- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 878
- Reaction score
- 413
- Points
- 63
They all ready moved Timmons to the other ILB spot
What to think about Jason Worilds.
- Thread starter DeaconKnowledge
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,394
- Reaction score
- 6,217
- Points
- 113
I read the other day that he left practice early with some injury. If I had his injury history, I'd be pretty lenient when asking for a long term deal.
he's not worth the tag we put on him. i don't know who posted they saw him do things that Woodley didn't do on his best day, but that's ridiculous. the guy played good for what half a season out of 4 seasons, then demanded he be a started if he came back, this guy isn't going to make or break this team. should've let him walk.
Couldn't agree more the guy has never done a thing and were paying him 9.75 mill and we wonder why we have been 8-8 the last two years. We give him a large deal and 8-8 will seem like the good days. We have way too much money tied up in a bad linebacking group
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 18
First of, I was the one who made that post. Second, I never said Worilds was better than Woodley, I said in one game he played with a consistency and fire that i've never seen out of Woodley (I also admitted that one game is a terribly low sample size).
Frankly one game amounts to next to nothing in the grand scheme, but for someone who was a question to stay on the team earlier in the season seeing him dominate like that was very encouraging.
I think factored in was not wanting to deplete the depth by letting two OLBers go in one offseason.
I could see another tag (if possible) next year and drafting a OLBer in 1.............
Or simply letting him walk.
His play will determine which path the Steelers take, which is why they shouldn't be in a hurry to sign him now IMO.
As the Steelers will be in a Worilds of hurt cap wise again if they at least don't keep Woodley's situation in mind going forward.
I could see another tag (if possible) next year and drafting a OLBer in 1.............
Or simply letting him walk.
His play will determine which path the Steelers take, which is why they shouldn't be in a hurry to sign him now IMO.
As the Steelers will be in a Worilds of hurt cap wise again if they at least don't keep Woodley's situation in mind going forward.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2014
- Messages
- 5,307
- Reaction score
- 4,795
- Points
- 113
They didn't HAVE to let Woodley go. That was a decision as well and could have waited to be made until today (or training camp or whenever before the season starts).
I like Worilds and what he shows as LOLB. I actually want to sign him long term. I just don't like the use of the transition tag to do it because I think the value of the tag INFLATED his asking price. I actually think we were better off offering a deal that competes with the free agent market for him. All the concerns you state - health, consistency, one-year wonder, etc. - would affect his free agent value as well, correct? Is there a team out there that thought Worilds was a $25 million+ over the first three seasons type of OLB/edge pass rusher? I'm not so sure.
And based on our depth, just like Starks, we are going to look back in history with Worilds sometime in 2018 or 2019 and see the Steelers ended up paying Worilds $25 million+ from 2014 through 2016. And possibly closer to $30 million. You watch.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 11,167
- Reaction score
- 11,788
- Points
- 113
I do think some team (like the browns or another team with a lot of cap room) would've offered that and more, this was a FA class with very little depth at OLB
Not sure if the tag inflated his asking price or was it just his agent wanting too much, not playing ball and the Steelers thinking the tag was bidding them some time. Or both.................
I would have rather worked out a deal without the tag myself.
But I think with pass rushers being a premium, teams have little choice to use what's at their disposal.
Problem with the free agent market is the Steelers could very well been outbid and short changed.
With certain teams having more money at their disposal and willing to take that chance on a player despite in this instance knowing Worilds obvious question marks.
Then one might say let him walk, Depth wise I just don't think that was ever a option for the Steelers this year.
Plus like you maybe they prefer to sign him to a long term deal.
Something the tag lets them do. Even if it might inflate his price range a bit.
With the Steelers they tend to be hard negotiators.
Will be fun to see how this plays out.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2014
- Messages
- 5,307
- Reaction score
- 4,795
- Points
- 113
Maybe it would have been best just to keep Woodley for another season as LOLB. Find a mid-to-lower tier free agent (Moats or someone a bit better) and save that $9.75 million on our salary cap books this season.
Again, if the price is too high, you walk away. Not put yourself in a position to overpay a player. Part of the criticism of this regime has been not looking ahead to see these situations come up 2-3 years ahead of time and prepare to give yourself OPTIONS.
