Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

If you're Bell, do you trust this to play out this way (with regards to the "secret" agreement to not sign/not tag again part)?

If you're Pittsburgh in this scenario, the smart thing to do is tag Bell again, secret agreement be damned.  Bell not signing at all in 2018 means his tag number in 2019 would be $14.5M again; the exact same amount of cap room that you should have been able to roll over from 2018 because you couldn't spend it on Bell.  If Pitt tags him again, they have the ability to sign/trade him and get more than a comp pick.  If they tag him and he refuses to sign, they are still operating with their full 2019 cap.

If you're Bell, you gain NOTHING by agreeing to this secret deal.  Why would he do this?

The Steelers lose out by bring duplicitous, as well. Organization reputation and simply the word of the team have to mean something in the  marketplace, or else the Steelers' name becomes Mudd when dealing with league FAs going forward (including their own). Agents and players don't forget. I don't think purposefully backing out of a gentlemen's agreement and screwing over Bell does anything positive at all for the Steelers organization.

Both parties not being ready to move on by this point ... that beggars belief IMHO. Guess we'll see.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fat Nick said:

Do you think that's worth it to the Steelers to go through this clown show for a 2nd straight season though?  I don't.  I think Tomlin would either kill a reporter or quit before he got asked Bell questions for another season.

I don't think it was worth it for them to go through it this year; but they did.  If you're Bell, do you risk another year on the chance that the Steelers do something different in 2019 than they did in 2018?  Bell doesn't care if the Steelers "WANT" him back, he cares about the money.  He can virtually guarantee he will be a FA in 2019 by signing by 11/13.  If he signs and the Steelers struggle with the decision to play him/Conner, that's Pitt's problem, not his.  The less the play him, the less wear and tear on his body. 

What incentive does Bell have to go through with this potential "secret" agreement?

Share this post


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

What incentive does Bell have to go through with this potential "secret" agreement?

None - and the whole idea is dumb speculation to fill talk show time.

Share this post


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

The Steelers lose out by bring duplicitous, as well. Organization reputation and simply the word of the team have to mean something in the  marketplace, or else the Steelers' name becomes Mudd when dealing with league FAs going forward (including their own). Agents and players don't forget. I don't think purposefully backing out of a gentlemen's agreement and screwing over Bell does anything positive at all for the Steelers organization.

Both parties not being ready to move on by this point ... that beggars belief IMHO. Guess we'll see.

 

You pretend like money doesn't trump everything.  If a FA has a choice between signing with Pitt and Balt, and Pitt offers more, but they backed out of a secret deal with Bell, do you seriuosly think the FA is going to take less money to teach the Steelers a lesson? 

Share this post


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

You pretend like money doesn't trump everything.  If a FA has a choice between signing with Pitt and Balt, and Pitt offers more, but they backed out of a secret deal with Bell, do you seriuosly think the FA is going to take less money to teach the Steelers a lesson? 

It might if both offers are the same/or close 

Edited by Wrigley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if he shows up in 15 minutes, or sits out the whole season. 

If/when he shows up, he won't be the bell cow again. Conner has earned himself a large workload and Lev is out of shape. At best he'll be the passing downs back, or take over if Conner is injured.

The possibility of a Conner injury is the main reason I think the Steelers want Bell to come back. They don't want to try for a playoff run with Samuels and Ridley. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Wrigley said:

It might if both offers are the same/or close 

Not same offers; Pitt offers more, but a FA chooses to play for less because Pitt backed out of a "secret" deal with Bell.  I don't see that happening, ever.  The players will always value money over a team's reputation, with the exception of vet players who are just playing for a ring.  But in that case, it's not the "character" of the franchise, but their shot at a title that might make a player take less mone.

Share this post


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

You pretend like money doesn't trump everything.  If a FA has a choice between signing with Pitt and Balt, and Pitt offers more, but they backed out of a secret deal with Bell, do you seriuosly think the FA is going to take less money to teach the Steelers a lesson? 

You're making my point. The Steelers having to consistently overpay for FAs (compared to other franchises) would be an organizational problem. That would be a specific negative result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks Bell will accept a secret, pinky swear deal from the Steelers at this point has not been paying attention.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Anyone who thinks Bell will accept a secret, pinky swear deal from the Steelers at this point has not been paying attention.

Assuming the bridge is that thoroughly burned ... you have to be correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Doug B said:

You're making my point. The Steelers having to consistently overpay for FAs (compared to other franchises) would be an organizational problem. That would be a specific negative result.

Your point is invalid.  The Steelers wouldn't have to overpay, because FAs would take the Steelers offer if it is the best offer.  The FAs wouldn't care if the Steelers back out of a secret deal with Bell.

