1. Hi Guest, Registrations are now open. See you on the inside.
    Dismiss Notice

Steelers Re sign Starks

Discussion in 'Steelers Talk' started by J&LSTEEL, Jul 17, 2012.

  1. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    27,702
    5,276
    Oct 22, 2011
    The 2 mil is dead money it counts against the cap with or without Starks.[/quote:2qr7vyke]

    exactly. if we cut scott, we will have 500,000 more in dead money. we save 2 mil. though. add max's 2 mil and 605,000 and 500,000 dead money from scott, it will cost us 3.105 mil. for max this year. i'm not sure how the new CBA lets them go from 825,000 contract down to 605,000 though. :cool:
     
  2. TheSteelHurtin2188

    TheSteelHurtin2188 Well-Known Member

    5,380
    261
    Nov 30, 2011
    Glad to have him back scott is gone
     
  3. HugeSnack

    HugeSnack Well-Known Member

    5,233
    100
    Oct 17, 2011
    :facepalm:
     
  4. PWP

    PWP Well-Known Member

    5,803
    453
    Oct 26, 2011
    E I think Starks was a good sign....Starks is a good LT not great ,but stable....Also he was already dead money so we get him at a discount...It is a nice Insurance Policy for Adams and the entire OL.....As far as Wallace goes he just wants to much money.....The Steelers will not pay Wallace and his adjent what they want....

    Wallace will not be signed to a long term deal......Wallace is down to whether he will play for his tender...It is not the Teams fault that Wallace is not signed...I am sure the Team has made many fair offers ,but Wallace and his Team want the big bucks......As his Homie stated ,Wallace needs Football,Football doesn't need him...

    He has not earned 8 Mil plus a year and the Team is right not to bend at this point....
     
  5. Boomer

    Boomer Well-Known Member

    3,237
    274
    Dec 11, 2011
    Good to see Max back with the team! Hope he's ready to play.
     
  6. 4EvrH8O'donnel

    4EvrH8O'donnel Well-Known Member

    920
    0
    Nov 18, 2011
    All I care about is that Ben will be more comfortable on the blind side. You give him this and the play action from TH will be much more easier.
     
  7. TheSteelHurtin2188

    TheSteelHurtin2188 Well-Known Member

    5,380
    261
    Nov 30, 2011
    I think adams is still penciled as the starter
     
  8. 4EvrH8O'donnel

    4EvrH8O'donnel Well-Known Member

    920
    0
    Nov 18, 2011

    I'm certain that Ben is sleeping better tonight no matter which one is in there. I won't even consider a camp battle as an issue. Just reassurance that he won't have to worry. Max needs to work on his inside dip shoulder to be more effective but other than that he can hold his own.
     
  9. HugeSnack

    HugeSnack Well-Known Member

    5,233
    100
    Oct 17, 2011
    How much money has the team offered, how much has he asked for, and how do you know?

    How do you know he won't get signed to a long term deal? We have many weeks before that time comes.
     
  10. numbah58

    numbah58 Staff Member Mod Team

    1,856
    29
    Oct 16, 2011
    Excellent choice to bring him back for this year.
    I'm not sure what there is to not like about this signing.
     
  11. Blast Furnace

    Blast Furnace Staff Member Mod Team

    41,499
    8,937
    Oct 16, 2011
    I'm actually starting to think they will get a deal done.
     
  12. Iowasteeljim

    Iowasteeljim

    2,524
    492
    Oct 26, 2011
    I like the Starks signing, personally, however, I hope Adams is the starter.
     
  13. D0bre Shunka

    D0bre Shunka Well-Known Member

    3,275
    434
    Jan 24, 2012
    Adams, is the future-hopefully, not the immediate fix. Starks is an experienced vet and good, not great but good.

    Good sign and good mentor for the future.
     
  14. PWP

    PWP Well-Known Member

    5,803
    453
    Oct 26, 2011
    I don't know how much,,,but I am sure they havn't low balled him....I am also sure that the Team put up it's best offers already simply because they brought in a new OC....Wallace needs the time and the Reps and the Coach and the GM know this....I am sure they have talked about this and put a final offer on the table to get Wallace to sign,he has not....The most logical explanation is that the money is just not enough for Wallace .....

