Skippy and Big Snack

Some stuff has happened with the Steelers since my last post and I wanted to go on record in saying that I'm glad my prediction of a three year deal for Casey Hampton was right. I also want to go on record as saying that I think it's a terrible move. He's 33, he's overweight (though he doesn't have much of an injury history), he's called "Big Snack," and he'll be 36 when his contract is up. Ted Washington notwithstanding, there haven't been a lot of big, fat guys that have stretched their career into their late 30s.

I also don't know what the Steelers are going to do on defense for the next three years. They aren't going to pay Hampton $21 million to sit on the bench and they can't use him as a 4-3 defensive lineman. Granted, even if Aaron Smith comes back fully healed, we don't have enough linemen for a respectable 3-4 defense, but I really would like to be right at some point and have Tomlin switch them to a Cover 2 package. Maybe when LeBeau retires, if that ever happens.

The signing, in my mind, points to the fact that they haven't drafted well in the last few years, they feel as though they don't have a successor to Hampton (apparently Ziggy Hood is not sufficient), and they want to try to keep the championship window open as long as possible. Well, I'm here to say that there isn't much of a window at this point. The Steelers got old in a hurry, they didn't re-stock the cabinets with young talent through the draft, and they've been living on sheer balls, defense, and quarterback play since late 2007. Their run may not come to an end in 2010. They may not need to blow things up until 2011. But some big decisions and big changes are on the way.

I also realized that the other two teams of the decade -- the Colts and Patriots -- are facing a similar issue. They've been able to keep from disintegrating up to this point because they have Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, respectively, but their windows probably won't stretch beyond the 2010 season, either. It will be interesting to see who emerges. Maybe the Jets. Probably someone from the NFC, as they have a lot of young superstars and some great, emerging quarterbacks.

The point is that all good things come to an end. Kevin Colbert may not be back, eventually the old guard is going to retire, and Mike Tomlin will be left with what he's tried to cobble together since he was hired... which isn't much. If they can have two great drafts the next two years and the rookie class from 2009 shows more than they've shown thus far, then they might be OK. They still have a great owner, a passionate fan base, and a franchise quarterback. But, I have a feeling we're in for a rough patch.

Speaking of rough patches, Jeff Reed was franchised after they signed Hampton (teams are allowed to do that once they sign the player that was previously franchised to a long term deal). I think that was a bad move, too.

I love Jeff Reed. I said last year -- right after he missed two kicks against the Bears -- that he gives the Steelers a tremendous advantage at Heinz Field and he's the reason they get three points for playing at home. But he's still a kicker. For every kicker on an NFL roster, there are two guys that could easily take his place. Reed lost a lot of goodwill with Steeler fans after he got arrested, then missed two field goals against the Bears, but he only missed two kicks the rest of the season, so I think he might be pretty good.

But he's not worth $2.8 million. He's not worth $2.5 million. What I think the Steelers should have done was to put the transition tag on him. The transition tag is very similar to the franchise tag in that the player gets a one-year deal for an obscene amount of money (I think it would have been about $2.6 million). But, there's a couple of key differences.

1. A team that signs that player doesn't have to give that player's team any draft choices in compensation. The team's player can still match the contract offer and keep the player, just like with the franchise tag. With the franchise tag, you need to give the player's team two first round choices if you sign him away, which no one is going to give up for a kicker. So, that means that now the Steelers are only bidding against Reed's unrealistic expectations.
2. It isn't considered as prohibitive or as much of an "insult" to the player that gets tagged, so negotiations are usually more amicable.

If they had transition tagged Reed, he would have found the market for his services to be similar to the one that Max Starks saw when the Steelers transition tagged him in 2008. Starks discovered that no one wanted to sign him for big money and played out the rest of the season. But, the Steelers couldn't just cut him loose because he's a left tackle and was too valuable to the team. Again, Jeff Reed is a kicker.

Two things would have happened if they gave Reed the transition tag. Either he would have seen no market for his services and would have signed a more palatable long term deal to avoid getting cut or someone would have offered him a contract. If he was offered a contract that was within reason, the Steelers would have signed him. If he was offered the kind of money he was looking for, he would have signed with that team and there would have been no bad blood. Reed is well-liked and him leaving with bad blood could have caused issues in the locker room.

Now, Omar Khan and Dan Rooney come to the negotiating table with their expectations, Reed's unrealistic expectations, and the general feeling of animosity hanging over the whole thing. Reed doesn't need to report to camp. He doesn't need to play in the preseason. He could fall out of bed tomorrow morning and kick a 50-yarder through the uprights. That means he'll be a distraction all season, probably make way too much money in 2010, and possibly take up another valuable tag next offseason.

I hope they sign him. I want him to retire as a Steeler. They dropped the ball on this one, though, and I think that it could get ugly.