Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, VikingFrog said:

I always thought the prom queen was hotter in those movies. But didn’t have a chance with either one.

The prom queen was hotter.  Then she poured pigs blood on your head.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

This is remarkable. 

Whether you side with the team or with Bell on this, it’s undenaible that Bell & his agent butchered this one pretty badly.

i can’t even fathom what the goal was at this point.

He lost a bunch of money this season.

He’s somewhat radioactive for next season.

Maybe a team like the Colts backs up the Brinks truck for him,  but if I’m the Colts (or whichever) GM, I’m writing a bullet-proof incentive-laden contract that has 1000% team options/outs and 0% player options/outs because you already know Bell & his agent are willing to operate in bad faith. 

 

I agree with you that Bell made a poor choice, and that in the long run this cost him not only the money he could have earned this season, but value on his long-term as well.

But I would stop short of saying he operated in bad faith.  From the time the Steelers tagged him he was effectively a free agent.  He was not under contract.  The tag was basically an offer, but one in a monopsony market since no one else was allowed to bid,  Bell was perfectly within his rights to decline that offer.  “Bad faith” would be a more viable claim were he already under contract, but seems too much to pin on someone for merely not signing an offer he felt undervalued his services.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bayhawks said:

Wow.  Completely disagree.  Bell didn’t want to play under the franchise tag; Bell didnt play under the franchise tag.  Bell wanted to get to FA healthy; Bell will, presumably get to FA healthy.  Bell wants to get a long term contract with big guarantees money, he will get one next off-season.  Sure, he lost the $14.5M in pay for this season, but he was willing to make that sacrifice to get the long-term deal.  He’s not radioactive and he hasn’t sacrificed any good will, except for with the Steelers; other teams won’t think twice about the fact that he refused to play for the Steelers under a second tag.  And other teams won’t say “Conner played great in Pitt, so we don’t won’t Bell.”  

This, somehow, played out well for both sides.   Bell got what he wanted, Pitt will have extra cap money next year, a complete pick on 2020, and a replacement for Bell that they know will allow their offense to remain successful.

So teams will have zero thoughts that Bell will hold out a year or so into his next deal?  Mmmmm k

Yeah, he has looked bad this whole time.  

But whatever, you think his plan was aces, so carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ghostguy123 said:

So teams will have zero thoughts that Bell will hold out a year or so into his next deal?  Mmmmm k

Yeah, he has looked bad this whole time.  

But whatever, you think his plan was aces, so carry on.

You do realize that there is a difference between holding out and not signing a contract you don’t think is acceptable, right?  Mmmmm k?

But, let’s just pretend that Bell did hold out, rather than refuse to sign what he thought was an unacceptable contract;  hmmm-what recent examples can we think of, of players that actually held out when they were under contract? How did teams punish them because they were afraid of them doing the same thing again “a year or so into his new deal?” 

Aaron Donald held out from Rams, and received the highest defensive contract in NFL history.  Must be a fluke, or maybe all other teams held the hold out against him, but the Rams felt some loyalty to him?  Yeah, that’s got to be it.  Other teams will obviously hold it against players when they  hold out of a contract they had with someone else.  Wait, what?  The Bears not only traded 2 1st round picks for Khalil Mack, but they also gave him the highest contract for a defensive player in NFL history?

It seems like NGL teams realize that this is a business & a player holding out for a better contract is part of that business, and it hasn’t been held against them after the fact.

But whatever, you want to ignore facts and pretend that NFL teams will suddenly make different decisions with Bell than they’ve made with every other NFL player who has held out/refused to sign deals with other teams, so carry one.

 

Edited by Bayhawks
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

You do realize that there is a difference between holding out and not signing a contract you don’t think is acceptable, right?  Mmmmm k?

But, let’s just pretend that Bell did hold out, rather than refuse to sign what he thought was an unacceptable contract;  hmmm-what recent examples can we think of, of players that actually held out when they were under contract? How did teams punish them because they were afraid of them doing the same thing again “a year or so into his new deal?” 

Aaron Donald held out from Rams, and received the highest defensive contract in NFL history.  Must be a fluke, or maybe all other teams held the hold out against him, but the Rams felt some loyalty to him?  Yeah, that’s got to be it.  Other teams will obviously hold it against players when they  hold out of a contract they had with someone else.  Wait, what?  The Bears not only traded 2 1st round picks for Khalil Mack, but they also gave him the highest contract for a defensive player in NFL history?

