Trade ben now!!!!

[stillwright]

What in the world are you people smoking ? Trade BEN????? Holyshit its not even worth a response.

Those that world consider getting rid of BEN when the man has at least 6 solid years left should be shot...

I know I know lets trade him and bring in RG3 or draft geno smith. Maybe we can draft Tim couch or Ryan whats his name the chargers had ... Hey maybe we hit Brady Quinn in round one...
If we are lucky and someone gives us two number ones for BEN we could draft Brady Quinn and jermain Stephens ... That way we get that LT QB combo.

Good lord guys. Grow a freaking Brain

obliviously you are not looking at the salary cap implications if we resign Ben......



/half of the board

 

[Wingman]

Why would you want to trade away a franchise QB when he "still has value"? That's kind of like dumping your life savings on a lottery ticket. What's more valuable to a NFL team than a franchise QB that is still playing well at a high level?

Let me answer your questions individually, one you would want to trade a franchise QB on the downside of his career when he still has value in order to receive value for him. That value could allow you to select his replacement, for example Andrew Luck did not win last week but he looked pretty good. Two, What is more valuable than a franchise QB that is still playing at a high level, a younger franchise QB that is playing at a high level and maybe on a rookie contract so he is very cap friendly.

Not saying that anyone will be willing to offer up that kind of deal but if it was available I would be looking into and not dismissing it out of hand, simply because locking oneself into a course of action regardless of the variables is worse than foolish. I am not advocating trading Ben for a third round draft pick, but say the Raiders for example had a top five pick, or the foreskins and offered 2 first rounders this years and next years for Ben. That might be hard to turn down it might not.


Team
W-L
*Opp W-L %
1 Oakland
0-7 .593
2
Jacksonville 1-7 .541
3

New York Jets 1-7 .561
4
Tampa Bay
1-6 .467
5 Tennessee
2-6 .492
6
Atlanta
2-6 .496
7
St. Louis
2-5 .542
8 Minnesota
3-5 .472
9
Washington
3-5 .504
10 Chicago 3-5 .512

Those are the top ten draft teams if it was held tomorrow at the off season one would know who had what but there are lots of teams that could be very close to the top pick in that list. One would wonder what they are willing to part with to get a great but aging QB.

I would say keep all options on the table and evaluate them on their own merits.

 

[Hollywood Bags]

Let me answer your questions individually, one you would want to trade a franchise QB on the downside of his career when he still has value in order to receive value for him. That value could allow you to select his replacement, for example Andrew Luck did not win last week but he looked pretty good. Two, What is more valuable than a franchise QB that is still playing at a high level, a younger franchise QB that is playing at a high level and maybe on a rookie contract so he is very cap friendly.

Not saying that anyone will be willing to offer up that kind of deal but if it was available I would be looking into and not dismissing it out of hand, simply because locking oneself into a course of action regardless of the variables is worse than foolish. I am not advocating trading Ben for a third round draft pick, but say the Raiders for example had a top five pick, or the foreskins and offered 2 first rounders this years and next years for Ben. That might be hard to turn down it might not.


Team
W-L
*Opp W-L %
1 Oakland
0-7 .593
2
Jacksonville 1-7 .541
3

New York Jets 1-7 .561
4
Tampa Bay
1-6 .467
5 Tennessee
2-6 .492
6
Atlanta
2-6 .496
7
St. Louis
2-5 .542
8 Minnesota
3-5 .472
9
Washington
3-5 .504
10 Chicago 3-5 .512

Those are the top ten draft teams if it was held tomorrow at the off season one would know who had what but there are lots of teams that could be very close to the top pick in that list. One would wonder what they are willing to part with to get a great but aging QB.

I would say keep all options on the table and evaluate them on their own merits.

Luck didn't just look good last week, he looked awesome (minus that pick six, of course). That's one thing I took away from that game - even though we won and Roethlisberger had a career day, I found myself wishing we had Luck. The dude's arm is incredible, and he's smarter than ****.

Too bad we didn't unload Polamalu a few years back when he had value.
Yep. They should have looked to dump Polamalu

 

[Wingman]

Luck didn't just look good last week, he looked awesome (minus that pick six, of course). That's one thing I took away from that game - even though we won and Roethlisberger had a career day, I found myself wishing we had Luck. The dude's arm is incredible, and he's smarter than ****.

