It is literally impossible to know if he made the right decision. If he played this year and suffered a serious injury, it's conceivable he could have made $14.5 million this year and nothing beyond that (although pretty unlikely). If he did get severely hurt, he could have seen his value plummet and been forced to take a one year, low ball prove it deal next season. If that were the case, he certainly would not see much in guaranteed money.Bell made a huge blunder. He is never getting that $15M back. And, he is another year older with 30 years old quickly approaching. Time to cash in is running out.
Agree with most of what you’re saying. Most people seem to be overlooking the fact that Pitt was going to have him play one year with zero incentive to keep him healthy and no guaranteed money beyond this year.No skin in this game (not a Steelers fan, barely own Bell/Conner anywhere)....
I have no problem whatsoever with what he did. I'm glad he did it. He didn't "holdout". He wasn't under contract. He was presented an offer and he believes his worth is higher than the single year offer. He made the decision that, for him, it would be better/smarter to wait until next year and sign a long-term offer rather than risk injury, especially given that Pitt has had no issue giving him a very heavy workload for a few years now. He is under no obligation to accept that offer. It's very different than a player under contract that decides to hold out because they feel they are worth more than their current contract. Keep in mind, in general, I don't mind that either as teams typically have the advantage in most of those situations, especially with the ability to unilaterally cut a player and end contracts if they want.
They made a business decision to not want to give him a long term contract but instead offer him a one year franchise tag. He made a business decision to not accept it. Both parties are able to do what they did. Neither is right nor wrong with their decision overall.
Hopefully this will pave the way for some changes:
1) RBs, especially at the elite level, are underpaid. Yes, it's more of a plug and play position than others, but it's a punishing position with a lower shelf life and he deserves more. Sammy Watkins got a 3 year/$48M with $30M guaranteed with the Chiefs. He means much less to them than Bell does to Pitt. Tyrod Taylor is making more than Bell would have made. He's not even starting.
2) The franchise tag is turning into nonsense. And, in particular, it's ruining RBs. When they get signed to lesser rookie contracts that extend 4-5 years, then get tagged 1-2 years because the team isn't willing to commit, now you have a 27-28 yo RB that can't get his pay day anymore as a result. The tag has to either be limited to 1 year, rookie contracts need to be shortened, or an exception has to be made for a low shelf-life position like RB. Hopefully his decision can help bring up a way to change the current system.
3) Losing the ability to negotiate a contract after an early deadline -- This was a big part of why we ended up here, IMO.
not that I disagree but it did offer him a long-term offer that he felt was not good enough.No skin in this game (not a Steelers fan, barely own Bell/Conner anywhere)....
I have no problem whatsoever with what he did. I'm glad he did it. He didn't "holdout". He wasn't under contract. He was presented an offer and he believes his worth is higher than the single year offer. He made the decision that, for him, it would be better/smarter to wait until next year and sign a long-term offer rather than risk injury, especially given that Pitt has had no issue giving him a very heavy workload for a few years now. He is under no obligation to accept that offer. It's very different than a player under contract that decides to hold out because they feel they are worth more than their current contract. Keep in mind, in general, I don't mind that either as teams typically have the advantage in most of those situations, especially with the ability to unilaterally cut a player and end contracts if they want.
They made a business decision to not want to give him a long term contract but instead offer him a one year franchise tag. He made a business decision to not accept it. Both parties are able to do what they did. Neither is right nor wrong with their decision overall.
Hopefully this will pave the way for some changes:
1) RBs, especially at the elite level, are underpaid. Yes, it's more of a plug and play position than others, but it's a punishing position with a lower shelf life and he deserves more. Sammy Watkins got a 3 year/$48M with $30M guaranteed with the Chiefs. He means much less to them than Bell does to Pitt. Tyrod Taylor is making more than Bell would have made. He's not even starting.
