Steeler Hitman Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 3 hours ago, warfelg said: For a decision like this to come this fast, all parties likely agreed in season to make this move. I am with you. I was just teasing @3rivers a little about his dislike of Tomlin.🤪 Just trying to have a little fun. In a move with speed like this it likely was a combination of them talking about making these moves in season of they don't have a long term future with the team. When you cut players this fast too, it's usually the coach going to the GM and saying he's done with players X, Y, Z; would we be in financial trouble by letting them go; and the GM is the one that finalizes it. Different root cause reasons for all three. Bottom line is they didn't perform well enough to help the Steelers win. Expectations were higher for all three. So as stated above, I think there was likely a moment where Tomlin asked that, the FO reminded him all 3 would be in the final year of their deals, and they agreed to pull the trigger sooner than later. It also benefits the players. No waiting and they can get a jump on signing elsewhere. What's interesting about this timing is that it sends a message to the players on the team of "you aren't safe, we'll cut you if you aren't working out", but at the same time it's a sign of respect for these players. Mitch and Chuks can go sign with anyone right now, so they have a head start on any other FA. Yes. You just explained what I was saying above. So if the Raiders with their $11mil in cap space want Chuks, they can offer him a deal right now and bring him in, then they aren't fighting with someone like Chicago who will have a ton more space in a few weeks. Great points☝️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 10 hours ago, Steeler Hitman said: I almost thought you were going to give Tomlin some kudos for doing SOMETHING right. Way to go Arthur Smith! 🤣😂 tomlins history says otherwise, so credit will have to go to Khan/Weidl or even smith for needing players for the OC new scheme . What about signing RT Brown and then drafting JPJ before the eagles do? Then Sneed too, thats it for UFA, and to make it happen removes some cap casualties in the process. we have to start somewhere and if tomlin does pound the table for OL and they go there, thats a start for helping the team become solid along the front. We never know who is really making these decisions, but as the HC and considering how the teams OL has been for most of his tenure, it appears that it's secondary to him based on that trend/track record. to neutralize your GIF, I just need to look at my avatar just to the left of it, as a friendly reminder of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 9 hours ago, warfelg said: "you aren't safe, we'll cut you if you aren't working out" this should be a given , but as we have seen, not really until now perhaps. Will it remain and of course need to be in place moving forward? 8 hours ago, jebrick said: We need to keep theses players can we fit it in the cap? keeping mitch never fixed anything, seems like 2 wrongs don't make a right. Sometimes it's just best to admit the mistake and move on, mitch being a prime recent example. He brought some of the worst QB play we have seen since? time to move on, he wasn't the only real issue either. A few others deserve as much bad press as mitch IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 might as well ask what do you expect chuks, mitch and ph3 to get for a contract? I doubt ph3 will get one other than PS player. He will be at subway with jarvis jones soon chuks - maybe 7M one year prove it, and he won't prove it if the team wants to run mitch - qb's are so overpriced, this I can't entertain. Whatever it is, it's too much. If cousins is going to get 45M, then mitch might get 10M+ no matter what? The FO kept my interest somewhat, whats left of it (not much) in that they cut 3 players at the top of the 'to cut' list . Now that I think of it, those 3 happen to be 3 of the most disliked players for me that this team has had in a very long time. To have them all on the team then cut at once is quite a feat colbert put together there. But as many here have discussed, there are still a few more..... or are there? Any candidates? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 17 hours ago, warfelg said: I wish I still had the tweet but that extension had no new money. All they did was take what was owed and moved it from one year to two. My issue was more about keeping him around another year with how terrible he was the previous season, and despite not getting NEW money, he still got a raise going from 2022 to 2023. He earned $2.5 mil in 2021 with Buffalo, and didn't improve his stock even a little. I get we signed him to compete for the starting job while he was a guaranteed backup in Buffalo, so I get why he got more here, but he absolutely shouldve been outright cut after 2022 and Rudolph shouldve been resigned to be the immediate backup. So my bigger issue was not cutting him last offseason, and instead giving him an extension....even if there was no money added, I hated that decision. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 (edited) 6 hours ago, 43M said: My issue was more about keeping him around another year with how terrible he was the previous season, and despite not getting NEW money, he still got a raise going from 2022 to 2023. He earned $2.5 mil in 2021 with Buffalo, and didn't improve his stock even a little. I get we signed him to compete for the starting job while he was a guaranteed backup in Buffalo, so I get why he got more here, but he absolutely shouldve been outright cut after 2022 and Rudolph shouldve been resigned to be the immediate backup. So my bigger issue was not cutting him last offseason, and instead giving him an extension....even if there was no money added, I hated that decision. It lowered his cap hit giving us the ability to bring in guys we brought in. From what I’ve gathered his dead money is lessened in 2024 by half of the 2023 dead money by the way this was done. Also going into 2023 if you do that your QB room is Kenny Pickett. That’s it. You’re not going into the offseason with that. So you would have the dead cap from Trubisky and be in the backup QB market where you would have to pay as much as you did to Trubisky anyways. We get that you hated the Trubisky signing but we were never going to cut him after one year. IMO Khan ended up salvaging a a bad deal by keeping the QB room stable, adding no more dead money, and lowing his 2023 cap hit. Edited February 15 by warfelg 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeler Hitman Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 6 hours ago, 43M said: My issue was more about keeping him around another year with how terrible he was the previous season, and despite not getting NEW money, he still got a raise going from 2022 to 2023. If you recall, I hated the signing period. I get that he was a former #1 and starter, but I think there were much better options for a year. He earned $2.5 mil in 2021 with Buffalo, and didn't improve his stock even a little. I get we signed him to compete for the starting job while he was a guaranteed backup in Buffalo, so I get why he got more here, but he absolutely should've been outright cut after 2022 I get that it is hard to cut your bait after one year. Mitch was a team captain and seemed to earn the players respect early. When his play fell, he seemed to lose that starting with Dionte. Should have been done and he started complaining that he should have shopped around. and Rudolph should've been resigned to be the immediate backup. This is the only problem that I have with my fellow Steelers fans. They were treating Rudolph like they are Tribisky prior to these last four games he played in 2023. Mitch was here in the first place because everyone had seen enough of Mason in 2019 and his limited games since. The Lions tie cemented his fate as being able to even be a good back-up. Many fans have very short memories about their Mason feelings. I believe that the Steelers actually tried to resign Landry Jones when Ben went down in 2019, but the USFL/XFL whoever had his rights wouldn't release him. We also had a conversation on here about expectations of a back-up QB. Many expect there to be no drop off when the back-up comes in. Huge difference in play between Big Ben and Landry Jones. So my bigger issue was not cutting him last off-season, and instead giving him an extension....even if there was no money added, I hated that decision. Understood, but a classic case of making your bed and refusing to get out of it when it is uncomfortable. Not trying to imply that I am always right or I can predict what the Steelers would do, but I never liked this signing. I supported Mitch as a Steeler and hoped for the best, but got what was expected. Actually, probably a little worse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 5 hours ago, warfelg said: It lowered his cap hit giving us the ability to bring in guys we brought in. From what I’ve gathered his dead money is lessened in 2024 by half of the 2023 dead money by the way this was done. Also going into 2023 if you do that your QB room is Kenny Pickett. That’s it. You’re not going into the offseason with that. So you would have the dead cap from Trubisky and be in the backup QB market where you would have to pay as much as you did to Trubisky anyways. We get that you hated the Trubisky signing but we were never going to cut him after one year. IMO Khan ended up salvaging a a bad deal by keeping the QB room stable, adding no more dead money, and lowing his 2023 cap hit. Pretty sure they converted some of his base salary from 23 from his ORIGINAL contract into guaranteed money. We are on the hook for $4.6m in dead money, which, unless you provide evidence I can't seem to find...doesn't fall in line with what you're claiming. After a brief search, all I could really find is this... https://stillcurtain.com/2022/12/26/steelers-foolish-not-cut-qb-mitch-trubisky-2023/ Quote According to Over the Cap, Trubisky is set to have a cap number of over $10.6 million in 2023. This would make the backup quarterback the 10th most expensive player on the roster. By releasing him during the 2023 