Too bad we didn't unload Polamalu a few years back when he had value.
Yep. They should have looked to dump Polamalu

I would say trade for value and dump are two different things. The only way I trade an aging star player is to someone who trades me something I find MORE valuable. Teams still do that. The steelers before Chuck Noll, used to trade for players that were in their last two or so years of play but were big name players and they lost most of the time. There are still guys like Snyder who think they can trade for a team. The only way a trade makes sense is if you get more than you give. Look at Woodley we have 5 mill this year and 8 mill next year and nothing to show for it, that is what happens when you keep a guy too long.

 

[GMC]

Let me answer your questions individually, one you would want to trade a franchise QB on the downside of his career when he still has value in order to receive value for him. That value could allow you to select his replacement, for example Andrew Luck did not win last week but he looked pretty good. Two, What is more valuable than a franchise QB that is still playing at a high level, a younger franchise QB that is playing at a high level and maybe on a rookie contract so he is very cap friendly.

If he's on the downside of his career, why would a franchise give up 3 1sts for him? Who's the young franchise QB they're going to get in next year's draft? You don't get rid of a proven performer for the chance or hope of getting someone better. It's hard to "suck for Luck" when there is no Luck to be had. I understand what you're trying to say, but it's not realistic.

 

[CoolieMan]

Luck didn't just look good last week, he looked awesome (minus that pick six, of course). That's one thing I took away from that game - even though we won and Roethlisberger had a career day, I found myself wishing we had Luck. The dude's arm is incredible, and he's smarter than ****.

Too bad we didn't unload Polamalu a few years back when he had value.
Yep. They should have looked to dump Polamalu

**** off ratbird fan

 

[deljzc]

It's harder to dump veterans at the "right time" than some here think.

First, it's always easy in hind sight to see that one off-season where a player still had value but happened to drop off in performance or have a major injury. I'd like to see more people go on record in off-seasons when they want to trade guys.

Second, you very rarely know a player's actual trade value.

Third, replacement-level players aren't as good as you think. We spent a LOT of money on someone like Mike Mitchell and he's not exactly lighting the world on fire. He's been okay and he's learning and getting better, but the idea it's just easy to replace players like Harrison, Keisel, Polamalu, A. Smith, Clark a few years BEFORE we actually did is kind of a pipe dream. For every one you selloff early about half you won't find a replacement that's as good or better for the first couple of seasons. And could start you down the path of spending a LOT more resources trying to fix the position than you got back in the first place.

Fourth, fans don't really understand the dynamics of a locker room and what effect "skimming the veterans" off the top of the locker room pecking order does to chemistry. Young players watch how a franchise treats it's veterans. It's one of their main sources of information they have on whether they should feel pride in the organization, whether they should sacrifice for the organization and whether they should "negotiate" in good faith on contracts.

If an organization consistently treats it's veterans poorly, then they will struggle with locker room leadership and likely have trouble signing players to win-win contracts that are team friendly.

I'm not saying you can't do it occasionally. I'm not saying you don't pursue trade offers are every one of your assets in the off-season (just to have the most information before making decisions). But it's a very fine line.

And honestly, trading face-of-franchise players like Polamalu for a 3rd or 4th round picks isn't really worth it in my opinion. If we're talking about a major franchise changing decision (like trading Roethlisberger for the 1st overall pick PLUS another 1st round pick) is one thing. Trying to trade very veteran that reaches his 3rd contract for 3rd and 4th round picks is another.

 

[Troglodyte]

It's easy to say that they should have traded whoever for whatever draft pick(s) but the salary of that player also gets traded which can negatively impact their trade value. Losing cap space along with a premium draft pick makes gaining a star player a lot less attractive.

 

[topseed]

No, I'm basing my argument off what they have always done and always will do. You are basing your entire argument on what you want them to do that they will never do. Again please name me the player you are worried about losing because they are paying Ben too much money? The draft is the ONLY way to build. No team can afford to build through FA. So your plan won't and can't work. The only way to win a SB in the next 10 years is to draft better and pray Ben stays healthy. They went over 20 years trying to find a QB. Now they have one. They better use him. They've had top defenses before during the 90's and 2000's and failed. With a real QB they went to 3 SB and won 2. If you think they are going to change the way they do business you are very mistaken.

Dude, I'm not worried about losing what they have now, because they simply don't have enough on defense to smell the Super Bowl. I'm concerned about what they'll be able to do in the future. Why do you keep insisting my plan only involves free agency? Obviously, if they don't tie up the money on a huge contract for Ben, they'll have it to spend on the draft or a key free agent here or there. They'll have the ability to acquire a good young quaterback, pay him a fraction of what Ben would be making, and develop the team around him.