It seems like NGL teams realize that this is a business & a player holding out for a better contract is part of that business, and it hasn’t been held against them after the fact.

But whatever, you want to ignore facts and pretend that NFL teams will suddenly make different decisions with Bell than they’ve made with every other NFL player who has held out/refused to sign deals with other teams, so carry one.

 

You do realize there is a difference between Bell and those other players, right?

Probably not.  Well, obviously not.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All it takes is one team to want to give Bell a big contract, and I think there will be at least one willing to do that.  Put him on a team starved for offensive/RB help and he will make a difference. He's not a difference maker on the Steelers, as a nobody named James Connor has shown this year, so the Steelers were very smart to not pay him what he wanted.  And I can't blame Bell for holding out, as RB's have a short shelf life and this is his one shot to get a big long-term contract. 

Share this post


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

You do realize there is a difference between Bell and those other players, right?

Probably not.  Well, obviously not.

Why he’s still allowed to post in these threads is beyond me... if it were me just nefariously posting in one players thread I’d be handed another vacation and have Joe pretend like he’s aloof to why I’m mad. It’s pathetic.

Edited by Bojang0301
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts or Bucs preferable. Jets ok I guess. Stay clear of Gruden in LV. If he goes to Buffalo, uggh. SF would be good but I think Shanahan wants little injury prone guys.

Lets get the talk going now on where he ends up in 2019 since it's not PITT. Also not NE, LA Rams, DAL, NYG, KC, ARI.

Edited by lod001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

All it takes is one team to want to give Bell a big contract, and I think there will be at least one willing to do that.  Put him on a team starved for offensive/RB help and he will make a difference. He's not a difference maker on the Steelers, as a nobody named James Connor has shown this year, so the Steelers were very smart to not pay him what he wanted.  And I can't blame Bell for holding out, as RB's have a short shelf life and this is his one shot to get a big long-term contract. 

The problem for Bell will come when that one offer comes from a crappy team in a crappy city, and lines him up to be the next shady McCoy.

Or maybe that won't be a problem for him at all.

Share this post


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

The problem for Bell will come when that one offer comes from a crappy team in a crappy city, and lines him up to be the next shady McCoy.

Or maybe that won't be a problem for him at all.

That's the concern for dynasty owners. He's probably taking the biggest guarantee regardless of if they stink or not.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The problem for Bell will come when that one offer comes from a crappy team in a crappy city, and lines him up to be the next shady McCoy.

Or maybe that won't be a problem for him at all.

I get the sense that Bell is the kind of guy who will go to the highest bidder.  

14 minutes ago, Ketamine Dreams said:

I’d have to think Indy is the front runner right now. 

That'd be a mistake.  With Luck looking to be back to form, the Colts should be spending to improve the team around him, and I don't think overpaying a RB with this many miles is the way to go.  They'd be smarter to stick with Mack and their other young cheap backs and then spend their money elsewhere. 

Edited by Ghost Rider
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I get the sense that Bell is the kind of guy who will go to the highest bidder.  

That'd be a mistake.  With Luck looking to be back to form, the Colts should be spending to improve the team around him, and I don't think overpaying a RB with this many miles is the way to go.  They'd be smarter to stick with Mack and their other young cheap backs and then spend their money elsewhere. 

I kind of feel like this could be re-written to fit the script of pretty much every team.  Spending $17m/yr on a RB will seriously hinder your cap.  Only way I could see it is if you have a QB who is still on a rookie deal and you think you can win a super bowl during that deal.  If you have to pay a QB and a RB each $17M+, you are going to be seriously lacking at other positions.  Rams are good to pay Gurley because Goff is still on his rookie deal, and they are in clear win-now mode.  Maybe Philly with Wentz still on his? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its beyond obvious he is going to the highest bidder with the highest guarantee no matter what.

He just passed up 15 million for one year on a super bowl contender for crying out loud.  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ChuckLiddell said:

I kind of feel like this could be re-written to fit the script of pretty much every team.  Spending $17m/yr on a RB will seriously hinder your cap.  Only way I could see it is if you have a QB who is still on a rookie deal and you think you can win a super bowl during that deal.  If you have to pay a QB and a RB each $17M+, you are going to be seriously lacking at other positions.  Rams are good to pay Gurley because Goff is still on his rookie deal, and they are in clear win-now mode.  Maybe Philly with Wentz still on his? 

I think the Jets and Dolphins are likely to make big offers.  The Jets will have Darnold on the 2nd year of his rookie deal next year, and Miami appears to be a team likely to take a QB early in 2019, so they could be starting a rookie as well.  Same for TB, who could very well be drafting a QB in 2019 and maybe bringing Fitz back for a cheap price. 

