While news has slowed down concerning contract talks between the Steelers and any of their players who are scheduled to become free agents at the end of the season, that's not exactly anything new.
When the team re-signed Casey Hampton a few years ago, it happened the night of the team's first preseason game. So there's still some time.
Word is, however, that there is some dispute between the coaching staff and the front office as to who should be top priority, defensive end Brett Keisel or placekicker Jeff Reed.
The coaching staff feels it should be Keisel, the front office, Reed.
There's not a lot of money left in the pot right now, so it will be interesting to see if something gets done.
The Steelers will have their franchise tag back at the end of this season after using it on offensive tackle Max Starks.
And if the team fails to get something done with both Keisel and Reed - among others - before we get too close to the regular season, don't be surprised if Reed is tagged.
The franchise tag value for kickers is a heck of a lot less than it is for defensive ends.
Is camp over?
ReplyDeleteNo Camp isn't over yet
ReplyDeleteI'm just giving an update here. But I guess the wise guys out there don't want them.
ReplyDeletethe franchise tag for kickers is 2.5 mil. Thats way too much for Reed.
ReplyDeleteI say get Keisel signed.
ReplyDeleteUm... $2.5 mil is a lot of money for any person to make, but do you have any alternative selections? A strong leg with proven ability and with particularly good, consistent accuracy at Heinz Field? It's not as though teams keep a couple of extra kickers on the PS in order to nurture them along until they're ready...
ReplyDeleteAnyone who thinks Reid isn't worth $2.5 Million is crazy. Reid has won how many games for us with his late game kicking...a lot of them!
ReplyDeleteKeisel will be a nice re-signing, but Reed is an absolute must.
Thanks for the updates Dale.
Reed is clearly worth $2.5M. Do you ever have a fear that Reed will miss a big FG? Remember the crappy feeling in your stomach when our kickers before Reed were attempting a game tying or winning FG? I'd pay him as much as any other kicker in the league, broken paper towel holders or not.
ReplyDeleteKeisel is good but did defensive production ever drop when he was replaced by Kirschke or Eason? Smith is much more valuable and if Ziggy is as good as advertised we're fine. I'd rather re-sign Clark before Keisel.
And keep up the great work Dale. Dale, do you think our KR will be Wallance and PR will be Burnett?
See what Reed does this year. Sign Keisel. Franchise hampton next year
ReplyDeleteWhat more does Reed have to prove to you guys? He's been more clutch than any other kicker in recent history.
ReplyDelete2.5 mil is more than Mendenhall, Sweed, Woodley, Holmes, Hood, Timmons....More than they are all making.
ReplyDeleteI can't think of a franchise being used on a kicker before. I'm sure there has been though.
ReplyDeleteI think you tag Reed. Keisel will come along eventually.
2.5 mil is a lot. But the question isn't, "in a perfect world, what would jeff reed earn next season?" The answer to that is we would extend him and his base would be less than 2.5 million.
ReplyDeleteThe real question is "if we can only sign one guy now, how much do we want to pay to franchise the other?" -- the answer there is clearly 2.5 mil for reed, not the far heftier tag for keisel
And less than, say, the dead money allocations to Simmons or Mahan this year.
ReplyDeleteKoenen and Graham were tagged this year. Josh Brown the year before. I see no problem with tagging Reed if it comes to that.
There is relative value in tagging kickers, TEs, and iirc safeties. Surprised Miller was as high a priority as he was. Not saying he wasn't worth it, just that the urgency wasn't as great with him as it may be with other players.
Not looking like the CBA will be extended before FA next season. If so, teams will have two tags to work with.
maybe they are hesitant to give Reed an extension because he partys a lot and does stupid things
ReplyDeleteThere's only so much money in the pot. In an ideal world, they'd re-sign almost all of their own guys. But that's not the reality of today's NFL landscape.
ReplyDeleteVeterans do, and should, make more money than young guys unless the young guy was a top-10 draft pick.
Dale, what happened to the Ryan Clark extension that you were reporting as being very close when camp started?? He should be priority #1 among our remaining FAs IMO.
ReplyDeleteSounds like Clark wanted bigger money than Steelers had to give.
ReplyDeleteClark and the Steelers haven't talked...there were false reports that they had.
ReplyDeleteClark and the Steelers have talked. The talks were just very preliminary. And they didn't go anywhere.
ReplyDeleteHave you seen any new trick in Dick Lebeau to free up the LB? He deserve to be inthe HOF.
ReplyDeleteI think that proven veterans should make more money than top 10 draft picks. Matthew Stafford does not deserve more money than Jeff Reed. How about they earn it? Then maybe the worst teams won't be penalized more by bankruptcy. I propose a $2 million per year ceiling for all rookies. Call me crazy.
ReplyDeleteI think a QB that is taken #1 overall in the draft should definitly make more that 2.5 million. what he shouldnt make is anything near any top veteran AT HIS POSITION. I definitly think that rookie wage scales are needed but they must take into account the position of the player drafted, just like contracts for NFL veterans do. Rookies should never be in the top 15 in salary at their position in the league.
ReplyDeleteTwo million is pretty low considering the overall value of the cap.
ReplyDeleteThey need to have slotting like they have in the NBA. Each pick makes said amount - regardless of position. The trick is getting the union to back it.
Many of the vets support it, but they have to talk the union heads and agents into realizing its a good thing.
I think as more money is guaranteed in NFL contracts, that will be the way they head.
When I first started covering the league, no teams guaranteed money to players.
i dont see how they could slot players in the draft without consideration for position. Theoretically a place kicker could be taken in the the top 10 and get paid the same as a QB or OT drafted at that position. I dont see how that could be fair when veteran contracts depend so much upon the what other players at that position are making (Ex. franchise tag, transition tag, QB extensions, ect.)
ReplyDelete