PDA

View Full Version : Will We Ever See Jehrico Cotchery???


Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 07:39 PM
Will we ever see this guy this season , reason why I ask , instead of extending Aaron Smith for a year, why not cut Cotchery?????

55BaileyFan
10-07-2011, 07:41 PM
Doubt it. If this is like the rest of our team...he will remain hurt all year.

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 07:43 PM
Man, why do we keep him around taking up cap space like Battle? Steelers need to concentrate on locking up Mike Wallace, not giving money to people who don't perform.

davidtrout
10-07-2011, 07:47 PM
Gotta have a full roster. Jericho is not keeping anyone from getting resigned, neither is anyone else. We are not likely to see him on the field unless injury makes it so. Not bad insurance, I say.

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 07:52 PM
Gotta have a full roster. Jericho is not keeping anyone from getting resigned, neither is anyone else. We are not likely to see him on the field unless injury makes it so. Not bad insurance, I say.

Not bad insurance, let me see we got Hines, Wallace, Brown, Sanders, Heath, Saunders, Battle and now Cotchery. Well look at it like this the way things are going, I really hope you didn't jinx us, but if we have to get down that far, we may want to sign T.O. that's how bad that would be.

55BaileyFan
10-07-2011, 07:52 PM
Man, why do we keep him around taking up cap space like Battle? Steelers need to concentrate on locking up Mike Wallace, not giving money to people who don't perform.

Who really cares about Wallace's contract?

If we don't spend money on an offensive line instead of offensive players and linebackers, then we won't have a quarterback to throw the ball because he will be dead.

I understand needing to keep Wallace and drafting lineman for the future...but we need a solid veteran immediately and we will need to spend money to get one.

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 07:57 PM
Who really cares about Wallace's contract?

If we don't spend money on an offensive line instead of offensive players and linebackers, then we won't have a quarterback to throw the ball because he will be dead.

I understand needing to keep Wallace and drafting lineman for the future...but we need a solid veteran immediately and we will need to spend money to get one.

Hey wasn't going to touch the line issue, if it were up to me we would have signed Flozell also. I am talking about solidifying the receiver position, not paying money that is simply wasted. No, I agree, O-Line is the TOP PRIORITY, but face it with Arians in Colbert's ear, we will get another WR next year with the #1 pick.

fer522
10-07-2011, 07:58 PM
Who really cares about Wallace's contract?

If we don't spend money on an offensive line instead of offensive players and linebackers, then we won't have a quarterback to throw the ball because he will be dead.

I understand needing to keep Wallace and drafting lineman for the future...but we need a solid veteran immediately and we will need to spend money to get one.

what he said :thumbsup:

tony hipchest
10-07-2011, 08:02 PM
crotchsniffers salary is guaranteed. no cap space saved by cutting him.

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 08:07 PM
crotchsniffers salary is guaranteed. no cap space saved by cutting him.

Damn, what about next year, make it a package deal Cotchery and Battle, then maybe a nice retirement incentive for Aaron Smith????????

tony hipchest
10-07-2011, 08:12 PM
Damn, what about next year, make it a package deal Cotchery and Battle, then maybe a nice retirement incentive for Aaron Smith????????

lol... both crotchgrabber and battle are on vet minimum deals, i believe, which means you cant divide up their salaries.

the aaron smith deal doesnt seem to be as bad as it appears on the surface, and it serves a good purpose getting max starks back in the fold.

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 08:16 PM
lol... both crotchgrabber and battle are on vet minimum deals, i believe, which means you cant divide up their salaries.

the aaron smith deal doesnt seem to be as bad as it appears on the surface, and it serves a good purpose getting max starks back in the fold.

All right, probably spite and frustration, would feel like an idiot if it works out for the better. Now, I have to say I would have liked to see the "Hotel" back, now that is insurance not Cotchery!

tanda10506
10-07-2011, 08:47 PM
Isn't he still hurt?

Goldsteel86
10-07-2011, 08:49 PM
Isn't he still hurt?

Yes, all season so far!!!!! :mad::banging:

tony hipchest
10-07-2011, 09:01 PM
Isn't he still hurt?

nope... not even listed on the injury report.

he's just not needed, until the injury bug finally hits our wr corps.

btaylor179
10-08-2011, 06:39 AM
we need an o line BADLY

steelbad@50
10-08-2011, 09:42 AM
we need an o line BADLY

nuttin wrong with are O-line:injured: nuttin

Wallabeast17
10-08-2011, 10:14 AM
Yes, all season so far!!!!! :mad::banging:

He was actually on the field...I can't recall what game, maybe vs the Texans? Idk but Battle was even in too a one point, just saying, I did and do support the Cothcery signing, for the vet min. he is a good reciever..

Goldsteel86
10-08-2011, 10:50 AM
He was actually on the field...I can't recall what game, maybe vs the Texans? Idk but Battle was even in too a one point, just saying, I did and do support the Cothcery signing, for the vet min. he is a good reciever..

Nothing wrong with the signing, he proved himself when he played for the Jets against the Steelers, however with a signing comes results, there are no results. Welcome to the Burgh baby, learn to play with pain and to play hurt, the coaches don't know what his body is feeling, hey Hines has done it!!!!! He is in no way better than Hines!!!!

Bayz101
10-09-2011, 09:05 AM
Actually, Cotchery is set to play in todays game, and will probably see some plays.