Release Ben, bring in Hoyer.
Ben Roethlisberger hopeful of deal
- Thread starter Spike
- Start date
If the Steelers are going to guarantee Ben about 40 million would this contract work? A three year deal worth 51 million with 40 million guaranteed, that's 17 million per year, then have three 1 year deals that can be executed, the first for 16 million, the second for 13 million and the final one for 10 million. That's a 90 million dollar deal that if it gets to the 4th year will require Ben to continue to perform at a high level or they don't exercise the one year deal. The Steelers protect against age deteriorating his skills, but still allows Ben to be paid like a top quarterback if he's playing like one. They could include incentives in the final three to get him to 100 million if that's the sticking point, get performance for pay and no dead money if he's injured or playing poorly.
Papillon
Papillon
Pap, there will be no more thinking out of the box. Shame on you for not just whining and advocating that we trade him.
W
Walter
Guest
I like your thinking.
Ben is not the cerebral pocket passer that gets better with age or at least does not fall of sharply when his physical skills start failing. I would even be comfortable with letting Ben play out his contract and then franchising him year by year this paying Ben market rate but not tying us up with huge dead money when his skills deteriorate.
Oh come on man, we all KNOW its Landry time . . .
I think you can only franchise a player twice and besides, that isn't fair to Ben, IMO, he's been a warrior for this team and deserves a fair deal that could pay him very well again, but protects the team as well. In my scenario he would be 36 at the beginning of the 4th year and would have already pocketed 51 million. If his play didn't nose dive off the cliff you exercise the 4th year at 16 million, still good pay for an elite quarterback. You keep doing that for years 5 and 6 he would end his 6th year at 38 years old and would be 39 the start of next year, at that point if he's still playing well you take it one year at a time like Manning did in Denver.
The down side to my scenario is if Ben is injured in years 1-3 and can't play, you only have 3 years over which to spread the guaranteed money and that would be 13 million in dead money per year for however many years Ben can't play.
It's a risk in years 1-3 for the Steelers, but based on Ben's toughness over the years it's one I would take. the back end of the deal is good for the Steelers and for Ben if he continues to play well. I see little downside for Ben in this scenario.
Papillon
Last edited:
W
Walter
Guest
My deal is even more fair to Ben and protects the Steelers more. Ben would get about 55 million from the 2015,16 and 17 seasons and we would not be stuck with an aging QB with little upside. Ben is no Manning and his game won't age well.I want to pay him for present performance not for past performance as any long term deal would do as he is not going to be playing up to his contract level after the 2017 season. a 37 year old Ben is gonna be a punch drunk athlete who does not have the physical ability to play the playground style football bhe has to play to be effective.
Your deal is fair to everyone except if he's injured in years 1-3 then he's done and with no guaranteed money the pay checks stop. The players hate the franchise tag for a reason.
Papillon
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 6,075
- Reaction score
- 7,396
- Points
- 113
Thank you sir for clarifying for him. That's exactly what I was trying to say.
W
Walter
Guest
Ben is under contract for 2015 so he has no leverage there. We franchise him in 2016 and he picks up 26 or so guaranteed. Sorry that is 42 million he picks up and if he is not injured or sucks in 2016 he sees another 26 or so in 2017, that is enough for a 37 year old declining QB.
Montana, Manning, Farve, none of them finished with their original teams. As much as I would love to see Ben finish a Steeler, history is not in his favor
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,413
- Reaction score
- 881
- Points
- 113
Marino, Elway, Kelly stayed among many others. I would say the majority finish with their teams.
A couple things:
1) We'd be assuming he's declining, we won't know until we get there
2) Players hate the franchise tag, why eff with him?
3) Deep down I think he wants to finish what he started here in Pgh
4) 26 million is a steep hit against the cap in 2016 and possibly 2017
I don't know, I think I'd rather rather go with 17 million per year, take a little risk on both sides and keep Ben happier to be in Pittsburgh. Your way would certainly work though.
Papillon
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,909
- Reaction score
- 11,436
- Points
- 113
Didn't Bert get over $20 million per when he re-upped? I think Ginger Dalton did too.
I would think a longer deal with bonuses along the way would be best. That way, if he retires or has to be cut, the cap hits will be less.
Worilds is no where near worth $6 million per. At best, I'd offer him $4 million per and if he balks, he can walk. He wasn't worth the tag they put on him and he proved not to be worth what they offered him last year. In 2 years, he didn't even put together one good year. Pay him as an average, at best, LB. Don't over pay just because we need an OLB. That is what they did with Mitchell and Allen. Now, they have to pay the price. If Worilds wants more, put bonuses in for 10 and 15 plus sack seasons. Also put a bonus in for consistent pressure. If he can't do that, then he is useless - as he was for most of this year.
wait, everyone complains that if we extend Ben it will hurt our chances of signing any Free agents, but some want to franchise tag him and have a cap hit of somewhere in the 20 million range for one season?
7 years? That'd be like offering Troy a 5 year deal now. Why offer soo many years if they know they can't play it at that level. I think Ben may have 3 or 4 good years left. But even giving a 30+ year old QB another big deal like that would mean they don't antipate a better QB coming out the draft in the next 4+ years which I think the Steelers management might not agree.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 803
- Reaction score
- 297
- Points
- 63
I don't anticipate a better QB coming out and being available to us in the next 10-15 years and then only if we have a few less than 5 win seasons. When that starts I hope all you who think Ben is so easy to replace enjoy it.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2014
- Messages
- 5,307
- Reaction score
- 4,795
- Points
- 113
Our best hope for a transition after Roethlisberger is if he has his career ending injury about 4-5 years into his next deal AND it happens early enough in the season that we can limp through a 4-12 season, get a top-5 draft pick and pray it's also a year with a couple good QB prospects coming out in the draft.
Otherwise, we are going to struggle watching Tomlin week-in, week-out coach this team with average or worse QB play.
Otherwise, we are going to struggle watching Tomlin week-in, week-out coach this team with average or worse QB play.
When QB's are heading into their mid to late 30's, their contracts need to have incentives in them and be contingent upon them playing a certain amount of snaps and have an out at some point. I know the NFLPA and the agents don't want to hear that but that is what is needed. Basically, it needs to be similar to what Elway did with Peyton. I believe the Broncos had outs if Peyton could not perform.
i say 7 year b/c you heavy front load the first 4 years and the last 3 have like change cap hits, so if he retires in 4 years the last 3 years wont affect the cap that much.
worlids i think according to the value is the high 4 to 6 mill range, maybe a 5 28 could seal it and whoever the DC is uses him better to his strenghts which is rush more drop back less.
worlids i think according to the value is the high 4 to 6 mill range, maybe a 5 28 could seal it and whoever the DC is uses him better to his strenghts which is rush more drop back less.
Similar threads
