Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Apr 17, 2014 at 05:07 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Simmons Signs 4 Year Deal  (Read 2138 times)
msdmnr2002
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 2836
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,605



WWW
« Reply #10 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 13:02 »

Thought the $ per year ($6 mill per) was a little high for someone who has never been, nor likely will ever be, a Pro Bowler.  However, the guaranteed money wasn't huge, so they can cut their losses in 2-3 years if needed.  

As far as drafting Oline next year, even with this signing it wouldn't bother me to take two O linemen on day one.  The odds are you'll get one pretty good starter, and one serviceable player.  If one of them happens to wash out, you've covered yourself by drafting two.  We don't have an urgent need for youth at any other position, so I think we can afford it.  
Logged
Winters in Holland
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: -1001
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« Reply #11 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 13:37 »

Quote
Quote


At the very least, I think they could have waited until 8 games into this season
Steelers don't negotiate during the season.
Well, if this contract is indicative of what they're rushed into to get done before the season starts, maybe they should consider it!


.WiH.
Logged

I don't care if Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy are black. Good for them. But that doesn't change the way I feel about them. The longer we keep looking at guys like Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith as "BLACK HEAD COACHES" as opposed to just "coaches" the longer race will continue to be a problem. --DoctorJohnnyFever
jonzr
Asst. VP, Jonzring
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 11360
Offline Offline

Posts: 11,332


Have a cup o' joe.


WWW
« Reply #12 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 15:03 »

Quote
Thought the $ per year ($6 mill per) was a little high for someone who has never been, nor likely will ever be, a Pro Bowler.  However, the guaranteed money wasn't huge, so they can cut their losses in 2-3 years if needed.  
 
I thought the same thing then looked again - it's a 4 year extention, add in this year and it's a 5 year contract for a bit under $25 mil.

I guarantee you the one Faneca turned down was a damn site better than that.
 
Logged

"I like David Bowie, he was always my favorite member of Tin Machine."
- Rodney Anonymous

It's a Steeler Nation
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8117
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,579



« Reply #13 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 15:18 »

Quote
Quote
Quote


At the very least, I think they could have waited until 8 games into this season
Steelers don't negotiate during the season.
Well, if this contract is indicative of what they're rushed into to get done before the season starts, maybe they should consider it!


.WiH.
I've never fully understood the purpose behind the "no talks during the season" policy, but it's just the way the Rooneys have always done business.  IMO it leads on occasion to some unnecessary tension in the off season, but, I guess they're happy with the results.
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
Winters in Holland
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: -1001
Offline Offline

Posts: 735


« Reply #14 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 18:43 »

You're probably right.

I just don't see how the timing of this deal DOESN'T piss off Faneca.

I'm far from a Faneca apologist, as I think he was being a really big pud about the whole thing earlier, but I really don't know how he'll react to this one.  

Hopefully Faneca uses the deal as motivation, and kicks ass this year as his own personal F.U. to the Steelers' brass.

But I could also see him simply mailing it in and going through the motions this year as well.  

I think he'll do the former, as dogging it would only hurt is own FA value.  But we saw last year how the magnitude of off-the-field factors ended up affecting their play on the field, and I just hope this extension doesn't cause all the Faneca bullshit to flare back up.


.WiH.
Logged

I don't care if Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy are black. Good for them. But that doesn't change the way I feel about them. The longer we keep looking at guys like Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith as "BLACK HEAD COACHES" as opposed to just "coaches" the longer race will continue to be a problem. --DoctorJohnnyFever
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12187
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,051



« Reply #15 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 18:53 »

I think Scac and msdmnr hit my stance, between the two of them.  I'm taking an optimistic wait and see attitude this year with Simmons.  I've been down on him, and I think his strengths (footwork, pulling) may indicate a future at LG, whereas Kemo's strengths (strength, and meanness) bode well at RG.  That would mean we could take an early LT, a backup OG or OC, and depending on what Starks does a RT.  

It's fruitless to say what we need to draft for before these guys have the chance to cohere, though.  Maybe Coach Z can bring out that small difference that makes a difference with a guy like Simmons.  I loved Simmons his rookie year, reminded me of this year's Auburn OG Grubbs.  The diabetes and ACL account for only so much dropoff: was the rest Grimm?

The case against Grimm:

Why did players like Nkwenti never develop any potential?
Why did Marvel Smith regress from his Pro Bowl year?  Was it entirely injuries?
How did the Patriots beat us so badly DL v. OL in the 2005 AFCC?
How did the Ravens beat us so badly in both 2006 games?  Just overloading?
Why was our OL with so many R1 players (Smith, Faneca, Hartings, Simmons) so "just a tad above average?"

I liked Grimm.  But I think he had limits.  His limits seemed to coincide with those of Cowher, to wit, big games.  So maybe he was a good OL coach against teams we should beat, not so much against teams we could beat (i.e., those litmus tests of greatness).  And if that's the case, maybe he held players like Simmons back.  From which one can infer the broader "coulda woulda" with Cowher.