2) The franchise tag is turning into nonsense. And, in particular, it's ruining RBs. When they get signed to lesser rookie contracts that extend 4-5 years, then get tagged 1-2 years because the team isn't willing to commit, now you have a 27-28 yo RB that can't get his pay day anymore as a result. The tag has to either be limited to 1 year, rookie contracts need to be shortened, or an exception has to be made for a low shelf-life position like RB. Hopefully his decision can help bring up a way to change the current system.
3) Losing the ability to negotiate a contract after an early deadline -- This was a big part of why we ended up here, IMO.
We he literally just lost $14.5M,.It is literally impossible to know if he made the right decision.
Maybe. Some are saying "read the CBA", but the CBA is not 100% crystal-clear and explicit on this matter, is it? Isn't it kind of open to interpretation? The kind of thing league lawyers would hash out with an arbitrator or in front of a judge if the league felt like fighting it?Would be funny as hell if the Steelers came out and said ... after further consideration, we feel confident that we can tag him again next year at the 2nd year rate and we'll settle it in arbitration.
Yep, which makes it all the stranger that the NFL and Steelers were saying they wouldn't fight it.Maybe. Some are saying "read the CBA", but the CBA is not 100% crystal-clear and explicit on this matter, is it? Isn't it kind of open to interpretation? The kind of thing league lawyers would hash out with an arbitrator or in front of a judge if the league felt like fighting it?
Yes, that's true and I failed to mention that.not that I disagree but it did offer him a long-term offer that he felt was not good enough.
So their plan wasn't solely a one-year run them into the ground
What if he signed his tag, got 400 touches, and teams didn't give him a ton of guaranteed money because of his workload, then he broke down from all the work and eventually got cut like Jamaal CharlesWe he literally just lost $14.5M,.
Only thing it's literally impossible to answer is if it was worth the less then 1% chance of a career ending type injury and if the decreased wear and tear vs questions such as if he's a team player and how much he loves football made him more or less appealing when he hits the open market next spring then had he just suited up this year. So we don't yet know what his lost $14.5M did for him, we just know he lost it.
He’s 26.Bell made a huge blunder. He is never getting that $15M back. And, he is another year older with 30 years old quickly approaching. Time to cash in is running out.
Baltimore is the favorite, imo, since I can totally see Bell wanting to stick it to the Steelers twice a year. Texans would make my fantasy shares happiest, though. Yes, please! See you next year Le'Veon. Don't get fat.New York Jets 3/1
Oakland Raiders 5/1
Philadelphia Eagles 7/1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 7/1
Green Bay Packers 7/1
San Francisco 49ers 9/1
Baltimore Ravens 9/1
Indianapolis Colts 9/1
Houston Texans 12/1
Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.Yep, which makes it all the stranger that the NFL and Steelers were saying they wouldn't fight it.
Exactly. This looks like a rare occasional where an absolute can be assumed. There's zero chance the Steelers would even consider giving him big money in any fashion. Let him walk, collect a 3rd, both sides look a little silly (less so for PIT but only b/c Conner beasted out and they saved 14M+ in personnel costs) but at least it's over.Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.
What if he signed his tag, got 400 touches, and teams didn't give him a ton of guaranteed money because of his workload, then he broke down from all the work and eventually got cut like Jamaal Charles
We also know for certain that he didn’t get hurt playing football this season.We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.
Exactly. He turns 27 in 3 months and is that much closer to 30. RBs typically have a short career and Bell wasted a prime year.He’s 26.
And made as much as we did. Surefire way to not get hurt playing football is to not get paid to play football. Brilliant.We also know for certain that he didn’t get hurt playing football this season.
With the potential for much more than us next yearAnd made us much as we did.
He didn't lose $14.5M.We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.
Ricky Williams.So was Lynch the first big name to "sit and save" (his body) for a year? I think we will see more of this. Especially at RB, it makes sense to take a breather for a position like that, with such a short shelf-life. They could very well end up making more money and/or extending their career in the end. There's no way of knowing that for certain, but there's certainly an argument for it.
