing I do wish the Steelers FO would do is hire more smart football people. More as in numbers. The more smart people you have in a room, the more good ideas you can come up with. This philosophy goes for coaches as well. Again, my opinion.

If you just start replacing people without a solid plan on who you want it's just pi$$ing into the wind. So when fans start with the fire everyone and just hire better stuff, I gotta ask what the plan is.

 

100%
I subscribe to winning comes from the top down.
Hire those football smart people and let them go.
I would fire them without a plan, but with a plan to move out mediocrity.. It took Adam Peters or rather the new owner 2 years.
The first year he was stuck with some, but he gave them a good opportunity to prove otherwise. They didn't.
He brought on Adam Peters and they cleaned house.
Now of course, they have to follow up last's years success to prove anything. They did do some nice moves in the offseason.

I pretty much feel the same except I am more radical.

The formula pretty much goes like:
1. You have to have a strong GM. He has to chart players and know when it's time to move on from them and make those tough decisions yet see down the road how to replace them. He also has to have vision to scout players who can change the game.
2. You have to have a coach that can recognize the players strengths and weakness and find 11 that can fit together on offense and 11 on defense.
3. The coach has to have a staff willing to come up with ideas and get those ideas into his unit, along with the HC..
4. You gotta have players that fit the system and buy into it.
Get those 4 ingredients working together and you have something. (I think we do have some but not enough)