• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Jason Worilds

Wingman

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,810
Reaction score
289
Points
83
Location
Texas
And my point is that statement pretty much summarizes how bad this organization was in building it's offensive line for over half a decade. We think Max Starks was a "good" player only because we are comparing him to what other options we had. History has proven the league (and people outside of Pittsburgh) think Max Starks is a very below average tackle. He was a complete FREE AGENT only 24 months after receiving $10 million guaranteed from this organization, was only 29 years old, was healthy and capable of playing (albeit fat and out of shape), and NOT ONE TEAM wanted him. He was on his couch and unemployed throughout all of August and September. By definition, that means 32 teams thought both their STARTING TACKLES (64 each) and their primary backup (32 each) were better than Max Starks. That is not a good player.

I also believe at that point his age was a factor. There comes a point that no matter how good or bad a player was his age will move him out of the game. There is also the salary cap thing to consider as well. If a team does not see a major change in quality over their own they may not wish to eat dead money from what they have and sign another player that may only be a small upgrade over what they have. Max was a lot better than what we have now. He moved decent and blocked fairly well, a great example of a good play by Max was in the SB on the long run by FWP.
 

Supersteeler

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
5,832
Reaction score
4,777
Points
113
This thread is a great example of a classic fan overreaction.
 

STEELERS R GR8

Member
Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
406
Reaction score
16
Points
18
Well here is some good news, bye bye JW:


Pittsburgh Steelers:
2/14: The Steelers plan on allowing Jason Worilds to test the open market, according to general manager Kevin Colbert.

2/11: The Steelers will not re-sign James Harrison for 2015 "unless there is another emergency." - Gerry Dulac, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

2/4: "With Dick LeBeau on board, Titans could look at LB Jason Worilds." - Paul Kuharsky, ESPN

1/28: The Eagles could target Jason Worilds in free agency, according to Jimmy Kempski, Philadelphia Inquirer. Worilds "would have signed with the Eagles" had it not been for the transition tag. - Adam Caplan
 

Supersteeler

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
5,832
Reaction score
4,777
Points
113
Now everyone can come down off their respective ledges and the FO can keep their jobs apparently lol.
 

TDX27

Well-known member
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
12,518
Reaction score
8,945
Points
113
Location
Lakewood Ranch, FL
Ya, I'd rather keep Worilds too but not for $11 million and not even for $6 million. $5 million per is my max for him. System or not, we could get 2 for the price of one and get better results.
 

STEELERS R GR8

Member
Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
406
Reaction score
16
Points
18

F83

Well-known member
Member
Forefather
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
2,990
Reaction score
811
Points
113
Location
Up North
[some local Pittsburgh FB people reporting that Deebo has already re-signed a 1 yr vet min deal, no confirmation from PZ or trib but he is working like a beast to get into likely his 08 frame for a final year, if he is starter he just needs 6 sacks to overtake Gildon as the franchise all time sack record, can't have a better LB then Harrison a diamond in the rough to be atop the the sack list, had Woodley stayed in shape he could of overtaken with the duration that was left on Woodley's deal but he become lazy and MT had enough of it.

So we have gildon atop at 77,2. Harrison at 2 71.5 3 Porter 60 4 Willis 59 5 Woodley 57
 

ark steel

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
9,394
Reaction score
6,217
Points
113
I think someone offers JW more than $7m/year. I'd bet the Steelers are want to offer $6m/year. Maybe a tad more. I'm concerned that his other offers may not be far enough away from what the Steelers are wanting to pay that they would be willing to bump up their offer.

I don't think I'd give up JW for Graham, if the money were even. Graham would have to come cheaper.
 

Ron Burgundy

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2014
Messages
27,127
Reaction score
25,667
Points
113
Location
Rochester, PA
I think someone offers JW more than $7m/year. I'd bet the Steelers are want to offer $6m/year. Maybe a tad more. I'm concerned that his other offers may not be far enough away from what the Steelers are wanting to pay that they would be willing to bump up their offer.
Exactly. I don't think Worilds is bad, like Jarvis Jones bad, he's just not $11 million good. I'm just concerned that the Steelers will overpay him (again).
 

ark steel

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
9,394
Reaction score
6,217
Points
113
Exactly. I don't think Worilds is bad, like Jarvis Jones bad, he's just not $11 million good. I'm just concerned that the Steelers will overpay him (again).