 

[topseed]

Your prove your ignorance on the subject right off the bat...do you know how many teams would give $100 million contracts to Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson right now? ALOT. Are they hall of fame QB's Flacco, no, Wilson, obviously way too early to decide that. I never said the QB had to be a hall of fame QB. I said the league has proven over time you need a franchise QB to win in this league. You dont have to win super bowls but its been shown without a franchise QB you probably wont and you wont win consistently.

LOL. You excluded Flacco from your list, now suddenly he's a "franchise" quarterback again. I have no idea why certain teams pay certain players. In my opinion, the Ravens overpaid Flacco after a fluky Super Bowl run. Andy Dalton signed a $115 million contract...does he meet your "franchise" criteria too?

This is what YOU actually said, clown: "Since the ******* late 80's it has been proven you dont win titles in this league with average QB's." Williams, Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer, and Johnson are about as average as it gets. So your statement is clearly incorrect. Eli Manning might be slightly above average, and he's won two.

Your points about Peyton Manning, Brady, and Jim Kelly shows just how stupid you really are. Brady and Manning have dominated their conferences for the better part of a decade, have made multiple super bowls, yet that isn't good enough?? Do the Patriots, Broncos, Colts etc make super bowls without these QB's? Your ignoramus logic would be, well **** were making the playoffs every year and getting to the super bowl sometimes or at least the AFC Championship game, but we really should trade our franchise QB because we need to solidify our defense and maybe find a "solid" QB to do the rest. As far as Jim Kelly, if you don't think he was a franchise QB, you are a moron. You will probably never see a QB lead his team to 4 straight super bowls again. The fact that he never won doesn't mean ****....again, how has the franchise done since he left?

Thanks for playing....

Wait, now it's no longer about winning titles, it's about "dominating their conferences." I see. Just change it up midstream however you see fit. I never said Jim Kelly wasn't a franchise quarterback, I said he never won a Super Bowl. As a matter of fact, his team lost two of those games to Rypien and Hostetler. This doesn't really help your case, does it? Dan Marino was one of the best quarterbacks of all-time. Never won. Why? Not enough defense.

Once again, for the slow of wit, Ben will no longer qualify as a franchise quarterback by the time the rest of the team is good enough to compete and WIN a championship.

Thanks for disproving your own points.

 

[hardcore12]

Idiots. Some of you are complete fucktarded ... No reason to debate so lets just say this. There is absolutely 0 chance BEN is not a steeler for many years to come. He will sign 5 to 7 years next year.. You can count on it.

 

[topseed]

Took over 30 yrs. to find our first SB winning QB and 20 yrs to find our second. You trade Ben guys willing to wait?

If they hand Ben another big deal at this stage of his career, 30 years sounds about right.

 

[topseed]

Idiots. Some of you are complete fucktarded ... No reason to debate so lets just say this. There is absolutely 0 chance BEN is not a steeler for many years to come. He will sign 5 to 7 years next year.. You can count on it.

Go **** yourself, pal. It's a discussion forum.

Yeah, that's what the Steelers are going to do. No ****. Doesn't mean there aren't some legitimate reasons why they shouldn't.

Have fun masturbating with your Big Ben doll until his sack-beaten body forces him to finally leave the team in financial shambles.

 

[Vader]

Dude, I'm not worried about losing what they have now, because they simply don't have enough on defense to smell the Super Bowl. I'm concerned about what they'll be able to do in the future. Why do you keep insisting my plan only involves free agency? Obviously, if they don't tie up the money on a huge contract for Ben, they'll have it to spend on the draft or a key free agent here or there. They'll have the ability to acquire a good young quaterback, pay him a fraction of what Ben would be making, and develop the team around him.

Rookies are slotted in the draft pay system. Having a butzillion dollars does not effect the draft in any way shape or form. That's why I said they'd draft the exact same way with or without Ben. Money has nothing to do with the draft. So the only other option you have is FA. The ONLY way money enters into the picture is by FA. Let's say right now that Ben made $2 million a year what would that change on the team right now?

 

[Litos]

Rookies are slotted in the draft pay system. Having a butzillion dollars does not effect the draft in any way shape or form. That's why I said they'd draft the exact same way with or without Ben. Money has nothing to do with the draft. So the only other option you have is FA. The ONLY way money enters into the picture is by FA. Let's say right now that Ben made $2 million a year what would that change on the team right now?

