Roethlisberger, Steelers Agree to New Contract

[topseed]

You can doom and glom until you croak for all I give a ****. You can stick your QB rating and all the other fantasy football statistical garbage up your whiny ***. He played great last season, he has at least a couple good years left in him barring injury. Not YOU, or anyone else, can predict such an injury to him, Rodgers, Brady, Manning, or any other professional player. He's the best QB we've had in over twenty years. He got paid the market value he earned. You want to wait for the inevitable decline in a couple years? Go ahead. Never once did I say he wasn't nearing that very decline. By all means, do what half the people here do and ***** about something that should be seen as a positive. It's been the prevailing mojo here for a couple years now. I'm done.

YOU said that Ben never played better than last season, and "anyone who watched the games" knows it. Well, the playoffs are part of the season, right? Against Baltimore at home in the regular season, he had 6 touchdowns and 0 INTs in a 20-point win. In the playoffs, he had 1 touchdown and 2 INTs in a 13-point loss.

Sorry if I"m all "doom and glom" and my "whiny ***" isn't creaming in my pants about how wonderful Ben was last year, because the fact of the matter is he hasn't played very well in the postseason for quite some time now. Statistics, the team's record, AND the eye test all bear that out. Go ahead and ignore it.

And you're clueless -- if anybody needs "fantasy football statistical garbage" to help his argument, it's certainly not me. In fact, I sardonically pointed out his 334 yards in that playoff game to prove that his regular season yardage crown doesn't mean ****, but I guess you aren't bright enough to understand that

 

[topseed]

Takes two people to negotiate. The Steelers really don't have a lot of choices at the position and for all we know the final terms were a lot less than what Roethlisberger came to the table wanting.

If we figure on the salary cap continuing at rise at $10-$11 million/year increases and figure Roethlisberger restructures next year:

2015: $17.95 cap out of $143.2 million = 12.53%
2016: $11.95 cap/ $154.0 million = 7.76%
2017: $22.2 cap/ $165.0 million = 13.45%
2018: $27.2 cap/ $176.0 million = 15.45%
2019: $27.2 cap/ $188.0 million = $14.47%


Now compare that to what's we've done with Roethlisberger his LAST contract:

2008: $7.97 cap hit out of $116 million = 6.87%
2009: $13.22 cap/$123 million = 10.75%
2010: No salary cap
2011: $11.32 cap/$120 million = 9.43%
2012: $8.895 cap/$120.6 million = 7.38%
2013: $13.595 cap/$123 million = 11.05%
2014: $18.895 cap/ $133 million = $14.21%

Basically the last three seasons (2012-2014) Roethlisberger has used up a total of 11.0% of our cap. Over the next three years (2015-2017) you're looking at in the ballpark of 11.3% to 11.5% depending on how aggressive they get with next year's restructuring.

That's not crazy.

It all really comes down to the end of Roethlisberger's career when everyone knows we're going to be eating tons of dead money the season or two after Roethlisberger is not longer on the team (i.e. retired or gone). That's kind of inevitable but you have to think the quarterback we have actually playing will NOT be a $20 million/year player either.

2015 and '16 are better figures than I thought they might be, which is good, but the piper will have to be paid eventually as Ben's skills really decline. Those are going to be some dark years.

 

[topseed]

no team ever "spied" on Ben the way teams did with Vick, Newton, Griffin, etc. He was never a threat to rip off big chunks of yards with his legs. What Ben did, and still CAN do is extend the play by getting outside the pocket. It was never his speed that made this possible, but his size and strength. Teams still try to keep Ben in the pocket, but with Haley's offense, he hasn't needed to push off defenders get outside the numbers and chuck one deep to a wide open guy after 10 seconds. The fact that Ben had so much success INSIDE the pocket this past year is just further proof that he will be able to play well and continue to play well as he ages.

True, Ben was never a chunk yardage guy with his legs, but his willingness to scramble and create big plays on the run well outside the pocket was one of the things I loved about watching him play, even at Miami. He has what I would call "pocket mobility" now, where he can extend the play by shaking free of a defender, but I think the days of "Vintage Ben" are pretty much over. Hopefully he can adapt to a more limited style, and still be effective. Good line play is the key, and I thought the Steelers had that for most of last season.