offseason, Pittsburgh could save a whopping $8 million — money that they could throw back into a different backup and then some. So sure, Khan made the situation Colbert put us in better with Trubisky....for ONE year, but again, unless you can show me something Im not seeing, your claim that we cut his dead money in half or anywhere even CLOSE to that simply doesn't match up with the reality of the situation. As far as "we needed a backup", we signed Rudolph for significantly cheaper...a guy Trubisky didn't prove he was notably better than in 2022. If you or others feel Trubisky was the better option going into 23, thats perfectly fine....but not for what we ended up paying and the dead money we owe him now. The reality is, as I see it (unless you SHOW me where Im wrong), the Steelers once again panicked and kept a mediocre player because they didn't want to deal with the hassle in 2023, so they kicked the problem back a year...and is arguably a bigger problem NOW than it would have been LAST year if we cut him outright instead of giving him an extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 https://x.com/steelersdepot/status/1736916248737538421?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA His dead money this year is $4.25 mil according to Spotrac. I think you are really making a big deal out of basically nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 (edited) Here we go, found the SD article that shows where I get that from: https://steelersdepot.com/2023/12/after-demotion-mitch-trubiskys-contract-should-price-him-out-of-pittsburgh/ https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/mitch-trubisky-got-nothing-more-for-2023-no-guarantees-beyond-it The extension basically let us shift around cap money and cash flow while adding little to no new money to keep his rights should he be ok as a backup. And looking back at reports of his first contract he was to have a roster bonus decision in March of ‘23 that passed, and since he was still here the choice was basically either take this extension we’re offering or get cut at a time we couldn’t replace him easily. And there was no way of knowing Mason would be that good. And honestly I don’t think Mason was all that great. His only difference was a willingness to push it downfield. After the first game he looked meh again. If anyone knew he was going to be that good he would have signed much sooner or been offered more than anyone else. Edited February 15 by warfelg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 11 hours ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/steelersdepot/status/1736916248737538421?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA His dead money this year is $4.25 mil according to Spotrac. Ok....not really a significant difference. My other points still remain. 11 hours ago, warfelg said: I think you are really making a big deal out of basically nothing. Literally all I did was state my OPINION that I thought extending Trubisky was a terrible idea. It could have ended with that. Youre the one who jumps down my throat almost every time I am remotely critical of this team, especially certain people. Im not making a big deal of anything. I think extending him was a bad move. I thought so then, and I think so now. Thats it. 10 hours ago, warfelg said: Here we go, found the SD article that shows where I get that from: https://steelersdepot.com/2023/12/after-demotion-mitch-trubiskys-contract-should-price-him-out-of-pittsburgh/ https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/mitch-trubisky-got-nothing-more-for-2023-no-guarantees-beyond-it The extension basically let us shift around cap money and cash flow while adding little to no new money to keep his rights should he be ok as a backup. And looking back at reports of his first contract he was to have a roster bonus decision in March of ‘23 that passed, and since he was still here the choice was basically either take this extension we’re offering or get cut at a time we couldn’t replace him easily. And there was no way of knowing Mason would be that good. And honestly I don’t think Mason was all that great. His only difference was a willingness to push it downfield. After the first game he looked meh again. If anyone knew he was going to be that good he would have signed much sooner or been offered more than anyone else. I am not saying this one move had some type of dramatic affect on the quality of this team. My main issue with keeping Trubisky is that it is emblematic of much bigger, long standing issues with this team. We "settle" for mediocrity too often. Maybe we didn't reward him with NEW money, but we gave him another year with this team and he gets more free money THIS year than he would have gotten LAST year if we cut him. Trubisky literally showed nothing of notable value in 2022. He was an extremely mediocre backup caliber player and based on some things I read, didn't have a great attitude either. And I am not sure what value he gave us in 2023....regardless of Rudolph. Trubisky was a net negative in 2023, as I expected he would be....which is why I hated the extension. You are 100% right about