It turns out that the Tribune-Review got it right. McFarland is not a Steeler. The Post-Gazette mistakenly reported on Wednesday the 26th that McFarland had reached an agreement with the Steelers. The Tribune-Review article of the same day had explicitly said that no deal had been reached.
Credit the Tribune-Review’s Scotty Brown for bringing Steelers Nation the hard facts.
By Thursday the 27th, the Post-Gazette had taken the previous day’s article off their main page, and the version that was available on the site’s search engine had been edited. The headline referred to an agreement, the text however did not. (As of today, both the text and the headline have been edited – no correction was announced however.)
How Nick Eason’s signing impacts the Steelers interest in McFarland is still ambiguous. The Post Gazette reported today that the re-signing of Eason ends the Steelers’ interest in McFarland. The Tribune-Review states that it is unclear how reinking Eason affects potential interest in McFarland.
Given that both papers clearly indicated that no negotiations have taken place, it is unlikely that the Steelers will make an offer to McFarland. He might have been an interesting pick up, but given his injury history and the team’s limited salary cap space, this move is understandable.