Share this post


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

Maybe we found the rare case of someone who can live comfortably on the $31 million already earned and he's not missing the physical abuse as much as he thought he would.

And how much has he lost since game 1 this season? 

Share this post


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

I don't think it was worth it for them to go through it this year; but they did.  If you're Bell, do you risk another year on the chance that the Steelers do something different in 2019 than they did in 2018?  Bell doesn't care if the Steelers "WANT" him back, he cares about the money.  He can virtually guarantee he will be a FA in 2019 by signing by 11/13.  If he signs and the Steelers struggle with the decision to play him/Conner, that's Pitt's problem, not his.  The less the play him, the less wear and tear on his body. 

What incentive does Bell have to go through with this potential "secret" agreement?

Good points - to your last question - the only thing he stands to gain is he eliminates completely the possibility that he'd get hurt prior to his big payday.  It'd look really bad if he signed, and then refused to play.  It'd also suck for him if he signed and played on 3rd down only or something, and STILL blew his knee out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Fat Nick said:

Good points - to your last question - the only thing he stands to gain is he eliminates completely the possibility that he'd get hurt prior to his big payday.  It'd look really bad if he signed, and then refused to play.  It'd also suck for him if he signed and played on 3rd down only or something, and STILL blew his knee out.  

There isn't going to be a secret deal.   If he reports the Steelers will get Bell in the mix as long as he is in shape and plays hard.  The Steelers are one big hit away on Conner from having to start Ridley and Samuels.   That is not a good thing no matter of how much you think the OL or Steelers offensive scheme is responsible for Conner's success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it just make more sense for them to rescind the tag than to have some "gentleman's agreement"?

Edited by ghostguy123
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Wouldn't it just make more sense for them to rescind the tag than to have some "gentleman's agreement"?

Not if Bell would turn around and sign with the Pats (or some other contending team).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

Wouldn't it just make more sense for them to rescind the tag than to have some "gentleman's agreement"?

If they rescind the tag, they don't get a comp pick.

Share this post


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

If they rescind the tag, they don't get a comp pick.

COrrect me if I am wrong, but you dont just automatically get a comp pick.  Isnt it also based on players you SIGN that year as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2018 at 3:03 PM, Steelers4Life said:

Can't see that happening, because the Steelers would be able to tag him again at $14.5M.

My own opinion is that if the Steelers can tag him again for next year at the same amount, they should. Some people will disagree because the Steelers should just spend the money on the defense, and I agree with that. But at the same time, there's zero chance that Bell would forfeit even more money and risk not seeing free agency until 2020, so at the point, it would be in BOTH of their interests for Bell to sign the tag and allow the Steelers to trade him to a team willing to give him the contract he wants. The Steelers would get compensated for him and Bell would get what he's really always wanted... his money. 

I really don't see Bell doing anything that would risk him getting credit for this year. But then again, who knows what's going through his head at this point.

 

On 10/26/2018 at 5:36 PM, Steelers4Life said:

Only if he reports this year.  If he doesn't report in time or sign the tender in time, it's like this year doesn't count.

This post was in response to someone saying that he won't sign at all this year, which I don't see as likely.

 

On 10/30/2018 at 1:23 PM, msommer said:

Yep, this is key. Also, after today he has little incentive in sitting out any longer unless he wants the Steelers to be able to tag him as a RB at $14.5m again next year if they so please 

It's debatable how much they would have to tag him at.  The CBA's wording:

Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average;

Bell has been designated as a Franchise Player twice now, so next year would be a third designation.  I am not convinced he has to sign this year at all to qualify for this.  It doesn't mention the player signing or playing under the tag, only that he has been tendered a third time, which next year will be.  And we all know that 3rd FT is at QB money.

Edited by Hankmoody
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

      

Aditi Kinkhabwala ✔ @AKinkhabwala

The #Steelers, w/ James Conner as their starting RB, are averaging 8 more ppg and have a higher 3rd down % (43.2 to 36.0) and higher red zone % (75.0 to 42.3) than they had thru 7 games last year w/ Le’Veon Bell at RB. How is Conner’s production affecting Bell’s perceived value?

11:34 AM - Oct 31, 2018

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

COrrect me if I am wrong, but you dont just automatically get a comp pick.  Isnt it also based on players you SIGN that year as well?