 

[insaniti]

YOU said that Ben never played better than last season, and "anyone who watched the games" knows it. Well, the playoffs are part of the season, right? Against Baltimore at home in the regular season, he had 6 touchdowns and 0 INTs in a 20-point win. In the playoffs, he had 1 touchdown and 2 INTs in a 13-point loss.

Sorry if I"m all "doom and glom" and my "whiny ***" isn't creaming in my pants about how wonderful Ben was last year, because the fact of the matter is he hasn't played very well in the postseason for quite some time now. Statistics, the team's record, AND the eye test all bear that out. Go ahead and ignore it.

And you're clueless -- if anybody needs "fantasy football statistical garbage" to help his argument, it's certainly not me. In fact, I sardonically pointed out his 334 yards in that playoff game to prove that his regular season yardage crown doesn't mean ****, but I guess you aren't bright enough to understand that

So you don't think not having a viable running back during the playoff game had any effect on Ben's play? Or that Baltimore was missing several key players in the 6 TD game, that they got back for the playoff game. It's just a coincidence that Ben was hit in that game more than he had been in the last five weeks of the season? We had no threat to run the ball, the guy we signed to hold Bell's spot fumbled the ball on one of his few carries.

This hasn't played well in the post season as of late isn't an argument. Our D has played like **** for years, giving up big leads in the fourth quarter of games, we only played in one playoff game since the loss in the super bowl, so lets put that ALL on Ben right? He played injured in the Denver playoff game, but still got us in position to tie the game in the fourth quarter, then Ike gets burned on the first play in overtime... yup, Bens fault. The D didn't help in the Green Bay super bowl either (neither did Kemo, being the direct reason for the pick six).

It's all Ben's fault, why didn't we trade him instead of signing him to the extension, the FO just wants to screw everything up, we'll never win anything ever again as long as Ben is here...[sarcasm off]

 

[topseed]

So you don't think not having a viable running back during the playoff game had any effect on Ben's play? Or that Baltimore was missing several key players in the 6 TD game, that they got back for the playoff game. It's just a coincidence that Ben was hit in that game more than he had been in the last five weeks of the season? We had no threat to run the ball, the guy we signed to hold Bell's spot fumbled the ball on one of his few carries.

This hasn't played well in the post season as of late isn't an argument. Our D has played like **** for years, giving up big leads in the fourth quarter of games, we only played in one playoff game since the loss in the super bowl, so lets put that ALL on Ben right? He played injured in the Denver playoff game, but still got us in position to tie the game in the fourth quarter, then Ike gets burned on the first play in overtime... yup, Bens fault. The D didn't help in the Green Bay super bowl either (neither did Kemo, being the direct reason for the pick six).

It's all Ben's fault, why didn't we trade him instead of signing him to the extension, the FO just wants to screw everything up, we'll never win anything ever again as long as Ben is here...[sarcasm off]

Yes, not having Bell was a factor, but Bell only had 20 yards on 10 carries in the first game, so his viability was limited by the Ravens, in spite of them missing "several key players." Who were those guys, by the way? Go back and watch the game again. Ben, yes, B-E-N missed a lot of open throws in that game. I know it's hard for you to believe, but it really happened. He didn't play well.

Sure, the D sucks lately, but the confidence I used to have in Ben coming back and taking the lead late in games is all but gone. Funny you should mention the Denver game, because the defense indeed got the ball back for Ben, at the 24 yardline, needing only a mile-high field goal to win, with over a minute-and-a-half and two timeouts left, against Denver's 18th-ranked pass defense. Unfortunately, he took three sacks on the drive (of course, we can conveniently blame the line for all of those, right?) and the rest is history. The Steelers were lucky to get to that Super Bowl against Green Bay in the first place, after Ben's 133-yard, 0 touchdown, and 2 INT performance against the Jets, but let's just give him all the credit for that win, too. Ben can do no wrong.