Edited by Ghost Rider
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I think the Jets and Dolphins are likely to make big offers.  The Jets will have Darnold on the 2nd year of his rookie deal next year, and Miami appears to be a team likely to take a QB early in 2019, so they could be starting a rookie as well.  Same for TB, who could very well be drafting a QB in 2019 and maybe bringing Fitz back for a cheap price. 

Good post. The 2019 Bucs are a team that no one is talking about regarding Bell ... and they could definitely use the firepower. The rest of their division has their franchise backs and then some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, shoecrew22 said:

In my  redraft with 1 keeper (cant keep same keeper 2 years in a row) I offered Bell for Adams. Adams owner is out of playoff race basically and doesnt have an RB1 to speak of. He is considering

Interesting ...  my 12 team PPR Keeper league, Bell owner had to move him (3 year limit) and made me an offer of Bell & Dem Thomas for Barber & MVS!  ACCPETED IMMEDIATELY!

He needed WR help but has Connor, Fournette, A Jones but best WR = Hilton & Fitz ...

 

I am on the side of the player has a right to reject the offer if he feels it is not in his best interest.  The NFL is a pure business machine driven by $ for the Owners.  They want the players to sacrifice their bodies and rights while limiting their financial reward. 

Share this post


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

I think the Jets and Dolphins are likely to make big offers.  The Jets will have Darnold on the 2nd year of his rookie deal next year, and Miami appears to be a team likely to take a QB early in 2019, so they could be starting a rookie as well.  Same for TB, who could very well be drafting a QB in 2019 and maybe bringing Fitz back for a cheap price. 

I hear you and those organizations are both desperate enough to make a bad decision like that, but I do contend that it is a bad decision.  Those teams are nowhere near contending and don't have good enough OLs to maximize Bell's potential.  They are better off using their cap to build their OLs and defenses around their young QBs (assuming Miami grabs one).  A blue chip RB is not the answer for either of those teams.  Much bigger issues to address than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

You do realize there is a difference between Bell and those other players, right?

Probably not.  Well, obviously not.

I do realize there’s a difference, I pointed it out at the beginning of my previous post.  Donald and Mack were players under contract, and refused to play under the terms they had agreed to.  (You know, “operating in bad faith;” that mortal sin you want to accuse of Bell of).  Bell is merely a person who wasn’t under contract who decided not to sign a contract he found unacceptable.  

So your suggestion is what, that a team he signs a contract with next will be worried that AFTER HE FULFILLS EVERY TERM OF THAT CONTRACT, he’ll choose not to agree to ANOTHER contract with that team, and that will dissuade other GMs from pursuing him??

Bell has played out each of his last two contracts and done everything he was contractually obligated to do; he hasn’t sat out any games, he hasn’t missed any meetings (that we are aware of), and other than being late to a game in the playoffs last year, he hasn’t done anything to warrant team discipline.  What he has done is decided not to play in 2018.  You want to make it more than it is, but that’s what he did.  You want to conflate FF and the NFL, where FF owners will refuse to draft a guy because he let them down the previous year, or will rage cut a guy on Tuesday b/c he put up a goose egg on MNF, but NFL GMs aren’t going to blacklist a guy who is a top player st his position because he refused to sign a contract with a different team.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Birdie048 said:

I

I am on the side of the player has a right to reject the offer if he feels it is not in his best interest.  The NFL is a pure business machine driven by $ for the Owners.  They want the players to sacrifice their bodies and rights while limiting their financial reward. 

Yeah they make peanuts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bayhawks said:

I do realize there’s a difference, I pointed it out at the beginning of my previous post.  Donald and Mack were players under contract, and refused to play under the terms they had agreed to.  (You know, “operating in bad faith;” that mortal sin you want to accuse of Bell of).  Bell is merely a person who wasn’t under contract who decided not to sign a contract he found unacceptable.  

So your suggestion is what, that a team he signs a contract with next will be worried that AFTER HE FULFILLS EVERY TERM OF THAT CONTRACT, he’ll choose not to agree to ANOTHER contract with that team, and that will dissuade other GMs from pursuing him??