You are not wrong.  However, the odds of Pitt signing FAs that will exceed the value of Bell is highly unlikely.  If the lose Bell in FA, it is almost guaranteed they will get a 3rd round comp pick.  If they rescind the tag, it is completely guaranteed that they will get nothing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

It's debatable how much they would have to tag him at.  The CBA's wording:

Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average;

Bell has been designated as a Franchise Player twice now, so next year would be a third designation.  I am not convinced he has to sign this year at all to qualify for this.  It doesn't mention the player signing or playing under the tag, only that he has been tendered a third time, which next year will be.  And we all know that 3rd FT is at QB money.

He has to sign the tender by 11/13.  he can't sign it after that date.  If he signs it prior to that, they have to franchise him at the QB tag rate.  If ht doesn't sign by 11/13 (he can't sign at all this year), they can franchise him again at this year's rate.

Share this post


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

      

Aditi Kinkhabwala ✔ @AKinkhabwala

The #Steelers, w/ James Conner as their starting RB, are averaging 8 more ppg and have a higher 3rd down % (43.2 to 36.0) and higher red zone % (75.0 to 42.3) than they had thru 7 games last year w/ Le’Veon Bell at RB. How is Conner’s production affecting Bell’s perceived value?

11:34 AM - Oct 31, 2018

Probably some, but not affecting it more than Bell himself by sitting out the season.  

Also, I am thinking Conner is positively affecting his OWN value quite a bit.

Edited by ghostguy123

Share this post


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

He has to sign the tender by 11/13.  he can't sign it after that date.  If he signs it prior to that, they have to franchise him at the QB tag rate.  If ht doesn't sign by 11/13 (he can't sign at all this year), they can franchise him again at this year's rate.

That isn't what it says.  It says "Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time ".  Period.  They have designated him a Franchise Player twice now.  People have been assuming it means he has to play, or sign, or be active, or some other such qualifier, but none of those are what the CBA says in plain english.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

That isn't what it says.  It says "Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time ".  Period.  They have designated him a Franchise Player twice now.  People have been assuming it means he has to play, or sign, or be active, or some other such qualifier, but none of those are what the CBA says in plain english.

Isn't there like 700 more pages of mumbo jumbo that eludes to this in some way?

Share this post


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

Where did I say he can't play in the NFL?  I just said I don't think he'll be a decent RB wherever he ends up.  I don't see any situation where any of his next 3 years in the league are better statistically than the average of his last 3 full seasons (throw out 2015).  He's not going to put up 2,000 total yards and 10 TD's again.  

You can quote stats all you want - all his stats were behind Pittsburgh's OL, in a Pittsburgh system.  The same system Conner is doing well in.  So there is some impact from talent, and some impact from team.  If you can't see that, there's no point discussing further.  The QUESTION is how much of Bell's stats are driven by Bell's talent, and how much are driven by the team he is on.  You're clearly on the Bell side, I'm further on the team side.  

Also, I never said he wasn't better than Conner.  I think his receiving skills are clearly better than Conner's...I do think that NEITHER of them are transcending RB talents that would excel on any team in the league regardless of situation. 

My point is that Bell's stats are more due to his situation and team than his  exceptional physical ability.  Again, to be clear, I'm not saying he's a bum.  I'm not saying Conner is necessarily better.  I'm saying that his talent ALONE is not sufficient to get 2000 yards and 10 TD's irregardless of the team - thus any team willing to pay him on that basis will be overpaying.  That also implies that Pittsburgh would be foolish to overpay him because it's the OL/system that is largely accountable for his stats, and he shouldn't get paid for that.  (Exhibit 1a and 1b for that argument are D. Williams and Conner)

So he's gone from having more yards from scrimmage in his first five years to less than average (which equates to not being decent.) It's all scheme? Wow. Just wow.  

Share this post


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

So he's gone from having more yards from scrimmage in his first five years to less than average (which equates to not being decent.) It's all scheme? Wow. Just wow.  

I guess we'll see....I don't think he'll be anywhere in the fantasy conversation of the top 15 backs next year unless he already lands on a team with a good running game.

Share this post


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

There isn't going to be a secret deal.   If he reports the Steelers will get Bell in the mix as long as he is in shape and plays hard.  The Steelers are one big hit away on Conner from having to start Ridley and Samuels.   That is not a good thing no matter of how much you think the OL or Steelers offensive scheme is responsible for Conner's success.

I guess this is the part I'd be concerned about if I were the Steelers.  He's made it clear he's not in it for the team.  What incentive does he have to play hard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ghostguy123 said:

Isn't there like 700 more pages of mumbo jumbo that eludes to this in some way?

316 yes but that's why I started with "it's debatable" however since something else may come into play.  It seems pretty cut and dried though:

Section 2. Required Tender for Franchise Players:
(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b) below, any Club that designates a Franchise Player shall on the date the designation is made notify the player and the NFLPA which one of the following two potential required tenders the Club has selected:

(b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker desig-nated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Fran-chise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below.