Ben is all-world and has never thrown a bad pass. He has never taken a sack where he bears any responsibility. It's everyone else's fault that in the past four years, he has missed the postseason entirely twice, and lost both his playoff games as a favorite, one of those to an 8-8 Tim Tebow-led team. [sarcasm off]

 

[insaniti]

See you like to hyperbole everything. It's always Ben's fault when we lose, not the team. I never said Ben played great, but there were other factors contributing to the games that you want to bring up. Sure Bell only had 20 yards, but they still had to respect him and couldn't pin their ears back and go after Ben like they did in the playoff game. One key player they were missing was Ngata, and he made his presence known IMMEDIATELY! Their secondary was COMPLETELY different the second time around. Ben also shouldn't have been let back on the field when he got crushed in the redzone. Came back and you could see he wasn't right, that one is on the coaches, not Ben.

And there you go again, BEN lost the game, not the Steelers. I don't why I expect anything else from you...

 

[topseed]

See you like to hyperbole everything. It's always Ben's fault when we lose, not the team. I never said Ben played great, but there were other factors contributing to the games that you want to bring up. Sure Bell only had 20 yards, but they still had to respect him and couldn't pin their ears back and go after Ben like they did in the playoff game. One key player they were missing was Ngata, and he made his presence known IMMEDIATELY! Their secondary was COMPLETELY different the second time around. Ben also shouldn't have been let back on the field when he got crushed in the redzone. Came back and you could see he wasn't right, that one is on the coaches, not Ben.

And there you go again, BEN lost the game, not the Steelers. I don't why I expect anything else from you...

There I go again? I'm using hyperbole? You're a treasure. Yes, I just made all that **** up about how much I've loved watching Ben play since he was in college, and how he did indeed have a productive year in 2014, and how I'd be happy if he has three more quality seasons, and how I hope he can be still be effective as a pocket passer if the line can play well, and how the defense sucks lately...because you know that somehow this all means that I think it's always HIS AND ONLY HIS fault when the Steelers lose.

What you NEVER say is that Ben has games where he just doesn't perform, and you'll look for every possible reason to excuse him from those aforementioned losses. Whether it's the coaches, or the running backs, or the offensive line, or the other team being too good, or Ben playing hurt, or the good ol' ****** defense's fault, you'll name it, as long as Ben is absolved from any and all blame. I don't know why I would bother to ask you (and your Ben doll) to actually be objective and watch the game again...if you did, you'd surely accuse the receivers of running the wrong routes.

 

[insaniti]

And this is where you're completely ******* wrong. I can admit when Ben plays poorly and is the DIRECT result of a loss. He was not the DIRECT result for the loss to Baltimore. But you like to put the losses DIRECTLY on his shoulders as if he's the only person that can decide the outcome of the game. You crawl out of your hole once every couple months to ***** and moan...just stay in your ******* hole.

 

[deljzc]

Even the greatest of the great QB's have warts when you pick their careers apart.

Some here don't want Peyton Manning because he's a regular season Tarzan and a playoff season Jane. Some don't like Tom Brady because they "think" his accomplishments were gotten by ill gains. Elway? Had more interceptions than touchdowns through the first 10 seasons in the NFL and never won squat until they cheated the cap, created a dominant, dirty cut blocking team and ran Terrell Davis into the ground.

Really is any quarterback perfect?

Roethlisberger is an ALL-TIME top 20 quarterback to ever put on cleats since 1960 and it's not even a debate. Does he have flaws? Of course. So did Aikman, Tarkenton, Warner, Dawson, Brees and whoever else you want to put in that #13-#20 all-time group.

The thing is money will NEVER make sense for quarterbacks. It won't because the demand far outweighs the supply. And even if you don't have an "A" elite quarterback in the league (like Manning, Brady or Rogers) and you're stuck with a "B" level (think top-5 to top-8 level QB in the league) or "C" level guy (think #9-#15), you still have to pay them because there are no other options.

Beggers can't be choosers and the issue is even if you have the #10 QB in the league (think Eli Manning or Joe Flacco) the option of NOT paying them is the likely potential of having a QB that is in the bottom half of the league. And history shows if you don't have a top-15 quarterback, you rarely make the playoffs, let alone make a run at a Super Bowl championship.

But history has shown that even having just a top-10 QB in the league, if you do everything else correct, you CAN win it all.

So those are the choices teams are faced with.

Saying "I would have just paid him so-and-so" doesn't work. He gets upset, walks away from the table and mopes his way to a trade or free agency. An unhappy quarterback can undermine everything in an organization to the point it's completely dysfunctional.