Bell has played out each of his last two contracts and done everything he was contractually obligated to do; he hasn’t sat out any games, he hasn’t missed any meetings (that we are aware of), and other than being late to a game in the playoffs last year, he hasn’t done anything to warrant team discipline.  What he has done is decided not to play in 2018.  You want to make it more than it is, but that’s what he did.  You want to conflate FF and the NFL, where FF owners will refuse to draft a guy because he let them down the previous year, or will rage cut a guy on Tuesday b/c he put up a goose egg on MNF, but NFL GMs aren’t going to blacklist a guy who is a top player st his position because he refused to sign a contract with a different team.  

Thank you for even more clearly pointing out that you have no idea what you are talking about. 

Share this post


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

Its beyond obvious he is going to the highest bidder with the highest guarantee no matter what.

He just passed up 15 million for one year on a super bowl contender for crying out loud.  

 

Agreed. He's all about the cash, nothing else. At least he's been relatively up front with it and not running the party line crap about how he's all about winning and all about the fans only to turn around and sign with the Jets for the highest guarantee. He's been pretty clear that his primary motivation is securing as much guaranteed cash as he can. 

Fare thee well as you sign your big deal and slowly fade into obscurity on an also-ran team, Le'Veon. We'll remember the good times. Unfortunately, we'll also remember the drug tests, the missed playoff games, and the holdouts. An interesting legacy in the Steel City. I doubt he'll be back much. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Thank you for even more clearly pointing out that you have no idea what you are talking about. 

Make sure you bump this post in the off-season when he signs a big contract despite how radioactive he is and how turned off NFL GMs will be because he chose not to sign the contract the Steelers offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GROOT said:

 

Yeah they make peanuts

Yeah, those owners who don’t risk their bodies and brains are barely scraping by.

Edited by Bayhawks

Share this post


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

Make sure you bump this post in the off-season when he signs a big contract despite how radioactive he is and how turned off NFL GMs will be because he chose not to sign the contract the Steelers offered.

Of course he will get signed.  If he gets 17 mil he only needs to play about 7.5 more years to break even........

Share this post


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

So what is his value in dynasty now?

I think you have to hold but it’s going down.  He was at 1800yds/10 TD or so in Pitt with a high ceiling.  I’d pray for Philly.

Share this post


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

Yeah, those owners who don’t risk their bodies and brains are barely scraping by.

Yeah 14 million isn't enough

Share this post


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

Of course he will get signed.  If he gets 17 mil he only needs to play about 7.5 more years to break even........

It isn't that simple. Since he had a healthy year off without injury, his next contract should be larger than it would have been if run into the ground again.

It is reasonable to argue Bell could extend his career by a year by avoiding back to back enormous work loads.

Conner's emergence certainly was an unexpected complication. It is the one thing that could make Bell's not playing this year him hurt him financially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Bayhawks said:

I do realize there’s a difference, I pointed it out at the beginning of my previous post.  Donald and Mack were players under contract, and refused to play under the terms they had agreed to.  (You know, “operating in bad faith;” that mortal sin you want to accuse of Bell of).  Bell is merely a person who wasn’t under contract who decided not to sign a contract he found unacceptable.  

So your suggestion is what, that a team he signs a contract with next will be worried that AFTER HE FULFILLS EVERY TERM OF THAT CONTRACT, he’ll choose not to agree to ANOTHER contract with that team, and that will dissuade other GMs from pursuing him??

Bell has played out each of his last two contracts and done everything he was contractually obligated to do; he hasn’t sat out any games, he hasn’t missed any meetings (that we are aware of), and other than being late to a game in the playoffs last year, he hasn’t done anything to warrant team discipline.  

Except for multiple failed/missed drug tests and being suspended.  Twice.

Bell overplayed his hand.  I am sure he'll get a nice contract from another team but I doubt he will get one so much larger than what he was offered by Pittsburgh to make up for the lost $14.5 million.  Maybe he lands on a good team and is named Super Bowl MVP or maybe he signs with a crappy team and stinks.

Either way will be okay for Bell because it was always about the money.

Share this post


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

Except for multiple failed/missed drug tests and being suspended.  Twice.

Bell overplayed his hand.  I am sure he'll get a nice contract from another team but I doubt he will get one so much larger than what he was offered by Pittsburgh to make up for the lost $14.5 million.  Maybe he lands on a good team and is named Super Bowl MVP or maybe he signs with a crappy team and stinks.

Either way will be okay for Bell because it was always about the money.

Which suspensions and failed drug tests resulted in team discipline?  The suspensions and drug tests were from the league.  As far as honoring his contract, which is what I was referencing, he has never failed to do that, in such a way that his team has taken action (as far as we know; as with any player, there could have been issues that were dealt with internally).  