So if they want to FT him again it looks to be at QB money.  If they Transition Tag him they have far less protection.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

      

Aditi Kinkhabwala ✔ @AKinkhabwala

The #Steelers, w/ James Conner as their starting RB, are averaging 8 more ppg and have a higher 3rd down % (43.2 to 36.0) and higher red zone % (75.0 to 42.3) than they had thru 7 games last year w/ Le’Veon Bell at RB. How is Conner’s production affecting Bell’s perceived value?

11:34 AM - Oct 31, 2018

So that's on Conner? Maybe, just maybe, scoring is up league wide as all the rules protecting QB's and WR's make the passing game so ridiculous for a team like the Steelers with Brown and Juju could be more responsible for the rise in offensive production. Don't believe me because you saw a stat line for one guy and another guy is still riding a 0.0 YPC for 2018? Here's a stat line for you. Big Ben threw for 4200 yards last year. This year he's on pace for 5200. Or that Brown had 9 TD's all of last year and has 8 this year after 7 games (and is on pace for 18). Conner looks great in this offense. That can't be denied. Bell would look so much better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TheFanatic said:

Maybe, just maybe, scoring is up league wide

Conner is so good the whole league new they had to preemptively score more to keep up with the Steelers + Conner  :lol: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless he has a wink wink (violation of the CBA) deal with the Steelers that they let him leave in exchange for not coming in and stealing :D 6 game checks, he's completely lost his mind.  Regardless, losing almost 6 mill for not showing up at all is $ he will never get back unless he has (again violated CBA) and got a wink wink deal from another team that will cover the losses in the next contract. Pittsburgh loses him for nothing but save 6 million. He loses nothing.

He could easily sit out the whole year with some wink wink deals that no one will be able to prove. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Hankmoody said:

316 yes but that's why I started with "it's debatable" however since something else may come into play.  It seems pretty cut and dried though:

Section 2. Required Tender for Franchise Players:
(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b) below, any Club that designates a Franchise Player shall on the date the designation is made notify the player and the NFLPA which one of the following two potential required tenders the Club has selected:

(b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker desig-nated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Fran-chise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below.

So if they want to FT him again it looks to be at QB money.  If they Transition Tag him they have far less protection.

 

You are cherry pick imo.

There is a section in the CBA talking about this:

 

If a Transition Player does not play in the NFL in a League Year,
he shall continue to be treated as a Transition Player the following League
Year and the Team shall be deemed on the first day of the following League
Year to have automatically tendered the player a one year NFL Player Contract
for the average of the ten (10) largest Salaries for the prior League Year
for players at the player’s specified position, or 120% of his Prior Year Salary,
whichever is greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, it goes back to 120% of his prior salary ... exactly where it is right now @ $14.5mm

Share this post


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

I guess this is the part I'd be concerned about if I were the Steelers.  He's made it clear he's not in it for the team.  What incentive does he have to play hard?

The only one I can see is to not suck.  If he reports, plays, and performs less than Conner it might affect any contract offers from other teams.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hankmoody said:

Bell is not a Transition Player.

And your point furthers mine.  There is an explicit "what if" laying out that the Transition Tag gets extended.  There is no such indication with Franchise Players.

Sorry, grabbed the wrong part.  But, I believe it is the same verbiage.

They HAVE to have that verbiage in there to prevent a franchise tagged player from simply sitting out the year in order to avoid it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, same verbiage:

 

If a Franchise Player does not play in the NFL in a League Year,
his Prior Team shall have the right to designate such player as a Franchise
Player or a Transition Player the following League Year, if such designation
is otherwise available to the Team, except that the applicable tender must
be made and any 120% tender shall be measured from the Player’s prior
year salary.

Share this post


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

Sorry, grabbed the wrong part.  But, I believe it is the same verbiage.

They HAVE to have that verbiage in there to prevent a franchise tagged player from simply sitting out the year in order to avoid it.

If any Franchise Player does not play in the NFL in a League Year, his Prior Team shall have the right to designate such player as a Franchise Player or a Tran-sition Player the following League Year, if such designation is otherwise available to the Team, except that the applicable Tender must be made and any 120% Tender shall be measured from the Player’s Prior Year Salary. If such a player is redesignated as a Fran-chise Player for the League Year following the League Year in which he does not play, the player may be designated only under Section 2(a)(i) above, except that Draft Choice Compensation of only one first round draft selection and one third round draft selection 52 shall be made with respect to such player in the event he signs with the New Club. If such a player is designated as a Franchise Player for a third time, the terms of Section 2(b) above shall apply. If a Franchise Player who has sufficient Accrued Seasons to be-come an Unrestricted Free Agent is not designated as a Franchise Player or Transition Player for any League Year immediately following a League Year in which he does not play, then on the first day of that League Year, the player becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with such player, without penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period.