I say we'd sign a top CB on FA. But truly I rather have Ben

 

[Vader]

I say we'd sign a top CB on FA. But truly I rather have Ben

Which is my point. It has nothing to do with the draft. Money only comes into play in FA. Which the Steelers don't do. They build their teams in the draft and pick up cheap FAs to fill holes. The idea that getting rid of Ben is going to free up money to make the team better is a fairy tale. This team needs a few more players on defense to be back in the hunt. Trading Ben makes no sense if you want to win another SB anytime soon. There are no 10 year plans in football. Think about this; Ben even at his current age will play longer than most of the guys on the team younger than him. If he plays 4 years then he will out play most players who only average about 3 years in the league.

Also even if you got a CB in FA is that going to take them to a SB with an average QB?

 

[Wingman]

Rookies are slotted in the draft pay system. Having a butzillion dollars does not effect the draft in any way shape or form. That's why I said they'd draft the exact same way with or without Ben. Money has nothing to do with the draft. So the only other option you have is FA. The ONLY way money enters into the picture is by FA. Let's say right now that Ben made $2 million a year what would that change on the team right now?

Well this is hindsight here, but maybe we would have been able to out bid the Team that got the Left tackle named Long had funds been available, I do not know if another star left tackle will be available in the near future or not. Also there is the possibility of a real good proven corner being signed. The Steelers very seldom make a big play in free agency other than their own but some that come to mind in the not to distant past, Bettis, Gandy, Kevin Greene, and James Farrior. There maybe a few others that have happened over the years.

Now for this to come to pass it would involve a very favorable trade involving Ben, getting draft picks that would likely secure his replacement although there is a chance we do not see someone with his same talent level in the game let alone on the team for a long while. And being able to fill a couple of positions like left tackle, and corner. If one can't work out something that will likely garner that kind of a deal it is not worth it.

That is not likely but Denver traded for an aging Manning and the colts were able to get Andrew Luck as a replacement. So it is possible to pull off a deal like that.

 

[Coryea]

Didn't Denver sign Manning as a Free Agent? Bettis was a trade wasn't he? Gandy, Farrior, Greene turned out to be very good players for us, but I don't think any of them were high priced free agents.

Back to what Vader said about a top tier CB making us a super bowl team with an average QB. I think we've seen that play out in the 90's.

There's exceptions, but you're not going to win a Super Bowl unless you have the best defense and/or a franchise QB.

 

[Vader]

Well this is hindsight here, but maybe we would have been able to out bid the Team that got the Left tackle named Long had funds been available, I do not know if another star left tackle will be available in the near future or not. Also there is the possibility of a real good proven corner being signed. The Steelers very seldom make a big play in free agency other than their own but some that come to mind in the not to distant past, Bettis, Gandy, Kevin Green, and James Farrior. There maybe a few others that have happened over the years.

You mean Jake Long? The guy who is has back ailments, torn bicep, and is now out for the year with a torn ACL? That Long? He was signed for less than Worilds is making this year. The Steelers had no interest in him at all.

Also, the Steelers do splurge in FA at times. But Bettis was traded for, he was not a FA. Farrior was ran out of NY and was not a big time FA at the time. The Jets thought he was a bust. Hartings is really the biggest FA I can think of because he was a dominant center for Detroit. The point is they don't build their team through FA. They build through the draft.

 

[Wingman]

You mean Jake Long? The guy who is has back ailments, torn bicep, and is now out for the year with a torn ACL? That Long? He was signed for less than Worilds is making this year. The Steelers had no interest in him at all.

Also, the Steelers do splurge in FA at times. But Bettis was traded for, he was not a FA. Farrior was ran out of NY and was not a big time FA at the time. The Jets thought he was a bust. Hartings is really the biggest FA I can think of because he was a dominant center for Detroit. The point is they don't build their team through FA. They build through the draft.

As I recall the steelers did look at him in the off season and I thought I saw they met with him prior to his signing with another team. The guy at the time was a highly touted left tackle at the time.


Pittsburgh Steelers tried to sign Jake Long
March, 18, 2013
3/18/13
8:45
AM ET
By Jamison Hensley | ESPN.com



Offensive tackle Jake Long signed a four-year deal with the St. Louis Rams on Sunday night that could be worth up to $36 million. The former No. 1 overall pick reportedly chose the Rams over the Miami Dolphins, but there was another interested team as well.

The Pittsburgh Steelers surprisingly made a play for Long as well, although it occurred after his negotiations were too far along with St. Louis, a league source told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter. This information indicates the Steelers aren't completely sold on their offensive tackles and the team could be more active in free agency than many expected.