The point being, the argument being made that other GMs will be wary that he won’t honor his contract in a year or two is baseless, because he has NEVER failed to honor his contract with the team.  If you want to argue that his suspensions from a few years back will cause other GMs to be scared off, that’s a different discussion.  But the idea that he’s gonna be blacklisted because he doesn’t honor his commitments is completely fabricated.

Share this post


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

Except for multiple failed/missed drug tests and being suspended.  Twice.

Bell overplayed his hand.  I am sure he'll get a nice contract from another team but I doubt he will get one so much larger than what he was offered by Pittsburgh to make up for the lost $14.5 million.  Maybe he lands on a good team and is named Super Bowl MVP or maybe he signs with a crappy team and stinks.

Either way will be okay for Bell because it was always about the money.

He didn’t overplay his hand.  He didn’t want to play under the franchise tag again, and he wanted to be a FA.  Barring something unforeseen, that’s exactly what happened.  He played his hand perfectly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well wasn't that predictable.

Bell has done plenty to warrant discipline, just not team discipline.

(Of course even that ignores the skipped walkthrough and the showing up late for a playoff game.  Those sound worthy of team discipline.)

Share this post


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

He didn’t overplay his hand.  He didn’t want to play under the franchise tag again, and he wanted to be a FA.  Barring something unforeseen, that’s exactly what happened.  He played his hand perfectly.  

Yeah sure, keep telling yourself that.  He didn't come to Pittsburgh last week because he wanted see the fall foliage.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yeah sure, keep telling yourself that.  He didn't come to Pittsburgh last week because he wanted see the fall foliage.  

What?  We don’t know why he came to Pittsburgh.  Maybe he had a meeting with the Steelers and/or the NFL to make sure of how the situation was going to play out, maybe he had a date; maybe he had to sell his house since he knew he wasn’t coming back; maybe he came to Pittsburgh to force Pitt/the NFL to state that they weren’t going to press for the ability to tag at the same rate in 2019 if he didn’t report.  In any event, I fail to see a way that him coming to Pittsburgh demonstrates him overplaying his hand.  Can you explain that viewpoint for me?

Share this post


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

What?  We don’t know why he came to Pittsburgh.  Maybe he had a meeting with the Steelers and/or the NFL to make sure of how the situation was going to play out, maybe he had a date; maybe he had to sell his house since he knew he wasn’t coming back; maybe he came to Pittsburgh to force Pitt/the NFL to state that they weren’t going to press for the ability to tag at the same rate in 2019 if he didn’t report.  In any event, I fail to see a way that him coming to Pittsburgh demonstrates him overplaying his hand.  Can you explain that viewpoint for me?

Maybe he came in for a supporting role in the new movie on Mister Rogers.  Just as likely as some of your scenarios.

He came in to sign his tender because he was out of options.   The only reason he bailed is because the Steelers were not going to pay him for the 2 weeks he was exempted, something that was made possible by James Conner outperforming Bell's production,  which is something he did not anticipate. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Maybe he came in for a supporting role in the new movie on Mister Rogers.  Just as likely as some of your scenarios.

He came in to sign his tender because he was out of options.   The only reason he bailed is because the Steelers were not going to pay him for the 2 weeks he was exempted, something that was made possible by James Conner outperforming Bell's production,  which is something he did not anticipate. 

So, he was out of options and came back to Pittsburgh, then he bailed.  You say he bailed because the Steelers weren't going to pay him.  But that doesn't address him being out of options.  Whether the Steelers pay him or not for those 2 weeks, "IF" he was out of options before, then he's still out of options now, and would still need to sign his tender.  So, your scenario that he came to sign his tender because he was out of options doesn't fit.  He didnt' sign the tender, so you can't logically contend that this is the reason he came to Pittsburgh. 

 

 

Share this post


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

So, he was out of options and came back to Pittsburgh, then he bailed.  You say he bailed because the Steelers weren't going to pay him.  But that doesn't address him being out of options.  Whether the Steelers pay him or not for those 2 weeks, "IF" he was out of options before, then he's still out of options now, and would still need to sign his tender.  So, your scenario that he came to sign his tender because he was out of options doesn't fit.  He didnt' sign the tender, so you can't logically contend that this is the reason he came to Pittsburgh. 

 

 

I give up :wall:

Share this post


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

Just remember, subtract 14.5 mill from whatever he signs for next year. He already starts in the hole from what he could have had.

This is fundamentally not true. Why do people keep saying it? If he plays and gets hurt he gets nothing long-term.  He avoids a huge change of injury to get more guaranteed money. 