.There is no perfect quarterback. The real question always comes down to whether you are getting good enough play from the position to win and go deep in the playoffs. I don't think there is any doubt Roethlisberger provides good enough (and consistent enough) play at the position to get into the playoffs and make a run at a Super Bowl.

Once that's the answer, there isn't any "wrong" amount of money to pay for it.

 

[topseed]

And this is where you're completely ******* wrong. I can admit when Ben plays poorly and is the DIRECT result of a loss. He was not the DIRECT result for the loss to Baltimore. But you like to put the losses DIRECTLY on his shoulders as if he's the only person that can decide the outcome of the game. You crawl out of your hole once every couple months to ***** and moan...just stay in your ******* hole.

Show me one time, ever, where you've admitted Ben has played poorly and blamed the loss directly on him. You're full of ****, as usual. I guess in your Bizarro world, when I objectively said that Ben missed a lot of throws and didn't play well, it meant I was blaming him and him only for the loss. Whatever, guy. Your reading comprehension sucks dick.

And forgive me. I do get lost in your old lady's hole for months at a time. It's cavernous in there.

 

[topseed]

Even the greatest of the great QB's have warts when you pick their careers apart.

Some here don't want Peyton Manning because he's a regular season Tarzan and a playoff season Jane. Some don't like Tom Brady because they "think" his accomplishments were gotten by ill gains. Elway? Had more interceptions than touchdowns through the first 10 seasons in the NFL and never won squat until they cheated the cap, created a dominant, dirty cut blocking team and ran Terrell Davis into the ground.

Really is any quarterback perfect?

Roethlisberger is an ALL-TIME top 20 quarterback to ever put on cleats since 1960 and it's not even a debate. Does he have flaws? Of course. So did Aikman, Tarkenton, Warner, Dawson, Brees and whoever else you want to put in that #13-#20 all-time group.

The thing is money will NEVER make sense for quarterbacks. It won't because the demand far outweighs the supply. And even if you don't have an "A" elite quarterback in the league (like Manning, Brady or Rogers) and you're stuck with a "B" level (think top-5 to top-8 level QB in the league) or "C" level guy (think #9-#15), you still have to pay them because there are no other options.

Beggers can't be choosers and the issue is even if you have the #10 QB in the league (think Eli Manning or Joe Flacco) the option of NOT paying them is the likely potential of having a QB that is in the bottom half of the league. And history shows if you don't have a top-15 quarterback, you rarely make the playoffs, let alone make a run at a Super Bowl championship.

But history has shown that even having just a top-10 QB in the league, if you do everything else correct, you CAN win it all.

So those are the choices teams are faced with.

Saying "I would have just paid him so-and-so" doesn't work. He gets upset, walks away from the table and mopes his way to a trade or free agency. An unhappy quarterback can undermine everything in an organization to the point it's completely dysfunctional.

.There is no perfect quarterback. The real question always comes down to whether you are getting good enough play from the position to win and go deep in the playoffs. I don't think there is any doubt Roethlisberger provides good enough (and consistent enough) play at the position to get into the playoffs and make a run at a Super Bowl.

Once that's the answer, there isn't any "wrong" amount of money to pay for it.

By the same token, even a great quarterback can only take a mediocre team so far. Think Marino, Fouts, Tarkenton, or Moon. And when the rest of the team IS good enough, guys like Rypien, Hostetler, Doug Williams, Dilfer, and Flacco become champions. That's the problem with the current Steelers...they don't have enough time to make a Super Bowl run while Ben is still elite because of their weakness and lack of depth in so many areas on defense.

 

[obxsteeler]

By the same token, even a great quarterback can only take a mediocre team so far. Think Marino, Fouts, Tarkenton, or Moon. And when the rest of the team IS good enough, guys like Rypien, Hostetler, Doug Williams, Dilfer, and Flacco become champions. That's the problem with the current Steelers...they don't have enough time to make a Super Bowl run while Ben is still elite because of their weakness and lack of depth in so many areas on defense.

Tarkenton took his team to 3 SB's and Marino to 1. Moon and Fout's both made a number of runs(as has Flacco). So that means 4 average QB's in over 50 yrs have won it all. More good reason to resign Ben-and I wouldn't write off rebuilding the D to a level where he can take us there.