Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Steeler said:

The Steelers didn't low ball Bell, they just couldn't agree on a contract.  Are you saying the Steelers should have given Bell 17M per year like he wanted? 

Apparently there are some people that think if you don't meet the demands of the player then the team is screwing him.  The truth is that both sides were negotiating and couldn't come to an agreement.   There was no bad guy in this situation and really both parties were hurt by the fact that they didn't work out a deal.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gandalf said:

So what is the timeline on Bell this year? When does all this start to go down?

The Steelers must decide by March 5 whether to apply the franchise or transition tag to Bell.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gandalf said:

So what is the timeline on Bell this year? When does all this start to go down?

As Godsbrother mentioned the deadline is March 5, but the process opens up a week from today.  2/19-3/5 is when teams can transition/franchise tag players.

March 5th is also the day after the combine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody think that the Hunt signing actually frees up the market just a bit for Bell? Hunt didn't go to a running back hungry team. In theory, this means that one more team is added to the mix when you think about it (assuming a running back hungry team would have signed Hunt).   

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Anybody think that the Hunt signing actually frees up the market just a bit for Bell? Hunt didn't go to a running back hungry team. In theory, this means that one more team is added to the mix when you think about it (assuming a running back hungry team would have signed Hunt). .  

That’s a great point. It’s more potential starting RB spot for Bell to occupy 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Anybody think that the Hunt signing actually frees up the market just a bit for Bell? Hunt didn't go to a running back hungry team. In theory, this means that one more team is added to the mix when you think about it (assuming a running back hungry team would have signed Hunt). .  

I actually took it as another sign of how little teams value RB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, menobrown said:

I actually took it as another sign of how little teams value RB.

That's also a way to look at it, and a fair point. But Hunt's salary is nothing, and I think that factors into it. I'm not saying this means somebody is going to break the bank for Bell, it just means that he has one more theoretical suitor given the assumption somebody would have signed Hunt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, menobrown said:

I actually took it as another sign of how little teams value RB.

I think Hunt signing with Cleveland might be more his doing. Return home. Stay out of trouble. Etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rockaction said:

That's also a way to look at it, and a fair point. But Hunt's salary is nothing, and I think that factors into it. I'm not saying this means somebody is going to break the bank for Bell, it just means that he has one more theoretical suitor given the assumption somebody would have signed Hunt.  

The bolded is why I commented that it's a sign of how little teams value RB. Because if you had a need at RB you could have in theory filled that need with a proven young player for cheap. Obvious reasons why some teams passed, but if he was not a RB I think he'd have had more interest.

But one thing I thought about Hunt a week or so ago, and really was mulling this over when I was thinking of Bears interest and what they might do with Howard if they had signed Hunt. But a problem that I felt Hunt might face is teams that have immediate need at RB don't have luxury of waiting for his suspension to end or are able to plan properly when they don't know length of that suspension yet.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, menobrown said:

The bolded is why I commented that it's a sign of how little teams value RB. Because if you had a need at RB you could have in theory filled that need with a proven young player for cheap. Obvious reasons why some teams passed, but if he was not a RB I think he'd have had more interest.

But one thing I thought about Hunt a week or so ago, and really was mulling this over when I was thinking of Bears interest and what they might do with Howard if they had signed Hunt. But a problem that I felt Hunt might face is teams that have immediate need at RB don't have luxury of waiting for his suspension to end or are able to plan properly when they don't know length of that suspension yet.

 

All good points, especially the italicized, but I think the kicking of the woman was really the main deterrent. I don't think you can overestimate that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gandalf said:

I think Hunt signing with Cleveland might be more his doing. Return home. Stay out of trouble. Etc. 

Might be right and financially he'll make as much money next year as he'd have made in 19/20 on his Chief contract plus gets to hit RFA.

Joe Banner was going around yesterday saying that Hunt made a mistake signing in Cleveland that he knew for sure other teams had interest in him.  I can see reasons why Hunt wanted to sign with Cleveland. But I doubt interest in him was rabid or anyone was willing to pay much more then Cleveland. I'm thinking he might have had similar offers, but would be surprised if he rejected anything substantially better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rockaction said:

All good points, especially the italicized, but I think the kicking of the woman was really the main deterrent. I don't think you can overestimate that. 

For sure on the bolded, without any doubt at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports "all indications" are the Steelers plan to use the transition tag on free agent Le'Veon Bell.

Yikes. The first day the Steelers can apply the tag is next Tuesday. It is an almost stunning level of pettiness, but within the Steelers' rights via the collective bargaining agreement. Per reporter Gerry Dulac, under no circumstance would the Steelers consider actually keeping Bell. The scheme would also require Bell signing the tag. The Steelers' endgame would be: Getting Bell to sign the tag, matching an offer sheet from another team, and then trading Bell for compensation. It promises to be an acrimonious end to an exceedingly bitter feud.

SOURCE: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Feb 14, 2019, 6:40 PM

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Faust said:

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports "all indications" are the Steelers plan to use the transition tag on free agent Le'Veon Bell.

Yikes. The first day the Steelers can apply the tag is next Tuesday. It is an almost stunning level of pettiness, but within the Steelers' rights via the collective bargaining agreement. Per reporter Gerry Dulac, under no circumstance would the Steelers consider actually keeping Bell. The scheme would also require Bell signing the tag. The Steelers' endgame would be: Getting Bell to sign the tag, matching an offer sheet from another team, and then trading Bell for compensation. It promises to be an acrimonious end to an exceedingly bitter feud.

So let's play this out.  The Steelers slap the transition tag on Bell and his tag value is applied to their cap.

The Steelers can then continue to try and work out a deal with Bell before FA starts.  Obviously very unlikely.

So FA starts and Bell receives an offer he is willing to take, presumably more than the Steelers have offered.

The Steelers can then:

A) Sign Bell and keep him.  Unlikely since it was more than the Steelers offered

B) Sign Bell and try to try to trade him.  Risky cause they are prohibited from trading him to the team that made the offer

C) Not match the offer and get nothing in compensation in 2020.

Oh and since Bell's tag value counts against the cap it could make it difficult to sign FAs that might actually help the team.

I really don't see much upside of this unless the Steelers think there are going to lots of bidders willing to part with trade picks -or- they feel that Bell's market value is less than what they've offered previously and they can get Bell at a discount.

Maybe things will work out but I just don't see it.    Just cut bait, use the added cap space to sign an impact FA, take the compensatory pick next year and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have read, they are not prohibited from trading him to the team that made the offer but would need Bell's permission to do so. From post Gazette web site...

Under the rules of the collective bargaining agreement, they cannot trade Bell for at least one year to a team that submits an offer sheet. The exception is if Bell would agree to the trade. Again, though, that would rely on Bell’s cooperation.

Edited by JoeSteeler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JoeSteeler said:

From what I have read, they are not prohibited from trading him to the team that made the offer but would need Bell's permission to do so. From post Gazette web site...

Under the rules of the collective bargaining agreement, they cannot trade Bell for at least one year to a team that submits an offer sheet. The exception is if Bell would agree to the trade. Again, though, that would rely on Bell’s cooperation.

Which means they are effectively not going to be able to trade him to a team that makes an offer.  Bell's agent should (if he hasn't already) let the Steelers know that Bell will not approve any trade (which is within his rights under the CBA) in that scenario.  If the Steelers are going to use every trick/loophole/detail of the CBA to their advantage, so should Bell.  

With that being said, the Steelers are left with using the transition tag, and being stuck with Bell for more than they want to pay OR losing Bell and getting no compensation, all while seeing their ability to sign players this off-season being severely hindered until a Bell deal is finalized.  Sounds like a great plan.

**ETA-they could tag Bell, match an offer, than trade him to a team that didn't make him an offer, but that seems highly unlikely; as any team that would trade for him could have made an offer while he was a FA without having to give up draft picks**

***2nd edit-just saw @Godsbrotherpost, re: "they feel that Bell's market value is less than what they've offered previously and they can get Bell at a discount."** 

This is interesting.  I'd love for this to be the final outcome, as I think Bell is a great player on a great team, with Pitt.  Maybe he'll be a great player elsewhere, maybe Pitt will be great without him, but those are unknowns.  The question remains though, is there too much bad blood between the Steelers and Bell, and Bell and his teammates (after their criticism of him last year) for this to be viable?  If they could work this out, AND manage to placate AB and bring him back, AND use the money they rolled over last-season to improve their D, that's the best possible outcome.  That's a lot of IF's, however.

Edited by Bayhawks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony in this, if things play out the way things are trending, is that the $14.5 million in salary cap space that PIT will gain from Bell not playing last year will cover roughly 2/3 of the $21.1 million cap hit it will take to move on from Antonio Brown. Essentially, not having either player on the field will cost them an additional $6.6 million in cap space. While we still don't know how this will play out and who the Steelers will get to replace these two, I am pretty sure 15 other AFC teams would LOVE that the Steelers no longer had LB and AB and had to lose cap space in the process.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Godsbrother said:

I really don't see much upside...

Just cut bait.

I agree with your whole post, but especially this part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

I am starting to side with Bell. This just seems really petty of the Steelers. I'd expect it from say Dan Snyder but not this organization. 

I've never faulted either side in this Steelers VS Bell situation - they simply couldn't come to an agreement on a long term contract and Bell didn't want to play for 14.5M last year.  However, this does seem petty of the Steelers because I can't see any logical conclusion that benefits them if they use the tag.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just let the man leave already and move on.  This team(ownership/management/coaching included) has become a dumpster fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

The irony in this, if things play out the way things are trending, is that the $14.5 million in salary cap space that PIT will gain from Bell not playing last year will cover roughly 2/3 of the $21.1 million cap hit it will take to move on from Antonio Brown. Essentially, not having either player on the field will cost them an additional $6.6 million in cap space. While we still don't know how this will play out and who the Steelers will get to replace these two, I am pretty sure 15 other AFC teams would LOVE that the Steelers no longer had LB and AB and had to lose cap space in the process.

I agree though at this point the AB situation has gotten so toxic it is imperative that he be gone, regardless of the cap hit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Steeler said:

I've never faulted either side in this Steelers VS Bell situation - they simply couldn't come to an agreement on a long term contract and Bell didn't want to play for 14.5M last year.  However, this does seem petty of the Steelers because I can't see any logical conclusion that benefits them if they use the tag.

It certainly appears that way but they have more information than we do.  That's not to say they won't screw this up but there might be a scenario that we aren't taking into account

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Godsbrother said:

It certainly appears that way but they have more information than we do.  That's not to say they won't screw this up but there might be a scenario that we aren't taking into account

Sure.  I hope there is some angle I cant see that makes this a good move for the Steelers but right now I don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Godsbrother said:

 

B) Sign Bell and try to try to trade him.  Risky cause they are prohibited from trading him to the team that made the offer

 

Wow I did not realize this part was true - if that's the case this strategy seems ridiculously risky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, brewer said:

Just let the man leave already and move on.  This team(ownership/management/coaching included) has become a dumpster fire.

You know, I was just thinking that Mike Tomlin has probably done a way better job than he gets credit for, for keeping this from becoming a dumpster fire for this long. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, travdogg said:

You know, I was just thinking that Mike Tomlin has probably done a way better job than he gets credit for, for keeping this from becoming a dumpster fire for this long. 

Disagree.  There are various reports of Tomlin allowing stars to skip practices and receive special treatment. 

The guy has a great regular season record but I don't think anyone would say that he won enough in the playoffs with the talent that he has had.  Did his treatment of star players affect that at all... I guess we will never really know, but it seems a fair question to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, brewer said:

Disagree.  There are various reports of Tomlin allowing stars to skip practices and receive special treatment. 

The guy has a great regular season record but I don't think anyone would say that he won enough in the playoffs with the talent that he has had.  Did his treatment of star players affect that at all... I guess we will never really know, but it seems a fair question to ask.

None of that had anything to with the LeVeon Bell situation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Godsbrother said:

None of that had anything to with the LeVeon Bell situation.  

Didn't it?  Bell wanted Brown's money and treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, brewer said:

Didn't it?  Bell wanted Brown's money and treatment.

Tomlin has nothing to do with money and if you have any link on Bell complaining about Brown getting special treatment that he himself wasn't getting I would love to see it.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steeler said:

Sure.  I hope there is some angle I cant see that makes this a good move for the Steelers but right now I don't see it.

 

 

7 hours ago, Godsbrother said:

B) Sign Bell and try to try to trade him.  Risky cause they are prohibited from trading him to the team that made the offer

 

Just spitballing here and it's whole other subject if this would even be the correct path if what I'm speculating was true(I don't think so) but one benefit/goal of this might be to have some say on where he does NOT go and in general it really complicates things for cap strapped teams to sign Bell knowing the Steelers have a week to match and that's a week of prime FA signing they'd have committed that cap space to Bell. As an example blocking him from Baltimore and tying up some of their cap space for a week.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

4 minutes ago, menobrown said:

 

 

Just spitballing here and it's whole other subject if this would even be the correct path if what I'm speculating was true(I don't think so) but one benefit/goal of this might be to have some say on where he does NOT go and in general it really complicates things for cap strapped teams to sign Bell knowing the Steelers have a week to match and that's a week of prime FA signing they'd have committed that cap space to Bell. As an example blocking him from Baltimore and tying up some of their cap space for a week.

 

I am not sure but my guess is if you apply the transition tag and then rescind it you will not receive the compensatory pick.  That's a pretty high price to pay to block him from the Ravens

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

I am not sure but my guess is if you apply the transition tag and then rescind it you will not receive the compensatory pick.  That's a pretty high price to pay to block him from the Ravens

Yep - if they tag him the lose the compensatory pick. 

 

27 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Just spitballing here and it's whole other subject if this would even be the correct path if what I'm speculating was true(I don't think so) but one benefit/goal of this might be to have some say on where he does NOT go and in general it really complicates things for cap strapped teams to sign Bell knowing the Steelers have a week to match and that's a week of prime FA signing they'd have committed that cap space to Bell. As an example blocking him from Baltimore and tying up some of their cap space for a week.

I don't see how the transition tag ties up any team's cap space.  If a team offers a contract to Bell you would have to assume they would do it with/without the tag in place.  Without the tag, they would immediately use the cap space on acquiring Bell.  With the tag, you are saying the team would have to wait one week (to give the Steelers a chance to match) in order to get him on the roster?  The tag (at worst) causes the team to wait a week... it doesn't artificially tie up a teams cap at all because they are willing to spend the money on Bell.

Edited by Steeler
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2019 at 2:40 PM, Bayhawks said:

What is the "long-term benefit?"  That if a player signs with Pitt, the team will gladly employ them while they are underpaid, then use every tool at their disposal to squeeze every last drop of value out of the player, and the player be damned?

I get that what Pitt did what completely in accordance with the CBA (I've been reminded of it many times when I've said that Bell likely feels that Pittsburgh has screwed him over), but just because it aligns with the CBA, and makes smart sense for the team, doesn't make it right.  And, I see no benefit for Pitt, with regards to player negotiations, to come from this.

Do we really think a player is going to say "let's sign/re-sign with Pittsburgh; look at how they treated Bell?"  That's absurd.

And the idea that if they "make it easy" for Bell, they'll lose this imaginary benefit?  Do we really think a player is going to tell his agent "after Pitt used the franchise tag twice on Bell, they then used the transition tag on him; you have to get me on that team?"  Ridiculous.

Vintage Bayhawks..  absurd.... ridiculous...

Apparently, the Steelers will play it their way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   1 member