The more I read the more it looks like I'm correct.

 

Edited by Hankmoody
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Bell is not a Transition Player.

And your point furthers mine.  There is an explicit "what if" laying out that the Transition Tag gets extended.  There is no such indication with Franchise Players.

wrong

Share this post


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

It's not.  It does say they can FT him again, but it does not explicitly say it would be under the exact same terms.  It does say the team can only designate him as a Non-Exclusive Franchise Player.

 

It EXPLICITLY says it is 120% of his previous salary ... which is exactly where he is right now.

Share this post


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

wrong

 

9 minutes ago, bryhamm said:

It EXPLICITLY says it is 120% of his previous salary ... which is exactly where he is right now.

I had forgotten about this and edited it out pretty quickly but you beat me to the punch.  However, see above, because you cut off the most important part of what is explicitly says.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Hank, but you're wrong.  If he doesn't sign by the specified week 11 date, then it is like this year never happened.  If the Steelers franchise tag him again, it would be for the second time ... again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you lean on CBA language right up until I show you it backs up my assertion, and then once I do you start making baseless interpretations.  Believe whatever you want in that case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If any Franchise Player does not play in the NFL in a League Year, his Prior Team shall have the right to designate such player as a Franchise Player or a Tran-sition Player the following League Year, if such designation is otherwise available to the Team, except that the applicable Tender must be made and any 120% Tender shall be measured from the Player’s Prior Year Salary. If such a player is redesignated as a Fran-chise Player for the League Year following the League Year in which he does not play, the player may be designated only under Section 2(a)(i) above, except that Draft Choice Compensation of only one first round draft selection and one third round draft selection 52 shall be made with respect to such player in the event he signs with the New Club. If such a player is designated as a Franchise Player for a third time, the terms of Section 2(b) above shall apply. If a Franchise Player who has sufficient Accrued Seasons to be-come an Unrestricted Free Agent is not designated as a Franchise Player or Transition Player for any League Year immediately following a League Year in which he does not play, then on the first day of that League Year, the player becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with such player, without penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period.

The more I read the more it looks like I'm correct.

 

It looks to me like this sets up a separate 3-year scheme for players who don't play. The first time a Franchise player doesn't play a year, the offer is 120% of his prior salary (i.e., the same amount offered to Bell this year). If he continues to sit out and is "redesignated" then it's as a Nonexclusive Franchise Tender (Section 2(a)(1)). If he sits out again, and is Franchised a 3rd time after not playing THEN it's under Section 2(b). Note that the provision applies to "such a player"--referring back to the discussion of a Franchise Player who doesn't play, is designated again at the 120% level, and then is redesignated under Section 2(a)(1).

Share this post


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

So that's on Conner? Maybe, just maybe, scoring is up league wide as all the rules protecting QB's and WR's make the passing game so ridiculous for a team like the Steelers with Brown and Juju could be more responsible for the rise in offensive production. Don't believe me because you saw a stat line for one guy and another guy is still riding a 0.0 YPC for 2018? Here's a stat line for you. Big Ben threw for 4200 yards last year. This year he's on pace for 5200. Or that Brown had 9 TD's all of last year and has 8 this year after 7 games (and is on pace for 18). Conner looks great in this offense. That can't be denied. Bell would look so much better. 

:lmao: another Bell supporter claimed Brown wasn't as good because Bell wasn't playing.  The inconsistency of excuses is hilarious.  

 

Share this post


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

316 yes but that's why I started with "it's debatable" however since something else may come into play.  It seems pretty cut and dried though:

Section 2. Required Tender for Franchise Players:
(a) Except as provided in Subsection (b) below, any Club that designates a Franchise Player shall on the date the designation is made notify the player and the NFLPA which one of the following two potential required tenders the Club has selected:

(b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker desig-nated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Fran-chise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below.

So if they want to FT him again it looks to be at QB money.  If they Transition Tag him they have far less protection.

 

I meant 700 more pages in the actual NFL rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tjnc09 said:

:lmao: another Bell supporter claimed Brown wasn't as good because Bell wasn't playing.  The inconsistency of excuses is hilarious.  

 

How did I say Brown wasn't as good? I said he's on pace to double his TD's from last year. I said the passing game in Pittsburgh is better this year than last year (as it is over most of the league).

The lack of reading comprehension is hilarious

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.