Hogs Haven Answers Behind Steel Curtain's Questions

Most of the questions were pretty standard, Campbell, Haynesworth, etc. But the question 'Was Antoine Randle-El worth 31 million dollars over seven years?' stumped me a bit. What is your opinion?

6 months ago KevinE 14 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Is he worth $4.4M per year?

Probably not, but he’s not horribly overpaid. Especially if we manage to get him to his natural position in the slot.

by smutsboy1 on Aug 21, 2009 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It shows a big difference in team strategy what roles they pay and what roles they just try to fill on the cheap. Steelers almost always fill Return spots on the cheap, probably why we are frequently weak there.

by Phantaskippy on Aug 21, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Randle-El is signed through 2015

Going to make $5mil next year, 3.8 mil in 2011, 4.2 in 2012…then slight approx $4 the rest of the way out. Not TOO bad.

It’s quite comical that Durant Brooks is costing us $87K against the cap this year.

by KevinE on Aug 21, 2009 12:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I could’ve really use that money too

by snowburnt on Aug 21, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

’Was Antoine Randle-El worth 31 million dollars over seven years?

You guys actually have to think about that?

Love how badly the Steelers guy butchered his name, too.

Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(

by Bye, Dawk :( on Aug 21, 2009 3:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ummm I would say

imho based on the production received for said contract, no

I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....

by piratedan7 on Aug 21, 2009 3:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

it basically

depends on the organization. The Steelers and Redskins operate on totally different wavelengths. While I really like the way Pittsburgh runs their franchise, they aren’t overly loyal to their veteran players year in and year out. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, but some may. Fan favorites who are still productive end up elsewhere because of this way of doing business.

by CJHutch on Aug 21, 2009 5:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

big deal

they always fill the holes left open by the veteran players.

it’s not about being loyal to your veterans, it’s about winning.

by Boney on Aug 23, 2009 4:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

few teams are loyal to the veterans

it’s the way roster mgmt ends up working in the NFL

by smutsboy1 on Aug 23, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

not true

the Redskins are overly loyal to veteran. Maybe not in the traditional sense, but they do keep them around way too long. It’s mainly because they redo contracts every year, making it hard to cut these guys. That’s why Jansen was just cut this year, and he STILL hurts our cap. But we will be paying for guys like Portis, Samuels, R. Thomas, Griffin, etc, etc, etc, long after they’re gone.

by CJHutch on Aug 23, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs