Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

My take is Pittsburgh has instructed any interested parties not publicly state interest in Bell. If Bell doesn't want to be traded all he has to do is wait until week 10 to report and the trade deadline will have passed. However, if he signs the franchise tag next week, then Pittsburgh is free to deal him anywhere. If I'm Pittsburgh I have deals in place while telling Bell no deal will happen. Then the second he signs you ship him out the door. Bell wasn't forthcoming with the organization, they have reason to be honest with him. Still no doubt the biggest boneheaded "holdout" in NFL history. Putting 865K in the fireplace every Sunday to have his long-term value decline. Brilliant strategy.

Share this post


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

My take is Pittsburgh has instructed any interested parties not publicly state interest in Bell. If Bell doesn't want to be traded all he has to do is wait until week 10 to report and the trade deadline will have passed. However, if he signs the franchise tag next week, then Pittsburgh is free to deal him anywhere. If I'm Pittsburgh I have deals in place while telling Bell no deal will happen. Then the second he signs you ship him out the door. Bell wasn't forthcoming with the organization, they have reason to be honest with him. Still no doubt the biggest boneheaded "holdout" in NFL history. Putting 865K in the fireplace every Sunday to have his long-term value decline. Brilliant strategy.

I agree that he is essentially burning nearly a million a week out of a very short shelf life in terms of NFL careers generally tend to be for Running Backs, but I don't know he is ruining his long term value. That remains to be seen. 

Share this post


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

I agree that he is essentially burning nearly a million a week out of a very short shelf life in terms of NFL careers generally tend to be for Running Backs, but I don't know he is ruining his long term value. That remains to be seen. 

How can you lock up a ton of money in someone (especially at that position) that you can't trust not to burn you? He's showing all suitors his lack of passion for the game and his lack of character. Even his ESPN interview where he finally told everyone what his plans are, he said he was coming back to "put up numbers". (He did mention winning a Superbowl with the Steelers but given how he screwed them this season, that's laughable.) Everyone watching Conner go off in that offense not helping his cause either. He'll play somewhere next season for decent money but he wouldn't have made a boatload more if he showed up week one and played like he's capable of the entire season? And if he was worried about a career ending injury he could have used a portion of that 14.5 million dollar salary to put his mind at ease. Gave away a year in his prime and millions of dollars when he didn't have to. Bad advice, flat out stupidity, or both.

If he comes back next week and blows the doors off the rest of the season, maybe, maybe he salvages some of his reputation and comes close to what he would have gotten next year if he didn't pull this stunt.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Nipsey said:

How can you lock up a ton of money in someone (especially at that position) that you can't trust not to burn you? He's showing all suitors his lack of passion for the game and his lack of character. Even his ESPN interview where he finally told everyone what his plans are, he said he was coming back to "put up numbers". (He did mention winning a Superbowl with the Steelers but given how he screwed them this season, that's laughable.) Everyone watching Conner go off in that offense not helping his cause either. He'll play somewhere next season for decent money but he wouldn't have made a boatload more if he showed up week one and played like he's capable of the entire season? And if he was worried about a career ending injury he could have used a portion of that 14.5 million dollar salary to put his mind at ease. Gave away a year in his prime and millions of dollars when he didn't have to. Bad advice, flat out stupidity, or both.

If he comes back next week and blows the doors off the rest of the season, maybe, maybe he salvages some of his reputation and comes close to what he would have gotten next year if he didn't pull this stunt.

This is also how I see it. Just think that he miscalculated his importance to NFL franchises. It’s too bad that football evolved in this way but RBs are irrelevant 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Nipsey said:

How can you lock up a ton of money in someone (especially at that position) that you can't trust not to burn you? He's showing all suitors his lack of passion for the game and his lack of character. Even his ESPN interview where he finally told everyone what his plans are, he said he was coming back to "put up numbers". (He did mention winning a Superbowl with the Steelers but given how he screwed them this season, that's laughable.) Everyone watching Conner go off in that offense not helping his cause either. He'll play somewhere next season for decent money but he wouldn't have made a boatload more if he showed up week one and played like he's capable of the entire season? And if he was worried about a career ending injury he could have used a portion of that 14.5 million dollar salary to put his mind at ease. Gave away a year in his prime and millions of dollars when he didn't have to. Bad advice, flat out stupidity, or both.

If he comes back next week and blows the doors off the rest of the season, maybe, maybe he salvages some of his reputation and comes close to what he would have gotten next year if he didn't pull this stunt.

And reportedly if he would have signed the Steelers offer that was on the table he would have had $21 million guaranteed in 2018, not to mention incentives.  

Share this post


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

Strictly from a fantasy foosball perspective, this would be more than ideal for owners of both Bell and Conner. Specifically, me! 

Uhhh, I'd have Bell, Hunt, Conner, Howard, Fornette, Lindsay, and Foreman on my IR ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shoecrew22 said:

Uhhh, I'd have Bell, Hunt, Conner, Howard, Fornette, Lindsay, and Foreman on my IR ?

It’s probably unlikely he’s traded. I’d much rather speculate on the fantasy aspect of his return or potential trade than go round and round and round and round on his holdout and how it affects some people on a personal level. It’ll be interesting to see distribution of touches if Bell stays with Steelers this season. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It’s probably unlikely he’s traded. I’d much rather speculate on the fantasy aspect of his return or potential trade than go round and round and round and round on his holdout and how it affects some people on a personal level. It’ll be interesting to see distribution of touches if Bell stays with Steelers this season. 

Big Ben was asked about Conner's usage once Bell returns on his weekly morning show.  He said he is glad he didn't have to make that decision but then went on to say that he doesn't think that Bell returning would put Conner in a backup role.   He sees them both at getting carries.

I realize that it is not particularly helpful info Fantasy-wise but until he reports this is about as much as you're going to get.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Big Ben was asked about Conner's usage once Bell returns on his weekly morning show.  He said he is glad he didn't have to make that decision but then went on to say that he doesn't think that Bell returning would put Conner in a backup role.   He sees them both at getting carries.

I realize that it is not particularly helpful info Fantasy-wise but until he reports this is about as much as you're going to get.

Do you believe that offense could support 2 fantasy starting RBs? Clearly at a level much lower than current individual production. 

Share this post


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

Do you believe that offense could support 2 fantasy starting RBs? Clearly at a level much lower than current individual production. 

It would be a departure for Mike Tomlin, that's for sure.   He typically has a bell cow and very occasionally brings in someone to spell the lead back.   I suppose it could work but we haven't seen the Steelers employ it for a very long time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a Steeler fan, have no insight that the fans/locals have but it would be a really ####ty look if Bell comes back during the bye then immediately takes over a huge chunk of the work I would think - even if he is ready to which also may be in question.

He's better so I could see him slowly taking over more as the season goes on for sure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

How can you lock up a ton of money in someone (especially at that position) that you can't trust not to burn you? He's showing all suitors his lack of passion for the game and his lack of character.

I just don't agree with any of this.  Or at least I don't believe you can make these personal judgments of the guy from this scenario.

It is business.  Not sure how you can infer a man's character or trustworthiness or passion for a game from a business decision that has nothing to do with either.

Edited by matuski
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the Steelers are diligently trying to trade him, but until Bell signs they will never admit it for these two main reasons:

(1) They want Bell to report during the bye week so they have time to trade him

(2) If Bell finds out who he's getting traded to, he might not agree and decide to show up after the trade deadline and the PS lose all leverage. 

If they can't pull off a deal, I think they keep Conner as the starter and slowly work Bell back in.  If last year is any indication, there's no way Bell comes in ready to play at Conner's level.  And unless Conner gets hurt I don't see Bell becoming the bell-cow anytime this year.

My prediction from a fantasy perspective:  If Bell doesn't get traded he's going to be a major disappointment this year. 

Share this post


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

I'm sure the Steelers are diligently trying to trade him, but until Bell signs they will never admit it for these two main reasons:

(1) They want Bell to report during the bye week so they have time to trade him

(2) If Bell finds out who he's getting traded to, he might not agree and decide to show up after the trade deadline and the PS lose all leverage. 

If they can't pull off a deal, I think they keep Conner as the starter and slowly work Bell back in.  If last year is any indication, there's no way Bell comes in ready to play at Conner's level.  And unless Conner gets hurt I don't see Bell becoming the bell-cow anytime this year.

My prediction from a fantasy perspective:  If Bell doesn't get traded he's going to be a major disappointment this year. 

already has been

Share this post


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

I'm sure the Steelers are diligently trying to trade him, but until Bell signs they will never admit it for these two main reasons:

(1) They want Bell to report during the bye week so they have time to trade him

(2) If Bell finds out who he's getting traded to, he might not agree and decide to show up after the trade deadline and the PS lose all leverage. 

If they can't pull off a deal, I think they keep Conner as the starter and slowly work Bell back in.  If last year is any indication, there's no way Bell comes in ready to play at Conner's level.  And unless Conner gets hurt I don't see Bell becoming the bell-cow anytime this year.

My prediction from a fantasy perspective:  If Bell doesn't get traded he's going to be a major disappointment this year. 

Bell can make a no trade clause a condition of his signing the tag. The Steelers of course do not have to agree to that - so each side still has a little leverage.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, kyoun1e said:

They should trade Foles to NE...

Stay golden, Pony Boy, stay golden!  

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, moondog said:

Bell can make a no trade clause a condition of his signing the tag. The Steelers of course do not have to agree to that - so each side still has a little leverage.  

If Bell wants to get paid he needs to get traded.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, matuski said:

I just don't agree with any of this.  Or at least I don't believe you can make these personal judgments of the guy from this scenario.

It is business.  Not sure how you can infer a man's character or trustworthiness or passion for a game from a business decision that has nothing to do with either.

It's not just the decision, it's the way he's gone about executing it. Had he come out right after the deadline to sign a long term deal passed and said something then about not reporting until week 10, wanting to limit wear and tear, and being fearful of injury while not under long term contract, then it wouldn't have been seen as a huge issue in terms of his image within league circles. Instead he was disingenuous saying publicly he was all in once the season started. He blindsided the organization and his teammates with his "holdout". You want to lock a guy in for max dollars who does something like that?  What happens after year one of the deal when he thinks he should be getting more money? He's a potential long-term headache. You don't think that came into the thinking of Steeler brass during these last round of negotiations? No doubt a great player but c'mon, this whole episode is bush-league.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Nipsey said:

It's not just the decision, it's the way he's gone about executing it. Had he come out right after the deadline to sign a long term deal passed and said something then about not reporting until week 10, wanting to limit wear and tear, and being fearful of injury while not under long term contract, then it wouldn't have been seen as a huge issue in terms of his image within league circles. Instead he was disingenuous saying publicly he was all in once the season started. He blindsided the organization and his teammates with his "holdout". You want to lock a guy in for max dollars who does something like that?  What happens after year one of the deal when he thinks he should be getting more money? He's a potential long-term headache. You don't think that came into the thinking of Steeler brass during these last round of negotiations? No doubt a great player but c'mon, this whole episode is bush-league.

I see a bunch of assumptions here.  I get it.. but you are arguing one side of the story, with only what information (right or wrong.. intentionally or not) the media has been able to feed you.

We have - from what I have seen to date - zero actual information on the negotiations (the business).

Edited by matuski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, matuski said:

I just don't agree with any of this.  Or at least I don't believe you can make these personal judgments of the guy from this scenario.

It is business.  Not sure how you can infer a man's character or trustworthiness or passion for a game from a business decision that has nothing to do with either.

Exactly. Underperform your contract and the team is going to burn you by voiding the rest of it and send you packing. We don't vilify teams when they jettison players as such. They have all the control after the player signs. We are we vilifying a player for maximizing the control he has before he signs? It's a business. Both sides will do, and should do, whatever they need to in order to get the most for themselves. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still hope the Steelers use the 2 week roster exemption on Bell so he can't get paid on the bye week 7.  It's a business decision, right? The Steelers should take that extra $1.7M and roll it into next year rather than paying him that money for one game.

Doubt they will since week 8 is now a meaningful game against the Browns, but it'd be nice to see.

I've never faulted Bell for what he's done. His choice, his money. But I expect the Steelers to act in their own best interests too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Help me on this one.   When Bell reports he will have lost almost 6 million in wages he can`t get back. Steelers last long term offer assured Bell of 32 million for the first 2 years correct?   Is Bell going to get a deal that will pay as much and be able to make up what he has lost?

Share this post


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

Help me on this one.   When Bell reports he will have lost almost 6 million in wages he can`t get back. Steelers last long term offer assured Bell of 32 million for the first 2 years correct?   Is Bell going to get a deal that will pay as much and be able to make up what he has lost?

No, incorrect.  The deal he said no to reportedly had a little over $20M fully guaranteed for this year between signing bonus and his first year salary that would've been guaranteed shortly after signing the contract.  Apparently nothing else in the contract really "counts."

Nevermind that's just about the same amount of fully guaranteed money Gurley and Johnson got.... details, details.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2018 at 11:48 AM, Chaz McNulty said:

After the first game (getting Bell up to speed), they will play Bell almost exclusively.

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2018/10/09/antonio-brown-ben-roethlisberger-937-the-fan-steelers-bengals/stories/201810090109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steelers4Life said:

No, incorrect.  The deal he said no to reportedly had a little over $20M fully guaranteed for this year between signing bonus and his first year salary that would've been guaranteed shortly after signing the contract.  Apparently nothing else in the contract really "counts."

Nevermind that's just about the same amount of fully guaranteed money Gurley and Johnson got.... details, details.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-rams/todd-gurley-16734/

Quote

Todd Gurley signed a 4 year, $57,500,000 contract with the Los Angeles Rams, including a $21,000,000 signing bonus, $45,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $14,375,000. In 2018, Gurley will earn a base salary of $950,000 and a signing bonus of $21,000,000, while carrying a cap hit of $7,228,306 and a dead cap value of $24,028,306.

 

Edited by eNdblu
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Todd Gurley signed a four year, $57.5 million contract extension with the Rams on July 25, 2018. Details of the contract come from a report from Mike Florio of PFT. Gurley received $45 million in guarantees, $21.95 million of which is guaranteed at signing, including a $21 million signing bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2019 league year his base salary and 2020 3rd day of the league year roster bonus which total $12.55 million will become fully guaranteed. On the 3rd day of the 2020 league year the final $10.5 million in injury guarantees becomes fully guaranteed. This includes Gurley's 2021 3rd day of the league year roster bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2021 and 2022 league years Gurley will earn a non guaranteed $1 million roster bonus. Those same years Gurley will earn a $4 million reporting bonus. There are also $2.5 million in escalators that can increase the total contract value to $60 million if earned. Gurley's cap figure in 2018 increased by $2.8 million and his 2019 cap figure decreased by $430,000.

https://overthecap.com/player/todd-gurley/3858

The ONLY part of Gurley's contract that was fully guaranteed was the $21.95M, which included his 1st year salary. The rest are rolling guarantees that only vest during the league years, similar to what the Steelers have offered to Bell both last year and again this year.

Gurley received a TOTAL of $45M in guarantees, but not even half of that was guaranteed at signing.  And I've been told many times that only fully guaranteed money at signing counts.

Edited by Steelers4Life
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steelers4Life said:

Todd Gurley signed a four year, $57.5 million contract extension with the Rams on July 25, 2018. Details of the contract come from a report from Mike Florio of PFT. Gurley received $45 million in guarantees, $21.95 million of which is guaranteed at signing, including a $21 million signing bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2019 league year his base salary and 2020 3rd day of the league year roster bonus which total $12.55 million will become fully guaranteed. On the 3rd day of the 2020 league year the final $10.5 million in injury guarantees becomes fully guaranteed. This includes Gurley's 2021 3rd day of the league year roster bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2021 and 2022 league years Gurley will earn a non guaranteed $1 million roster bonus. Those same years Gurley will earn a $4 million reporting bonus. There are also $2.5 million in escalators that can increase the total contract value to $60 million if earned. Gurley's cap figure in 2018 increased by $2.8 million and his 2019 cap figure decreased by $430,000.

https://overthecap.com/player/todd-gurley/3858

The ONLY part of Gurley's contract that was fully guaranteed was the $21.95M, which included his 1st year salary. The rest are rolling guarantees that only vest during the league years, similar to what the Steelers have offered to Bell both last year and again this year.

Gurley received a TOTAL of $45M in guarantees, but not even half of that was guaranteed at signing.  And I've been told many times that only fully guaranteed money at signing counts.

HELLO EXACTLY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Steelers4Life said:

Todd Gurley signed a four year, $57.5 million contract extension with the Rams on July 25, 2018. Details of the contract come from a report from Mike Florio of PFT. Gurley received $45 million in guarantees, $21.95 million of which is guaranteed at signing, including a $21 million signing bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2019 league year his base salary and 2020 3rd day of the league year roster bonus which total $12.55 million will become fully guaranteed. On the 3rd day of the 2020 league year the final $10.5 million in injury guarantees becomes fully guaranteed. This includes Gurley's 2021 3rd day of the league year roster bonus. On the 3rd day of the 2021 and 2022 league years Gurley will earn a non guaranteed $1 million roster bonus. Those same years Gurley will earn a $4 million reporting bonus. There are also $2.5 million in escalators that can increase the total contract value to $60 million if earned. Gurley's cap figure in 2018 increased by $2.8 million and his 2019 cap figure decreased by $430,000.

https://overthecap.com/player/todd-gurley/3858

The ONLY part of Gurley's contract that was fully guaranteed was the $21.95M, which included his 1st year salary. The rest are rolling guarantees that only vest during the league years, similar to what the Steelers have offered to Bell both last year and again this year.

Gurley received a TOTAL of $45M in guarantees, but not even half of that was guaranteed at signing.  And I've been told many times that only fully guaranteed money at signing counts.

The Steelers (as of the latest info, if accurate) offered Bell a deal very similar to Gurley's. It's time to stop blaming them for this mess. I already have. Not sure why others haven't.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The Steelers (as of the latest info, if accurate) offered Bell a deal very similar to Gurley's. It's time to stop blaming them for this mess. I already have. Not sure why others haven't.

Because it's too much fun for the haters to call them "cheap" and "stupid".

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Because it's too much fun for the haters to call them "cheap" and "stupid".

If you'll read the posts in this thread, the "non-haters" said we can't accept the reports that the Steelers offered Bell only $10M in guarantees because the Steelers don't discuss contract negotiations.  If that's the case, then why should we accept these latest reports as accurate? 

And, if we can accept these most recent reports, why can't we accept those previous reports?  And, assuming we can accept those earlier reports, the Steelers offered Bell LESS THAN HALF the guaranteed money than the Rams offered Gurley.  That IS cheap.  And risking (and ultimately losing) almost $15M of your cap space on an empty spot IS stupid.

So, it depends on which reports you CHOOSE to believe  In any event, the Steelers, according to all reports, offered Bell less than what the Rams gave Gurley and less than what the Cardinals gave DJ.

Edited by Bayhawks

Share this post


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

If you'll read the posts in this thread, the "non-haters" said we can't accept the reports that the Steelers offered Bell only $10M in guarantees because the Steelers don't discuss contract negotiations.  If that's the case, then why should we accept these latest reports as accurate? 

And, if we can accept these most recent reports, why can't we accept those previous reports?  And, assuming we can accept those earlier reports, the Steelers offered Bell LESS THAN HALF the guaranteed money than the Rams offered Gurley.  That IS cheap.  And risking (and ultimately losing) almost $15M of your cap space on an empty spot IS stupid.

So, it depends on which reports you CHOOSE to believe  In any event, the Steelers, according to all reports, offered Bell less than what the Rams gave Gurley and less than what the Cardinals gave DJ.

No, the non-haters (or most of them) said you couldn't accept those reports because it made no sense to believe that the Steelers would guarantee less than a season's salary. It was only when haters asked "so why don't the Steelers deny it?" that not discussing negotiations was raised. When one report makes no sense and the other does, is it really reasonable to accept the nonsensical one? And, using the Gurley and DJ contracts to determine the reasonableness of an offer made and rejected months before them means you expect the parties to have a crystal ball (even if you ignore the negative factors that affect the Bell situation that Gurley and DJ don't have).  Did people think the Ravens were cheap with what they offered Flacco just because Cousins later got more?

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

If you'll read the posts in this thread, the "non-haters" said we can't accept the reports that the Steelers offered Bell only $10M in guarantees because the Steelers don't discuss contract negotiations.  If that's the case, then why should we accept these latest reports as accurate? 

And, if we can accept these most recent reports, why can't we accept those previous reports?  And, assuming we can accept those earlier reports, the Steelers offered Bell LESS THAN HALF the guaranteed money than the Rams offered Gurley.  That IS cheap.  And risking (and ultimately losing) almost $15M of your cap space on an empty spot IS stupid.

So, it depends on which reports you CHOOSE to believe  In any event, the Steelers, according to all reports, offered Bell less than what the Rams gave Gurley and less than what the Cardinals gave DJ.

First, the reason I didn't believe the $10M guaranteed offer wasn't because the Steelers don't release info.  It's because it made no sense then or now and was probably leaked somewhere just to make Bell look good and the Steelers look bad. The Steelers didn't fight that fight in the media, and people believed the report.  But, it made no sense to think the Steelers would offer a guy guaranteed to make $14.5M for one year a longer deal with only $10M guaranteed. People who believed that just wanted to believe it to prove a point.

That said, you'll go on believing whatever you want to, whether it makes sense or not.

The latest report makes far more sense. A front loaded contract with $20M guaranteed in year one between a salary and a sign on bonus when the Steelers can afford it. Bell just wanted more fully guaranteed.... but he made clear by rejecting the offer in 2017 that rolling guarantees (like the ones Gurley got beyond year one) didn't matter to him. 

Given how much more realistic it sounds and assuming the most recent info isn't made up, it was only about $2M less in fully guaranteed money than Gurley got and it wasn't for as long of a term.  Of course, he's older than Gurley and he has a far more checkered past than Gurley or Johnson, so shouldn't be worth what they are. 

Your mind was made up about who was right and who was wrong a long time ago. The Steelers were neither cheap nor stupid with how they handled Bell, they did exactly what they should've done with the info they had at the time... which would've been different if Bell had announced his intentions in June or early July. Bell, on the other hand, could've had $20M this year and instead will settle for less than half of that, or he could've timed it out so that the Steelers could've traded him in July to let him sign a long term deal elsewhere.. good luck making that kind of money up, Le'veon. That's very definition of stupid.

 

 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times can I come into this thread hoping to see, "Bell reported and signed the tender," only to see the same guys arguing over whether or not the Steelers offered him $10,000,000 or $20,000,000 guaranteed? 

Two things. It has to be closer to the latter. That's just reality. Second, whatever it was, it wasn't enough for Bell. One side offered too little, one side is asking for too much. Blame for everyone.

Now can we only bump this when he signs. No? OK. Didn't think so. :kicksrock:

  • Like 10

Share this post


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

No, the non-haters (or most of them) said you couldn't accept those reports because it made no sense to believe that the Steelers would guarantee less than a season's salary. It was only when haters asked "so why don't the Steelers deny it?" that not discussing negotiations was raised. When one report makes no sense and the other does, is it really reasonable to accept the nonsensical one? And, using the Gurley and DJ contracts to determine the reasonableness of an offer made and rejected months before them means you expect the parties to have a crystal ball (even if you ignore the negative factors that affect the Bell situation that Gurley and DJ don't have).  Did people think the Ravens were cheap with what they offered Flacco just because Cousins later got more?

So, only accept the reports that make sense?  Well, it is nonsensical for Bell to turn down the contract he reportedly turned down, right?  So following your logic, we should reject that report, correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steelers4Life said:

First, the reason I didn't believe the $10M guaranteed offer wasn't because the Steelers don't release info.  It's because it made no sense then or now and was probably leaked somewhere just to make Bell look good and the Steelers look bad. The Steelers didn't fight that fight in the media, and people believed the report.  But, it made no sense to think the Steelers would offer a guy guaranteed to make $14.5M for one year a longer deal with only $10M guaranteed. People who believed that just wanted to believe it to prove a point.

That said, you'll go on believing whatever you want to, whether it makes sense or not.

The latest report makes far more sense. A front loaded contract with $20M guaranteed in year one between a salary and a sign on bonus when the Steelers can afford it. Bell just wanted more fully guaranteed.... but he made clear by rejecting the offer in 2017 that rolling guarantees (like the ones Gurley got beyond year one) didn't matter to him. 

Given how much more realistic it sounds and assuming the most recent info isn't made up, it was only about $2M less in fully guaranteed money than Gurley got and it wasn't for as long of a term.  Of course, he's older than Gurley and he has a far more checkered past than Gurley or Johnson, so shouldn't be worth what they are. 

Your mind was made up about who was right and who was wrong a long time ago. The Steelers were neither cheap nor stupid with how they handled Bell, they did exactly what they should've done with the info they had at the time... which would've been different if Bell had announced his intentions in June or early July. Bell, on the other hand, could've had $20M this year and instead will settle for less than half of that, or he could've timed it out so that the Steelers could've traded him in July to let him sign a long term deal elsewhere.. good luck making that kind of money up, Le'veon. That's very definition of stupid.

 

 

Your mind was also made up about who was right and wrong long ago.  You want to believe that the Steelers offered more money, so you choose to believe the reports that say more was offered, because they “make more sense.” I choose to believe the reports that less was offered which led to Bell refusing the offer because that “makes more sense.”  The Steelers, as YOU have pointed out don’t offer guaranteed money beyond year one, they only pay what they want, and don’t pay RBs.  To me, it makes more sense to believe that they made an offer that was too low for him, and he refused.  

The Steelers could have paid him a bit more in guaranteed money (instead of rolling guarantees), OR could have had $14.5M more cap to spend this year.  In doing so, they wasted one of the last years of Bens prime. That’s also the very definition of stupid.

Share this post


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

So, only accept the reports that make sense?  Well, it is nonsensical for Bell to turn down the contract he reportedly turned down, right?  So following your logic, we should reject that report, correct?

No, it's not nonsensical. His public announcements that he wanted paid the same as the best RB in the league plus a #2 WR support the report that he'd turn down that contract, as does his turning down a contract last year that his agent thought was acceptable. Having an over-inflated ego is not the same as nonsense.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

Your mind was also made up about who was right and wrong long ago.  You want to believe that the Steelers offered more money, so you choose to believe the reports that say more was offered, because they “make more sense.” I choose to believe the reports that less was offered which led to Bell refusing the offer because that “makes more sense.”  The Steelers, as YOU have pointed out don’t offer guaranteed money beyond year one, they only pay what they want, and don’t pay RBs.  To me, it makes more sense to believe that they made an offer that was too low for him, and he refused.  

The Steelers could have paid him a bit more in guaranteed money (instead of rolling guarantees), OR could have had $14.5M more cap to spend this year.  In doing so, they wasted one of the last years of Bens prime. That’s also the very definition of stupid.

You don't like the Steelers and you always side with the player, but the report about a contract rejected with $20M guaranteed would blow up your entire theory about the Steelers being cheap and stupid.  We all get it lol.

I was a Bell fan. I wanted to believe it could work out and I wouldn't automatically agree with the team. It's not that I want to believe the Steelers offered him more money... it makes no sense to believe they'd offer him less than he was already making. The Steelers don't guarantee money beyond year one to a RB.  You know who else didn't get anything but rolling guarantees after year one?  Todd Gurley. The Steelers shouldn't have to.

But you're arguing for the sake of arguing if you believe that the report of a $10M guaranteed offer to a guy who was already guaranteed $14.5M makes more sense. You can choose to believe that if you want, but no reasonable person would.

They offered him a contract that guaranteed him $20M in the first year, which was nearly identical to the contract that Gurley actually signed a month or two later. Was it enough for Bell? Nope, and that also makes sense given that he's openly said that he wants to be paid not like a top RB, but like a top RB and a top WR. So, even an offer with "only" $20M fully guaranteed wasn't enough for him. That's why he refused, and it won't be enough for him next year either - especially now that he left that much on the table this year.

Gurley got just under $22M in fully guaranteed money and then a bunch of rolling guarantees in future years. That wasn't enough for Bell, because that's basically what he turned down, plain and simple. But your idea about the Steelers spending an extra $14.5M on the rest of the roster doesn't carry any weight, because by the time Bell made his intentions clear, it was already into the season... at that point, they're not going to sign anyone who'd make a difference anyways.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

 I choose to believe the reports that less was offered which led to Bell refusing the offer because that “makes more sense.”  

There was a report a few weeks back with MJD stating the guarantee was for $19 MM. It was in this thread if you care to dig for it (I don't). Based on that and the latest reports, plus the logic that the guarantee would need to be more than $14.5 MM to even be worth consideration, it seems the Steelers were a lot closer to the Gurley deal than many of us thought.

ETA:

Also, if were running through logical reasoning tests as part of the process here, I tend to favor the Steelers' presumed logic over Bell's.

Edited by LawFitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the Steelers could put Bell on the exempt list for 2 weeks. It might make sense for him to report Friday or Saturday this week if he actually wants to report during the bye. That way he'd get a reduced salary for playing 0 games this week and next, but a full salary after the bye. But, seeing how all this has gone so far, I'd be surprised if he reported during the bye, let alone this week.

Also, we don't know the true contract offer and will never know. It's just safe to say that the Steelers offered what they wanted to, and Bell didn't think it was enough. If the reports about it being close to Gurley's offer are true (not saying they are, just playing out hypotheticals), then I don't think signing him next offseason is an impossibility. I don't think the likelihood is high because of how this season is playing out, and how well Conner is playing, but I no longer think the odds are 0. This whole situation has been weird, and I can't wait for it to be over, one way or another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Steelers4Life said:

You don't like the Steelers and you always side with the player, but the report about a contract rejected with $20M guaranteed would blow up your entire theory about the Steelers being cheap and stupid.  We all get it lol.

I was a Bell fan. I wanted to believe it could work out and I wouldn't automatically agree with the team. It's not that I want to believe the Steelers offered him more money... it makes no sense to believe they'd offer him less than he was already making. The Steelers don't guarantee money beyond year one to a RB.  You know who else didn't get anything but rolling guarantees after year one?  Todd Gurley. The Steelers shouldn't have to.

But you're arguing for the sake of arguing if you believe that the report of a $10M guaranteed offer to a guy who was already guaranteed $14.5M makes more sense. You can choose to believe that if you want, but no reasonable person would.

They offered him a contract that guaranteed him $20M in the first year, which was nearly identical to the contract that Gurley actually signed a month or two later. Was it enough for Bell? Nope, and that also makes sense given that he's openly said that he wants to be paid not like a top RB, but like a top RB and a top WR. So, even an offer with "only" $20M fully guaranteed wasn't enough for him. That's why he refused, and it won't be enough for him next year either - especially now that he left that much on the table this year.

Gurley got just under $22M in fully guaranteed money and then a bunch of rolling guarantees in future years. That wasn't enough for Bell, because that's basically what he turned down, plain and simple. But your idea about the Steelers spending an extra $14.5M on the rest of the roster doesn't carry any weight, because by the time Bell made his intentions clear, it was already into the season... at that point, they're not going to sign anyone who'd make a difference anyways.

 

You like the Steelers and want to believe your team is doing the right team.  But the report that they only offered $10M guaranteed blows your entire theory about the team being fair and smart.  We all get it, lol.

But you’re arguing for the sake of arguing if you think a player turned down that much truly guaranteed money really makes more sense.  You can choose to believe that if you want, but no reasonable person would.  

They offered him a contract below market value, which makes sense because the Steelers don’t give out a lot of big contracts & already had huge contracts for AB and Ben.  That wasn’t enough for Bell, so he turned it down, as was his right.

The Steelers offered Bell just $10M guaranteed because they knew Bell couldn’t go anywhere else.  They knew they had leverage with the franchise tag, so they made a low offer.  They are now paying for that decision by having $14.5 less of a cap.  If they knew they weren’t going to offer him what he was asking for, they should have been smart & traded him or let him go in FA (& get a comp pick).  Since they didn’t, they have less cap money.  

 

So, if you choose to believe the report that you choose to believe, your narrative makes sense.  If you choose to believe the report I choose to believe, it doesn’t.

You aren’t going to change my opinion, I’m not going to change yours.  Leave it at that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

You aren’t going to change my opinion, I’m not going to change yours.  Leave it at that?

Most likely the smartest thing you've said in this entire thread.  Agreed.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

There was a report a few weeks back with MJD stating the guarantee was for $19 MM. It was in this thread if you care to dig for it (I don't). Based on that and the latest reports, plus the logic that the guarantee would need to be more than $14.5 MM to even be worth consideration, it seems the Steelers were a lot closer to the Gurley deal than many of us thought.

ETA:

Also, if were running through logical reasoning tests as part of the process here, I tend to favor the Steelers' presumed logic over Bell's.

Don't bother arguing logic with Bayhawks.  Logic goes out the window and based on the responses here, he's the only one not to see it.

But yes, anyone with common sense can see that the initial reports weren't realistic. It just took time to come out since the Steelers don't negotiate that kind of stuff in the media. The Steelers' organization is a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. Bell turned down $20M guaranteed this year on a 3 year deal because he's openly said he wants to break the bank as a top RB and WR. I can only imagine what his expectations will be next offseason when he's trying to make up for lost wages lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Steelers effed up by declaring publicly they were listening to offers. Should have all been about wanting him back asap. Once he signs the tag he loses any leverage he has. Until then he calls the shots, albeit on his own dime. They have to have offers they'd pull the trigger on by now. If he does show up next week, the second he signs I'd ship him out the door. If he's lucky they ship him to Tampa.

If Le'Veon had just a competent agent he would have realized that next year was the year to hold out, not this one. Could have gotten 20M+ guaranteed including incentives for 2018 with a guaranteed lower paying option for 2019. You hold out after year one of a front loaded deal like that and you have them in a corner. Could have made maximum dollars in 2018 and beyond. Instead paying money out of his own pocket now to make less after this season. Maybe he sues the agent after it's all done and makes some of it back that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steelers4Life said:

But you're arguing for the sake of arguing

He's been doing that for a long time in this thread.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steelers4Life said:

You don't like the Steelers and you always side with the player, but the report about a contract rejected with $20M guaranteed would blow up your entire theory about the Steelers being cheap and stupid.  We all get it lol.

I was a Bell fan. I wanted to believe it could work out and I wouldn't automatically agree with the team. It's not that I want to believe the Steelers offered him more money... it makes no sense to believe they'd offer him less than he was already making. The Steelers don't guarantee money beyond year one to a RB.  You know who else didn't get anything but rolling guarantees after year one?  Todd Gurley. The Steelers shouldn't have to.

But you're arguing for the sake of arguing if you believe that the report of a $10M guaranteed offer to a guy who was already guaranteed $14.5M makes more sense. You can choose to believe that if you want, but no reasonable person would.

They offered him a contract that guaranteed him $20M in the first year, which was nearly identical to the contract that Gurley actually signed a month or two later. Was it enough for Bell? Nope, and that also makes sense given that he's openly said that he wants to be paid not like a top RB, but like a top RB and a top WR. So, even an offer with "only" $20M fully guaranteed wasn't enough for him. That's why he refused, and it won't be enough for him next year either - especially now that he left that much on the table this year.

Gurley got just under $22M in fully guaranteed money and then a bunch of rolling guarantees in future years. That wasn't enough for Bell, because that's basically what he turned down, plain and simple. But your idea about the Steelers spending an extra $14.5M on the rest of the roster doesn't carry any weight, because by the time Bell made his intentions clear, it was already into the season... at that point, they're not going to sign anyone who'd make a difference anyways.

 

It sounds like you convinced yourself of this.  Do you honestly believe that the Steelers offered him a Gurley/DJ type contract before they even knew the new market for a game-changer top 3 RB?  Why would they do this when they could simply franchise him and pay way less in guarantees.  They're running a business and felt they held the cards because of the franchise tag.  They were certain that Bell would still report just like he did last year. 

(my speculation) They wounded Bell's pride the year before, and Bell chose to make a stand this year.  The Steelers were probably correct to bargain from a point of strength and somewhat low ball him.  Bell is now choosing his option of sitting out the first half of the season and resting his body.  He will probably end up with less than 200 touches this year which will bode well when he negotiates with his new team next year.

Edited by Chaz McNulty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Chaz McNulty said:

It sounds like you convinced yourself of this.  Do you honestly believe that the Steelers offered him a Gurley/DJ type contract before they even knew the new market for a game-changer top 3 RB?  Why would they do this when they could simply franchise him and pay way less in guarantees.  They're running a business and felt they held the cards because of the franchise tag.  They were certain that Bell would still report just like he did last year. 

(my speculation) They wounded Bell's pride the year before, and Bell chose to make a stand this year.  The Steelers were probably correct to bargain from a point of strength and somewhat low ball him.  Bell is now choosing his option of sitting out the first half of the season and resting his body.  He will probably end up with less than 200 touches this year which will bode well when he negotiates with his new team next year.

I didn't convince myself of anything.  I (and most reasonable people) were pretty confident that the Steelers wouldn't have ever offered him less in guaranteed money than he was already getting, especially after what he had turned down the year before. Didn't know much about it until recently though. There have now been multiple reports that it's true. Yes, they reportedly offered him that deal which would have set the market for running backs like him. If $20M guaranteed in year one on a multi-year contract was a lowball offer, so be it. Bell obviously felt it was, so while he'll almost surely get a nice contract from someone next year, it'll be relatively close to impossible for him to make up for everything he left on the table this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 11m11 minutes ago

From @NFLGameDay: The #Steelers haven't heard from RB Le'Veon Bell, but showing up during a bye week would mean Pittsburgh wouldn't have to pay him that week. Would be a curious move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bracie Smathers said:

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 11m11 minutes ago

From @NFLGameDay: The #Steelers haven't heard from RB Le'Veon Bell, but showing up during a bye week would mean Pittsburgh wouldn't have to pay him that week. Would be a curious move.

They would need to elect to do so.  Do you think doing that would get a better result out of Bell? 

If he shows, I would be surprised if the Steelers further stirred that pot.  I think they pay him and play him.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.