Article about holdouts from the pastSo was Lynch the first big name to "sit and save" (his body) for a year? I think we will see more of this. Especially at RB, it makes sense to take a breather for a position like that, with such a short shelf-life. They could very well end up making more money and/or extending their career in the end. There's no way of knowing that for certain, but there's certainly an argument for it.
That’s three full seasons before he even turns 30 - so you’d get 4 seasons out of him until he’s over 30. He also just missed a full season of wear and tear.Exactly. He turns 27 in 3 months and is that much closer to 30. RBs typically have a short career and Bell wasted a prime year.
cant they carry over the 14.5 mil of unpaid money from this year to next year?Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.
So you think he made the right move by sitting out a year and not making $15M? No matter what he earns next year, he is always out the 2018 paycheck. I guess he saved his body to prolong his career but does Bell really want a prolonged career? Seems like walking away from the game came awfully easy.That’s three full seasons before he even turns 30 - so you’d get 4 seasons out of him until he’s over 30. He also just missed a full season of wear and tear.
I believe a large part will carry over but I don’t see why that matters - either way they are using up $15MM of cap space that they can use elsewhere. If they get an extra $15 MM carrying over should they “waste” it on Bell.cant they carry over the 14.5 mil of unpaid money from this year to next year?
No, I’ve said that from the beginning. I never thought he’d make that choice.So you think he made the right move by sitting out a year and not making $15M?
The only way he lost $14.5M is if he gets the Kaepernick treatment.We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.
Yes. Had he reported week 1 he could have had the $14.5 million this season and would still likely have gotten that $25 million contract with his next team. Heck he would have been close to your hypothetical $25 million by signing the Steelers contract offer.The only way he lost $14.5M is if he gets the Kaepernick treatment.
If he signs for, say, $25M, did he really lose $14.5M? You'll probably say yes but the correct answer is, not really.
If he signs for, say, $25M, did he really lose $14.5M? You'll probably say yes but the correct answer is, not really.
Because they have extra money rolling into 2019 now and want better and more immediate compensation.Exactly. This looks like a rare occasional where an absolute can be assumed. There's zero chance the Steelers would even consider giving him big money in any fashion. Let him walk, collect a 3rd, both sides look a little silly (less so for PIT but only b/c Conner beasted out and they saved 14M+ in personnel costs) but at least it's over.
Except if they decide to tag him again, they'd lose all that extra money & would get no compensation.Because they have extra money rolling into 2019 now and want better and more immediate compensation.
Transition tag=other teams can make offers, and Pitt has right to match. Other offers would likely be structured in such a way to make Pitt unlikely to match (huge first year, etc). If Pitt doesn't match, they lose Bell and get no compensation.
why even bring in the franchise tag? nobody believes that will happen.Except if they decide to tag him again, they'd lose all that extra money & would get no compensation.
Franchise tag (#3)= over $25M for 1 year. If they tag him, he signs that & that can't trade him with that large a contract. So, they are spending $25M of their 2019 cap on 1 RB, and won't get any compensation.
Transition tag=other teams can make offers, and Pitt has right to match. Other offers would likely be structured in such a way to make Pitt unlikely to match (huge first year, etc). If Pitt doesn't match, they lose Bell and get no compensation.
So, how does their extra money and desire for better/immediate compensation come into play?
That's what I thought. Might be another case of bayhawks just making crap up.Wouldn’t they get a supplemental pick if they lose him? If so, it would be a 3rd rounder.
Add that the market might not be as hot given how he placed himself as his only priority with no concern for the team whatsoever, and that he went back on his stated commitment to report for week 1. If you are a GM on another team, what’s to keep Bell from collecting the massive signing bonus that it will likely take to sign him and then watch him put himself first and only again and dog it or fake an injury to protect himself while making sure he keeps the bonus?
.