Rudolph....but nothing Trubisky showed in 2022 was better than what Rudolph showed in previous years (IMO anyway), which is why I much rather would have preferred we cut Mitch LAST offseason and SAVED $8M and spent considerably less on Rudolph...and maybe brought in a UDFA rookie or min. salary vet for 3rd string. On top of saving alot of money...you also have a CHANCE (however slim) that the younger player could develop AND, maybe Rudolph wouldnt feel so slighted that now he doesn't want to come back. Now, don't get me wrong...I dont really care if we lose Rudolph. I think his play the last few weeks of our season, while solid, was overhyped....BUT, now, we will only have one mediocre QB on the roster going into free agency. As I stated....we are in a worse situation THIS year after cutting Trubisky than we would have been LAST year if we had cut him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 4 hours ago, 43M said: As I stated....we are in a worse situation THIS year after cutting Trubisky than we would have been LAST year if we had cut him. How so? I think at worse it’s the same because either way we have only 1 qb under contract. only this way we have a little less dead money. 4 hours ago, 43M said: Now, don't get me wrong...I dont really care if we lose Rudolph. I think his play the last few weeks of our season, while solid, was overhyped....BUT, now, we will only have one mediocre QB on the roster going into free agency. The exact same as last year if you cut Trubisky. 4 hours ago, 43M said: You are 100% right about Rudolph....but nothing Trubisky showed in 2022 was better than what Rudolph showed in previous years (IMO anyway), which is why I much rather would have preferred we cut Mitch LAST offseason and SAVED $8M and spent considerably less on Rudolph...and maybe brought in a UDFA rookie or min. salary vet for 3rd string. On top of saving alot of money...you also have a CHANCE (however slim) that the younger player could develop AND, maybe Rudolph wouldnt feel so slighted that now he doesn't want to come back. The issue is we have to have cut Trubisky in early March to have seen that savings as he had a roster bonus. We didn’t cut him. At the time everyone thought Mason was going to be out the door since he was a free agent. Heck he himself said he was starting to look for work outside of football. He wasn’t signed until after the draft when we didn’t take someone. 4 hours ago, 43M said: Trubisky was a net negative in 2023, as I expected he would be....which is why I hated the extension. At that point the extension wasn’t about keeping him past 2023. It was about reducing his 2023 cap hit. 4 hours ago, 43M said: Trubisky literally showed nothing of notable value in 2022. He was an extremely mediocre backup caliber player and based on some things I read, didn't have a great attitude either. And I am not sure what value he gave us in 2023....regardless of Rudolph. I don’t disagree with this. I think he was average as a backup at best. From rumors the attitude issue seems to be from the fact that he didn’t see much of a difference between him and Kenny. 4 hours ago, 43M said: My main issue with keeping Trubisky is that it is emblematic of much bigger, long standing issues with this team. We "settle" for mediocrity too often. Maybe we didn't reward him with NEW money, but we gave him another year with this team and he gets more free money THIS year than he would have gotten LAST year if we cut him. I think 2023 was Omar’s first year and didn’t want to force too much. He already had an OL to rebuild, ILB room to rebuild, a secondary to rebuild, an aging DL that needed attention. Adding backup QB to the situation made it even more. On top of that because Kenny wasn’t a guy who had the starting role on lockdown, there’s a likelihood you would have to overpay a backup to come here. Likely more than Trubbisky’s 2023 $10mil cap hit that was scheduled, so with $4.9 mil in dead money you would possibly have $15+mil in money tied up in the backup role if you didn’t target Mason (who wanted to look at other options) right away, which we didn’t even do. In the end I don’t care about the extension because it’s not like this team was going anywhere and a rebuild was going to take a lot of work and a few offseasons. Sometimes you just got to deal with stuff like that and make a best of a bad situation. I think what “piles on” the Trubisky thing is the fact that so many backups played and had success. To me that a combination of how bad our offensive game plans were pre and post Canada combined with the poor play of the QB position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 https://x.com/Alex_Kozora/status/1760358518022943130?s=20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOSteelers56 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 5 minutes ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/Alex_Kozora/status/1760358518022943130?s=20 We also signed Sullivan as a senior offensive something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 So a new OC, QB coach, WR coach and two offensive assistants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.