The org seems to be blowing some "good OL" smoke.  Maybe it ain't all smoke.  Coach Z seems a bit ineffective and, I dunno, invisible, but maybe he's teaching technique in a quiet way, less gregarious and "Hey, look, I was a Hog, I know way more than you do" like Grimm.

Arizona's progress and Pitt's progess will be a great parallel story line this year and probably next.  The Cards badly needed an infusion of a Cowher type of Steelers team.  And I submit that the Steelers badly needed an infusion of a Tomlin.  Not "a" Tomlin, THIS guy, this Mike Tomlin.  Cards may get over the hump this year, but our long term prospects are far better IMHO.  

We'll fix the line.  Let's see what needs fixed.  Hope Ben stays healthy all year, and FWP.  The rest will work itself out.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
SCacalaki
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 4445
Offline Offline

Posts: 14,056


WWW
« Reply #16 on: Sep 03, 2007 at 19:00 »

Quote
Thought the $ per year ($6 mill per) was a little high for someone who has never been, nor likely will ever be, a Pro Bowler.  However, the guaranteed money wasn't huge, so they can cut their losses in 2-3 years if needed.  

As far as drafting Oline next year, even with this signing it wouldn't bother me to take two O linemen on day one.  The odds are you'll get one pretty good starter, and one serviceable player.  If one of them happens to wash out, you've covered yourself by drafting two.  We don't have an urgent need for youth at any other position, so I think we can afford it.
OL is probably the area I feel most comfortable with when talking about taking multiple guys on Day One.

LB wasn't and isn't one of those.  I look at the Ravens who this year seem to have found good players in Barnes and Burgess on Day Two.  

But back to OL...I think we've got to look towards better back up at tackle, very possibly at both positions depending on what is done with Starks.

It's why I would have rather banked on a guy not ready yet like Capizzi, but who had a better chance down the road than a guy like Essex who really is Barrett Brooks v2.0.

jonzr put it into perspective well, looking at it as a 4 year extension/5 year/$25M deal.  The guaranteed money is right when thinking that Dockery got $18M guaranteed for his 7/$49M deal.  
Logged

Words to live by:  "Dick LeBeau is Dick LeBeau," Tomlin said. "Everybody knows Dick."
steelerfaninCO
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1270
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,439



« Reply #17 on: Sep 04, 2007 at 01:33 »

Hopefully Simmons can just play well this year, let alone the next 4. I guess they had to lock up one of the starting guards and good ole Reddy ain't on the contract extension list. Simmons played awful last year. In his defense, he looked like one of the better OL guys in the preseason, but its preseason. He can definately pull well, and has decent pass pro, but he just doesn't have the roadgrading abiltity he had before his medical problems. No big push.... With the crazy contracts given out these days, I can live with this one.....Wow. There are a ton of OL questions going into this year. New center. New RT. Does Reddy give a shit. How does Mavel hold up. Can Simmons somehow, someway step it up(not going to be too hard considering he set the bar so low last year he tripped on it). No tested back up center. Could be a total disaster. I really hope they can find a way to make it all work and the guys gell relatively soon.
Logged

KTBFFH
Hercules50
Member
***

Karma: 158
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #18 on: Sep 04, 2007 at 07:13 »

Quote
The case against Grimm:

Why did players like Nkwenti never develop any potential?
Why did Marvel Smith regress from his Pro Bowl year?  Was it entirely injuries?
How did the Patriots beat us so badly DL v. OL in the 2005 AFCC?
How did the Ravens beat us so badly in both 2006 games?  Just overloading?
Why was our OL with so many R1 players (Smith, Faneca, Hartings, Simmons) so "just a tad above average?"
 
I'm applauding.

I've always wondered why Grimm was so highly regarded -- since it seemed to me to be that his reputation stemmed largely from his being one of the few O-Line coaches in the NFL with a recognizable name or who had a career of any kind as a well-known pro.

But I never thought it out like it is here. Well done.

I'd just add, as contrast, that it always seemed like other team's O-lines -- often made of rag-tag parts, like New England's -- would outplay our "blue-chip" line.  
« Last Edit: Sep 04, 2007 at 07:13 by Hercules50 » Logged
aj_law
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5531
Offline Offline

Posts: 14,883


« Reply #19 on: Sep 04, 2007 at 09:33 »

I think they overpaid, but Simmons kinda had 'em over a barrel a bit.  

Faneca is gone and really, truth be told, you've got nothing but question marks at the other 3 O-line spots.  Colon vs. Starks...meh, see how that goes; Smith is getting long in the tooth and it shows; Mahan has looked OK this preseason, but that's not really saying much.  Who knows how he'll do for them against #1s for a full 60 minutes.

So, that leaves Simmons as the only real lineman where they kinda know what they're getting.

Still, this line is very reminiscent of the '02 and '03 groups to me where if one guy goes down (maybe with Colon being the exception), there's no decent backup that can step in and keep the train moving.  I think by a longshot and not surprisingly since we've talked about this for as long as I can remember, this area of the team is clearly their achilles heel.
Logged

We suck because our drafts have been THE SUCK.
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!