    Yes we do have some time ,but I don't think the Steelers are going to budge....The question is will Wallace budge?I don't think he will....
     
  15. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    27,702
    5,276
    Oct 22, 2011
  16. JD99

    JD99 Well-Known Member

    153
    0
    Nov 15, 2011
    But, its so easy, isn't a real life NFL front office exactly like Madden franchise mode? I mean, its so simple when I play Madden on PS3, can't Colbert and the front office just make it happen? 8-)
     
  17. JD99

    JD99 Well-Known Member

    153
    0
    Nov 15, 2011
    :facepalm: X 10
     
  18. HugeSnack

    HugeSnack Well-Known Member

    5,233
    100
    Oct 17, 2011
    That's not really an explanation, it's more of an obvious fact. I'm just surprised that you seem to know that it's all Wallace's fault and not the team's. Of course he's asking too much money when you consider the fact that every player in the NFL is overpaid. But is he asking too much compared to what he could get elsewhere? You have to realize that the reason he's still ours is that he was a restricted free agent, and no other team could have him unless they outbid us and traded a first round pick. If he'd been unrestricted and other teams could've kept their pick the way we could, there is a 100% chance he would have gotten considerably more money by going to some other team. So instead of using your idea of what's the right amount (or mine, or the Steelers', or his own), he's probably using what he thinks he can get on an open market, and trying to get the Steelers to get as close to that as possible. In fact, if you think about it, if he really wanted to max out his money then he wouldn't sign a long-term deal with us, play the year, and make an even bigger long-term deal somewhere else next year. The only reason he'd rather not do that is in case he gets injured and his stock goes down.

    To me you have this situation: on one hand, a team that is not likely to ever pay top money for a wide receiver (probably not even close to it), and already has two promising young wide receivers (who will also need contracts soon) and a solid vet behind the man in question. On the other hand is the best free agent wide receiver of the year, who, despite a lot of people around here complaining about him, has a lot of things going for him. He has something like the statistically 3rd best 3 year run to start a career since Jerry Rice, is the fastest player and biggest deep threat in the game, is still only 25 and has never been hurt, and still has upside. He's also got the James Harrison / LaMarr Woodley "overplayed his last contract" issue, since he was a 3rd round pick making relative peanuts over the last three years. He probably feels he deserves some compensation there, too.

    It's a tough situation. I don't see why we need to put all the blame on one side, especially since we don't actually know the numbers we're talking about and are just guessing. Frankly, these two sides coming together would be a miracle for the simple reason that he's a top receiver and they're the Steelers. We don't usually keep them. Ward was different because he was the type of guy that was more valued by us than other teams (like Miller). Wallace is the type to be more valued by other teams than us. I think that if he does sign with us at all, he will be making a significant sacrifice to his wallet and his receiving stats. Yes, he is primarily motivated by money, but how is that different from anyone else? I don't get how some people are painted greedy and others saintly when they're all after the same thing. Even when someone takes a pay cut like Hampton, there are always factors besides loyalty. Hampton knows McLendon is coming on strong and ready to start, and they just drafted his replacement. His willingness to take a cut is very nice of him, but if he didn't he could have been cut from the team entirely.

    If he signs a long deal, he will be taking a cut in a manner of speaking because it's not as much as he could get with Dallas or Oakland or ______. I don't see why we should be automatically be expecting him to be so eager to take less than he could get elsewhere, regardless of what we think is fair.
     
  19. Thigpen82

    Thigpen82 Bitter optimist

    10,242
    1,426
    Oct 17, 2011
    :goodpost:

    (Not going to quote it all though)
     
  20. blackandgoldpatrol

    blackandgoldpatrol Well-Known Member

    4,943
    1,689
    Dec 5, 2011


    i don't believe that they would sign starks and neglect decastro or wallace........... this signing tells me that they may be closer to signing the two players than any of us think!!!!!!!!!!!
     

Share This Page

Welcome to the ultimate resource for Steelers fans. Sign Up Here!