Mediocre Muth.
- Thread starter snaphook297
- Start date
Art is afraid to ask the minority owners for the money. It was reported last year he was hesitant to buy out the remaining games for Canada's contract for that very reason.
In NFL dollars, it was peanuts. Art II stinks!
Yeah and Kelce put up almost 1,000 yards/5TDs at age 34 on one leg. Pat's career best year is 732/7 (and this is actually two different years combined to help him out).
These guys' 2024 only, not even career years:
McBride - 1,100
Bowers - 1,194
Andrews - 673/11 (and that's this year, which was a health disaster for him since he was recovering from tight rope surgery and a car accident). His best ever is 1,361/9.
Ertz (age 34) - 654/7
Gesicki - 665/2 on his 3rd team in 3 years playing with two alpha WRs that probably got 60%+ of the target share. His career best was 703/6.
Fant - 500/1
Ferguson - 494/0 (14 games and with a backup, career best is 761/5)
So I pretty much nailed it. Pat F is Mike Gesicki, except we gave him a multi-year extension while Gesicki bounces around the league for $2.5 million per season without any long term money. Or maybe he's 34 year old Zach Ertz. Either way, he's not a player who definitely needed an extension. He's extremely mid.
He also doubled his block total...to two. Only costing the stillers $6 mil per block.
Yeah, and Kelce is paid 42% more than Muth at $17.125 million per year.
I don't understand why so many people want to move goalposts instead of just saying "oh, my bad. I wasn't aware of the current Tight End trends of the NFL when I made my post. My mistake, but I still say Muth is overpaid." That's a lot easier than making up some point that I never made, then argue against it.
You stated that Muth wasn't really a Tight End because he played 42% of his snaps in the slot. I pointed out that almost every team's #1 receiving TE plays many of their snaps in the slot. Probably 80% of the top 32 Tight Ends take a third or more of their snaps in the slot. That's just how the NFL is trending.
I'm not even sure why you're posting their stats. Some are better than Muth's, some are worse. If you're saying some of these guys are better than Muth and some are worse than Muth, then I agree. Some of those guys make more than Muth, some make less, some are still on their rookie deals. But what is the actual point you are making? I listed them because they all have 40%+ of their snaps from the slot, but I can't for the life of me figure out what your point is.
As far as Gesicki, he was also coming off two straight seasons that combined for 61 catches and 606 yards with 2 TDs. His 2024 wasn't as good as Muth's, he's older than Muth, he's got 2 out of 3 years below average in a row, but how much you want to bet he gets an $8+ million/year contract this off-season?
He doesn’t need their money - that’s bullshit .
He has a net work over a billion.
Even as a lower end profit owner he’s making like $125mil a year
I know someone said that Gesicki would get an $8+ million/year extension this off season despite below average production for two straight years, I just can't remember who it was. The Bengals didn't even let him get to Free Agency because the price would have shot up.
Sources: Bengals keeping Gesicki on 3-year deal
The Bengals are re-signing tight end Mike Gesicki to a three-year deal worth $25.5 million, sources told ESPN's Adam Schefter.
www.espn.com
I don't even know what your point is here. Gesicki - who the Bengals didn't have to blow a high draft pick on - played on three separate one-year prove-it deals. The cap shot up 25% and the Bengals STILL paid him less guaranteed and over fewer years that the Steelers. Everything the Bengals have done with Gesicki vindicated me.I know someone said that Gesicki would get an $8+ million/year extension this off season despite below average production for two straight years, I just can't remember who it was. The Bengals didn't even let him get to Free Agency because the price would have shot up.
Sources: Bengals keeping Gesicki on 3-year deal
The Bengals are re-signing tight end Mike Gesicki to a three-year deal worth $25.5 million, sources told ESPN's Adam Schefter.www.espn.com
Pat F is crappy Gesicki, who the Steelers wasted a draft pick on and paid 50% more.
I'm with you here. TE should be on the radar to upgrade, but Muth being slightly better than mediocre lowers the priority unless Tyler Warren somehow drops to where the Steelers are picking.
Yep. Teams look to FA before the draft so that they can fill needs and have the ability to zero in on remaining needs through the draft. The Steelers acquired Metcalf and now the WR position is less of a glaring need.
If the Steelers didn’t sign Muth, they either would have had to get a TE in FA or early in the draft. The question I would have is were there any decent TEs in free agency? An elite one would have cost a lot more, and even one of Muths level would have likely cost more than the money used to sign him.
I don't believe elite TE's hit the FA market very often. I also believe that TE performance can be a factor of how a team chooses to use them in their offense. So even getting a TE with great stats as a FA doesn't necessarily mean he'd be good as a Steeler. At a minimum, Muth is adequate in the offense the Steelers run. They should look to get a FA depth piece and should consider drafting one on day 3. Mitchell Evans perhaps in the 4th and definitely 5th if he lasts that long (I believe he can be a starter somewhat early in his career). Even El Barto with one of the 7th round picks. Those are throw away picks for the most part anyways. With 4.7 speed, maybe find a way to have him play special teams.