The minute we cut Woodley so early in the off-season and tagged Worilds that huge1-year deal, we lost all options. And thus that puts us in a bad negotiating position. Really didn't make any sense to me, regardless of the outcome.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 18
Woodley missing 6-7 games while pocketing 10 million is the definition of being overpaid.
Sometimes you have to spend money. Cutting bait with Woodley was absolutely the right decision.
Sometimes you have to spend money. Cutting bait with Woodley was absolutely the right decision.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 7,497
- Reaction score
- 5,032
- Points
- 113
How is paying Worilds 9.7 million for one year any better considering he's been hurt almost as much as Woodley with much less playing time. Hell he is hurt now and they haven't even started hitting yet.
I would have kept woodley for one more year just for depth and tried to iron out a contract with Worilds. After seeing JJ play last year I think it would take some kinda miracle to turn him into a decent sack machine. Hopefully I am wrong. As it stands we had to tag Worilds because we have nothing else. Hopefully the FO has something up their sleeve?
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 4,614
- Reaction score
- 2,411
- Points
- 113
One year. If he plays through 8-10 games and kicks *** then pay the man.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2014
- Messages
- 878
- Reaction score
- 413
- Points
- 63
Could porter play in a pinch?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 690
- Reaction score
- 411
- Points
- 63
IMO, given that the free agent market (this year AND next year) yields little to be desired in the way of pass-rushing OLBs along with the fact that neither this years OR next years draft put us in position to nab a pass rusher either...they may have made the only play they had by tagging Worilds.
The way I see it, to this point of his career, Worilds is NOWHERE near a Justin Houston talent. Houston is going to get a contract (as is Orapko w the Redskins). These contracts should 'set the market'. Worilds is Sam Acho (in reverse). Acho started out w 7 sacks as a rookie and has slid downward wherein Worilds seemed to be coming into his own at the end of his rookie deal. In reality, it took the oft-injured Woodley to create a chance for Worilds. If Worilds had stayed at ROLB w Jones, he could've easily been retained, IMO. He took over at the LOLB spot and showed some promise. How much promise is NOW being put ON HIM in 2014. If he continues to prosper at LOLB, he will cement a decent contract for himself. If not, he will set his value based on his performance. Either way, their aren't many options for us as a team because the 2015 draft looks to be 'lean' at OLB as well as the FA situation. There really isn't anyone to 'replace' Worilds who is even 'average' (lots of Moats types).
This is exactly why I would bring in Harrison. He has limited 'miles' on his body recently and still takes care of it (unlike some...Woodley). As a team we thought Kevin Greene was nearing the 'end of the line' at age 34 and let him sign elsewhere. He played FOUR more years and racked up 52 sacks. He finished w 15 sacks at age 36 and 12 more at age 37. I think Harrison can give us some 'leverage' as he might be seen as a 2-year option if Worilds flames out or demands too much money. What other choice do we have?
I know it was a stupid move to put the transition tag on Worilds as nobody was going near him at those figures...his agent knew this as well but given what was 'out there' on the horizon, who would be our 'other' OLB if we lost him and Woodley was...well, Woodley?
The way I see it, to this point of his career, Worilds is NOWHERE near a Justin Houston talent. Houston is going to get a contract (as is Orapko w the Redskins). These contracts should 'set the market'. Worilds is Sam Acho (in reverse). Acho started out w 7 sacks as a rookie and has slid downward wherein Worilds seemed to be coming into his own at the end of his rookie deal. In reality, it took the oft-injured Woodley to create a chance for Worilds. If Worilds had stayed at ROLB w Jones, he could've easily been retained, IMO. He took over at the LOLB spot and showed some promise. How much promise is NOW being put ON HIM in 2014. If he continues to prosper at LOLB, he will cement a decent contract for himself. If not, he will set his value based on his performance. Either way, their aren't many options for us as a team because the 2015 draft looks to be 'lean' at OLB as well as the FA situation. There really isn't anyone to 'replace' Worilds who is even 'average' (lots of Moats types).
This is exactly why I would bring in Harrison. He has limited 'miles' on his body recently and still takes care of it (unlike some...Woodley). As a team we thought Kevin Greene was nearing the 'end of the line' at age 34 and let him sign elsewhere. He played FOUR more years and racked up 52 sacks. He finished w 15 sacks at age 36 and 12 more at age 37. I think Harrison can give us some 'leverage' as he might be seen as a 2-year option if Worilds flames out or demands too much money. What other choice do we have?
I know it was a stupid move to put the transition tag on Worilds as nobody was going near him at those figures...his agent knew this as well but given what was 'out there' on the horizon, who would be our 'other' OLB if we lost him and Woodley was...well, Woodley?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 18
You asking me or the Steelers?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,101
- Reaction score
- 650
- Points
- 113
- Location
- In a van down by the river!
I'm not sold on him.
As far as I'm concerned he has a lot to prove.
As far as I'm concerned he has a lot to prove.
JMO - but I think Worilds is much more athletic than Woodley and has a variety of pass rush moves.
Now, he isn't nearly as powerful as Lamar.
I think we screwed ourselves with the TT for Worilds. We have lost almost all of our leverage. Unless he completely sucks this year, he will get a deal worth more than he is worth.
I like him but we simply can't pay him 10 mil per year. Problem is - who is behind him? No one that has done anything. Chris Carter hasn't show much...that's for sure.
So, we could possibly be looking at taking ANOTHER OLB high in next year's draft. Eventually, you have to start realizing that losing all of these rd 1-3 guys that blossom is not just attrition due to rising costs.
We simply can't keep letting guys like Keenan Lewis leave. Worilds would represent yet another high draft pick that started playing well that we couldn't afford to keep.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 7,497
- Reaction score
- 5,032
- Points
- 113
You really think I'm talking to the Steelers on a message board? Why even reply if you don't want to answer?
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 4,757
- Reaction score
- 2,715
- Points
- 113
Hard to disagree with this, especially the part about Harrison. I really don't see what the huge risk would be trying to see if Silverback could get us a few more sacks in the twilight of his career and retire a Steeler. It's not like we'd have to pay him huge money
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 18
Because I find it pretty silly that you're so skeptical of my post when it's what actually happened in real life.
To answer your question, I don't think paying Worilds under the transition tag is the most practical thing, but it beats the hell out of paying Woodley another 10 million to sit on the bench. Unfortunately it's not always feasible to do the economical thing. Getting rid of both was NOT going to happen, so who would I rather take? The perrenially injured lackadaisical Woodley who hasn't been able to stay healthy since he signed his contract, or the healthier (but still not proven to be healthy himself) younger, and driven Worilds? The choice is clear.
2014 is a prove it year for Worilds, just like 2013 was for Woodley. Woodley failed his test, if Worilds fails his, you cut bait and put OLB at the top of your need chart for the draft.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 690
- Reaction score
- 411
- Points
- 63
This might end up being the BEST case scenario del. While I understand the gist (with regard to Starks-we should've had a better plan), IF he ends up making big money in the next few years, it will be because of his play on the field. If we give him the contract before the tag (at your numbers) we are going to give him some guaranteed money too. The guaranteed money is all that matters really. I don't remember your numbers but looking at Cameron Wake's extension of 4 years 33mil+, he got a guaranteed 20 million. While Worilds would lobby for something like this, his 'likely to be agreed' number might be around 12-15mil in guaranteed money to go along with a 4-5 year deal, IMO. If we do this...and his late season production was an aberration or he gets injured, we are out 12-15 mil. If we tag him (while still not the way I would have gone w it), and the same thing happens, we are out 9+mil. The alternate scenario where he proves himself worthy of a big contract this year is that it costs us 9+ with the tag verses as much as 8mil (deferred and spread).
NFL pundit, Gregg Rosenthal had stated that it was believed Worilds would have likely been offered 80% of what Paul Kruger received (5yr/40mil w 20mil guaranteed). This would have put us at a 5yr/32mil w 16mil guaranteed. With his history of injury and 'vanishing', I want no part of that potential 'dead money'.
It is likely that by NOT signing him to a long-term deal, it will hurt us as a team in Ben's final years to compete in FA and signing competent starters elsewhere but it may be better than eating the dead money if he flames out with a big new contract which would essentially do the same thing. Like I said before, the best case scenario may be that he IS a viable player at LOLB (not a best that we have player like Starks) and we renegotiate next season. All it should cost us is the difference between the 5 yr/ 32-36 w 16mil guaranteed we would have given him this year and the 5 yr 40 mil with 20 mil guaranteed he might deserve next year. I still think bringing back Harrison "pushes" both him and Jones to be the best players they could be this year because HE represents a credible threat to playing time and ultimate perceived value.
Similar threads
