Kenneth Gainwell

fair enough

 

No **** Sherlock

 

Gainwell is a third-down back. That's about it. The guy averaged less than four yards per carry behind the Eagles' line. 'Nuff said.

 

Chicago won't even pick up the phone after the Claypool trade. PIT is on their white list.

 

well fields came after Claypool, so we have that lol

 

That's more on them than it is on us.... they liked Claypool enough to give up that pick, they can't blame us for that. If they want a player at 21 and they think they can package those two picks to get him why not? Nobody is fleecing anyone in the scenario. Chicago gets an unknown player they want, and we get two unknown players later in the draft that we want.

 

Exactly. What are we doing??? DK was a good pickup but besides that we are fumbling all over the place in fee agency.

 

you think? slay and echols were good pickups. we still have beanie bishop, cory trice and ryan watts along with JPJ. you have to let these young guys work their way in. donald parham was a good add to the TE room. gainwell will help. harrison will help. they are trying to get younger while keeping some vet additions here to help the younger players. mason was a good signing. bringing back mccullom, warren, skowronek, miller, and last year friermuth signing.

the subtractions are a big part of what they are doing as well. DJ last year. russell, fields, najee, moore, daniels, herbig, pruitt, jackson, kazee, matekevich, jefferson, ogunjobi. none were guys that really made us better.

it's not over yet.

 

Don't get rid of too many ST guys. Last season was the first in a really long time fans weren't booing our ST. I don't just mean Boz and kicking FGs. We had a very good season.

 

skowronek, robinson< had a good year, harrison, gainwell, austin, miller. all contribute on ST's.

 

Skattebo would quickly become the starter among the group.

 

Well, with a few possible exceptions it's doubtful any of the guys you listed. will either. Developing young talent is an important part of roster construction, but you seem to regard every young and discarded player as a diamond in the rough that will eventually develop into a contributing member of the Steelers. The reality is the success rate on reclamation projects is low. It's hard to make an NFL roster, even harder to crack the lineup, harder still to play above replacement level.

This is the time of year clubs are casting wide nets hoping to mine extra talent. But the returns are few and far between. And life moves fast in the NFL; if a club relies too heavily on developing fringe talent the prime career years of their stronger players will pass them by before/if they get the others up to speed.

So while I advocate leaving no stone unturned I think Khan has been very passive using his cap resources to better the team this FA period, outside of acquiring Metcalf.

 

no you are wrong, i don't regard every young and discarded player that way. i do want to inform you though that about 30+ % of most nfl rosters are made up of these type of players. UDFA's hit at a rate higher than many mid to late draft picks. we have had more than our share over the years.

beanie bishop
ryan mccollum

these two played a role last year. cook has been brought back for now his 3rd year here. they have roles and are needed for rosters.

 

Leaving themselves to rely on Bishop as their nickel cornerback was a huge mistake. Yes, he made a few big plays, but he gave up more. He wasn't good at all.

McCollum is a backup. Nothing more. I'm not sure Cook can even be that.

Having some of those guys on the roster is fine. Relying heavily on them the way the Steelers seem to do, however, is not.

 

Cone on, Mac. One of your endearing legacies here is your affinity for fringe talent and obscure acquisitions. Last summer you were telling me you weren't worried about the WR2 position because we had Marquez Callaway. The season before you were talking up Darius Rush in the secondary. The past few weeks you've been thumping on about Brandin Echols.

There's nothing wrong with that - like I said, these players can play an important role in roster construction. And yes, I'm well aware that a standard roster of 53 is comprised of about 15 or so of these players. They're called depth pieces. And I don't certainly don't root against them. Everybody likes pulling for an underdog, and the value in hitting on players like that can be enormous for a club.

The point I'm making is that no, I don't think the Steelers have done a particularly good job after one week in free agency (acknowledging there's plenty of offseason left). They've signed mostly depth pieces that don't push the needle enough:

• Slay should be more consistent than Jackson in coverage, though his age is a concern
• Gainwell doesn't replace Harris' production.
• Echols doesn't improve the nickel CB position, and it was a weakness last season.
• Harrison may be able to equal Roberts' run-stuffing abilitiy
• Parham I assume can cover Pruitt's production of 6/40/1 as the TE3.
• McCollum resumes his role of Frazier's backup.
• McCormick may be able to fill Daniels' role, but we now need two solid backup guards with Daniels and Herbig departing

It feels like they're letting themselves be held hostage by Rodgers and/or they expect to acquire significant upgrades in the draft. I don't have a problem with the latter, but the lack of a second rounder stings, and I'm concerned they're going to become too need focused. Moreover, they had the resources to do more than they have thus far.

 

Tomlin still couldn’t beat Bellichek even without Brady..0-2 with no qb at time. Yeah, you’re right, all players fault, even tho players have come n gone, yet HC is the common denominator
I get your loyalty to T, but come on now,are you that blind or just ignorant?

 

To add to @mac daddyo

A full 1/3 of nfl players are UDFA

11% of starters in 2023 were UDFA

And I can’t find it but UDFA I believe have a higher success rate than those drafted in the latter rounds

Which is why moving back in the draft is a bad idea unless you are picking up an extra 2nd or 3rd

 

The latter is my biggest problem with what they are doing. There were plenty of solid offensive guards available, but most are gone. There were plenty of solid defensive tackles available, but most are gone. They could have signed one of each and been in much better shape for this season. It certainly seems like saving their money to pay Rodgers is costing them dearly.

 

here is a little on echols. far from a fringe player thor.

https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=e4c1...cnMtaG93LWhlLWZpdHMtYnJhbmRpbi1lY2hvbHM&ntb=1

 

I get and respect what you and Mac are saying, but you're missing the point I'm trying to make.

I'm speaking to directly improving the primary positions of need we have from last season, whether by departure or sub-standard play. UDFAs may be able to do that at some point, but I don't understand where you can claim that lower depth signings like McCollum, Gainwell, Miller, and Skowronek are making the roster notably better than it was in 2024 - especially when three of those four were already on the team last year, and the other is a RB with just over 1100 yards rushing over his first four years who's replacing Harris, who averaged over 1000 in each of those.

Again, I'm not disputing the role that lower-round draft picks and UDFAs play for teams. What I'm saying is that I think it's folly to say that a third-string or practice squad release is going to be able to perform above replacement level when, to date, they've yet to show the capability to do so. Doesn't mean they won't, but what are you using to support the claim that they will, gut feeling? Because however many success stories you want to cite, there are still far more that don't make it.

 

He's replacing Cam Sutton, who many have said we needed to upgrade from. Last year:

Sutton: 48.3 comp %, 2 INT, 11.1 yd/comp, 3 TD, 99.1 rating, 6.3 MTkl%
Echols: 60.2 comp %, 2 INT, 13.5 yd/comp, 3 TD, 90.0 rating, 7.0 MTkl%

Tell me how you rationally think this is an upgrade. Meanwhile, you conveniently left out commenting on the others I mentioned that you were big on in the past.

 

Echols is not good.

 

He can't be any worse than Sutton.