This type of move is unlike the Steelers, who rarely go after such high-profile free agents. Long would provide experience and dependability in protecting the blind side of quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, whose injuries have derailed the past two seasons for the Steelers. By even reaching out to Long, the Steelers showed they have some reservations about either left tackle Marcus Gilbert or right tackle Mike Adams, especially when the team's precious cap dollars should be spent on more pressing needs like outside linebacker, running back and wide receiver.

There are other web postings regarding this. Yes, I remember that Bettis was traded for and that it was our first round draft pick that year, and I tend to think of trades and free agency as the same thing as it involves getting a player that typically is from another team. Although the steelers do try and sign their own free agents rather than someone else's. I am not advocating building the team with free agents but filling a couple of holes that we might not fill in the draft if additional high draft picks were available to do both and rebuild the team.

And that approach will only work if the right scenario presents itself. If not we might be starting our next 20 to 30 year span of mediocrity in the very near future, as it will be hard to say how long Ben plays at a high level. The only way to be sure he does not kill the team with dead money would be to change the signing bonus to roster bonuses each year so it becomes a pay as you go proposition, that way if he becomes unable to play due to health or skill level deterioration the team is not with out both a QB and money to sign one.

 

[Vader]

As I recall the steelers did look at him in the off season and I thought I saw they met with him prior to his signing with another team. The guy at the time was a highly touted left tackle at the time.

I'm mistaken then. Too many Longs in the league for me to keep up with. I thought it was between St. Louis and Miami. I didn't remember anyone else being involved. My only point is that trading Ben may open up some money but the Steelers aren't going into FA to spend a ton of cash. They'll always build through the draft. They are going to pay their players most of the time. The problem now is that they are paying average players big money. Worilds is making almost $10 million just for this year. IF they had drafted better then the money would be better spent. But having more money to spend won't make the players any better.

 

[deljzc]

I think Ben will eventually have a season ending injury that will greatly impact his ability to play at a high level moving forward and will cause his retirement.

That's what I suspect will happen. Not sure when, but I'm not counting on 5-7 more years. That seems like a lot to me.

If I was a betting man, I think the injury that gets him is an Achilles tear. He's had all sorts of ankle injuries. I know his ankle isn't 100% ever. There are probably some issues with the strength of the joint. One day I think he's going to take a bad step in our ****** turf and the Achilles is going to go. He'll come back, but it will never be the same and his game will never be the same and he'll wake up one off-season and say "I'm done".

I was once worried about concussions, but Roethlisberger is a horse. His neck is huge and he seems to recover fine after a few weeks. Now that he's stayed concussion-free for a few years running, I suspect he's back to baseline completely.

I think it's going to be leg/ankle that gets him in the end. his mobility will go, he'll get hit more often and harder and it will drive him out of the game. Not sure when it's going to happen, but that's the end game.

 

[Wingman]

I'm mistaken then. Too many Longs in the league for me to keep up with. I thought it was between St. Louis and Miami. I didn't remember anyone else being involved. My only point is that trading Ben may open up some money but the Steelers aren't going into FA to spend a ton of cash. They'll always build through the draft. They are going to pay their players most of the time. The problem now is that they are paying average players big money. Worilds is making almost $10 million just for this year. IF they had drafted better then the money would be better spent. But having more money to spend won't make the players any better.

I agree with most of what you said a 100%, my only point is to leave the door open and entertain offers, and if a great deal comes up look at then decide.

 

[Vader]

I agree with most of what you said a 100%, my only point is to leave the door open and entertain offers, and if a great deal comes up look at then decide.

I can't see any offer that would make me trade him. IF a Luck is available in the draft then the team won't trade that pick for Ben. They'll just take the younger QB. And Luck doesn't come around often. Any trade that doesn't involve getting a very good QB doesn't make sense to me. So I can't see any trade that would make sense. No team can win in the NFL without a good QB. I'm not going to try to build every part of the team into NFL HOFs just to have a Kordell Stewart run it into the ground. I just can't realistically see a trade that would work.

 

[Stryker]

You mean Jake Long? The guy who is has back ailments, torn bicep, and is now out for the year with a torn ACL? That Long? He was signed for less than Worilds is making this year. The Steelers had no interest in him at all.

Also, the Steelers do splurge in FA at times. But Bettis was traded for, he was not a FA. Farrior was ran out of NY and was not a big time FA at the time. The Jets thought he was a bust. Hartings is really the biggest FA I can think of because he was a dominant center for Detroit. The point is they don't build their team through FA. They build through the draft.

Just a small point about Hartings. I he was an above average guard in Detroit. We moved him to center and he excelled. We tried to do the same thing with Mahan, and it backfired, terribly. So you can't always make a great center out of a good guard.