If it were me, I'd consider part of the 2014 tag as part of his signing bonus. I know they can't do it that way, but if offering him, say, an $18 million guarantee, I'd consider he already got $4m
 

SCSteeler4life

Well-known member
Contributor
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
2,801
Reaction score
2,597
Points
113
Location
South Carolina
Would anyone be willing to take Woodley back if he was cheap? I read that he would be released by Oakland.
 

hook

Well-known member
Forefather
Joined
Apr 11, 2014
Messages
882
Reaction score
308
Points
63
Location
The Lowcountry, SC
Would anyone be willing to take Woodley back if he was cheap? I read that he would be released by Oakland.

Pretty bad if Oakland cut him. Not sure I'd want one of their scabs. Which is worse, an undersized and younger Jarvis Jones or an older fat Woodley?
 

Drink IRON City

KAYAK Champion who drives a LUXURY S10
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
30,781
Reaction score
31,396
Points
113
Location
between $2 short & ten buck two
Pretty bad if Oakland cut him. Not sure I'd want one of their scabs. Which is worse, an undersized and younger Jarvis Jones or an older fat Woodley?


Woodly, on he cheap, with motivational contract. JONES needs to get his @ss in gear, show us a reason we drafted him.....



Salute the nation
 

Drink IRON City

KAYAK Champion who drives a LUXURY S10
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
30,781
Reaction score
31,396
Points
113
Location
between $2 short & ten buck two
PS If this actually did happen, don't you think woodley would have something to prove to fellow team mates? One year deal, then by a yearly basis.



Salute the nation
 

Supersteeler

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
5,832
Reaction score
4,777
Points
113
Woodley was washed up when he left Pittsburgh. He would be even worse at this point.
 

deljzc

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Messages
5,307
Reaction score
4,794
Points
113
I used to be a big fan of Woodley, but he has been such a disappointment to me after his contract.

His body breaking down is probably at least 50% on him just not working hard enough to keep in shape. That's a shame.

I think a lot depends on how the final few years of him vs. Tomlin/Butler when down. Can Tomlin/Butler forgive the not working hard enough? Can Woodley admit to not working hard enough and be contrite? Are they all willing to "try again" at least for a pre-season?

Woodley is definitely headed towards minimum salary territory now and if he wants to continue his career he's going to have to come into camp in shape and work hard to make a roster spot - his salary and name recognition aren't going to do that anymore.
 

Omar10213245

👀👂🎃🏈🍇🥑🍆🍋🪂🌞🌛🌜☂☔❄🌊🥴🤬🥺
Member
Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
10,401
Reaction score
8,528
Points
113

Litos

Well-known member
Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
10,777
Reaction score
11,042
Points
113
if we are bringing back anyone that should be Harrison, he busted his *** last season to keep us competitive. I'd gladly give him one more year to rally the troops while the rookie (there has to be a high drafted rookie, unless we go All In on FA) learns on spot duties
 

TDX27

Well-known member
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
12,518
Reaction score
8,945
Points
113
Location
Lakewood Ranch, FL
No way to Woodley. He got fat and out of shape here and became injury prone. We cut him and it was more of the same. He didn't seem to care to get back in shape to cut down the injuries and play somewhat like he used to. He is done because he got the money and then got very lazy. Professional football is a year round commitment. He hasn't done that for several years. No need to even consider him unless for the vet minimum and if he passes a physical and fitness test.
 

deljzc

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Messages
5,307
Reaction score
4,794
Points
113
I honestly could argue that starting a heatlhy Harrison at ROLB and Woodley at LOLB week 1 of the season would be more effective on a week-to-week basis than Tombert's heir apparents of Jones and Worilds.

Not saying the old guys would last a whole season or 16 games + playoffs, but for game-to-game?

That's a pretty sad indictment on our scouting/coaching/development.
 

Supersteeler

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
5,832
Reaction score
4,777
Points
113
I honestly could argue that starting a heatlhy Harrison at ROLB and Woodley at LOLB week 1 of the season would be more effective on a week-to-week basis than Tombert's heir apparents of Jones and Worilds.

Not saying the old guys would last a whole season or 16 games + playoffs, but for game-to-game?

That's a pretty sad indictment on our scouting/coaching/development.

As much **** as Worilds takes, I would be very confident in saying he is easily superior to Woodley at this stage of their careers. Which isn't saying much I know, but to say Woodley would be better than Worilds right now is a pretty large stretch. Wooldley is broken down and a shadow of his former self.
 
Top