Would you rather have $14.5M guaranteed with a 70% chance of another $30M  ... or get $35M guaranteed 100% of the time? Give me the $35M. I don't blame him at all.

Share this post


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

This is fundamentally not true. Why do people keep saying it? If he plays and gets hurt he gets nothing long-term.  He avoids a huge change of injury to get more guaranteed money. 

Would you rather have $14.5M guaranteed with a 70% chance of another $30M  ... or get $35M guaranteed 100% of the time? Give me the $35M. I don't blame him at all.

Now imagine that he took the $14.5, and signed for another $35 next year

 

See, money he'll never get back

Share this post


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

This is fundamentally not true. Why do people keep saying it? If he plays and gets hurt he gets nothing long-term.  He avoids a huge change of injury to get more guaranteed money. 

Would you rather have $14.5M guaranteed with a 70% chance of another $30M  ... or get $35M guaranteed 100% of the time? Give me the $35M. I don't blame him at all.

So, Gurley got $22M fully guaranteed at signing and the rest of his "guarantees" were rolling guarantees in future years, which Bell has repeatedly said he doesn't value and were a huge part of why he's turned down several offers from the Steelers. David Johnson I believe got marginally more than that guaranteed up front.

You think Bell, who's 3 or 4 years older than Gurley with 2 suspensions and multiple knee injuries in his past already will get more than Gurley got guaranteed up front? I know, it sounds great to throw around big numbers, but realistically he's not getting that kind of deal unless an owner is really, really stupid and desperate.

He'll be lucky to get $20M fully guaranteed at signing next offseason, and depending on who you choose to believe, he may have turned down a front-loaded contract from the Steelers this past offseason that would've paid him $20M in 2018.

Share this post


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

I give up :wall:

Best decision you can possibly make. He wants so badly for the Steelers to have screwed this up and for Bell to have made a great decision that he'll justify however he needs to. He and Le'Veon are just about the only two people who believe that, so let them. The rest of us can continue along in the real world.

Share this post


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

Maybe he came in for a supporting role in the new movie on Mister Rogers.  Just as likely as some of your scenarios.

He came in to sign his tender because he was out of options.   The only reason he bailed is because the Steelers were not going to pay him for the 2 weeks he was exempted, something that was made possible by James Conner outperforming Bell's production,  which is something he did not anticipate. 

I have no idea why Bell was in Pittsburgh.

Given what we know about next year's tag, I also have no idea why he'd all of a sudden want to play this year, after 10 weeks of not wanting to.  Your theory that he was all set to sign the tag but then bailed over the 2 week exemption sounds quite unlikely.

Speculation about selling his home or whatever sound more plausible, frankly. 

Share this post


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

David Johnson I believe got marginally more than that guaranteed up front.

As far as money guaranteed at signing, Johnson actually outpaced Gurley significantly -- 12% more ($24.6 M vs $21.95 M for Gurley). Gurley has higher salaries in Years Three and Four, though, both of which are guaranteed at the beginning of their respective league years (March 2020 and March 2021).

Share this post


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

Best decision you can possibly make. He wants so badly for the Steelers to have screwed this up and for Bell to have made a great decision that he'll justify however he needs to. He and Le'Veon are just about the only two people who believe that, so let them. The rest of us can continue along in the real world.

I might be alone on this island, but I don't really think either side screwed up.  The Steelers played this the way they should have.

Bell wants to hit FA next year fully healthy and with less mileage, and it looks like he'll get what he wants.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Phenomena said:

This is fundamentally not true. Why do people keep saying it? If he plays and gets hurt he gets nothing long-term.  He avoids a huge change of injury to get more guaranteed money. 

Would you rather have $14.5M guaranteed with a 70% chance of another $30M  ... or get $35M guaranteed 100% of the time? Give me the $35M. I don't blame him at all.

Poor logic. 

Even if he got hurt it would 99% likely be non career ending, so he would still get a contract, and probably still a decent one.

Plus the fact he could easily get hurt outside of football.  Unless of course he isn't training, in which case there is no way he gets a huge deal if he is out of shape.

So in your example, I EASILY take the 14.5 million now with the 70% change of 30 more million because that 35 million in the future is absolutely NOT a 100% guarantee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say Bell gets the same contract David Johnson got.

Had he played this year and got hurt, he would only need like 8 million guaranteed next year to "break even". 

He could have torn his ACL in the playoffs and easily still gotten that next year.  

  • Like 1

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.