Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, matuski said:

Not top 10 half of the league.  Borderline top 10 RB in a third of the league.  Back to arguably RB#1 on a handful of teams.

Having said that, I still predict he gets the $ he is after... even if it is signing with a team like the Dolphins or Browns.

He'll defnitely get the money he seeks if he signs with one of the also-rans of the league. That's why they're also-rans because they can't manage their caps or their free agent signings.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

That's not relevant.  And the NFL Network isn't "the NFL themselves".

Think of all the reporters covering individual teams on behalf of NFL.com or the individual team websites.  The league office has to monitor everything all 100+ of those people write or say on air, and if they don't issue corrections, then anything they say automatically becomes official league policy?  That's obviously absurd.

I disagree, and I think a court would too, if the NFL tried to "back-track" from this report.  As I posted previously, I'd assume that Bell's agent got this information first-hand, as well, before they decided not to report by 11/13.

Share this post


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

By signing his tender and playing the 2018 season he would have gotten $14.5 million -AND POSSIBLY- the next contract guarantee.   

Fixed

Share this post


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

By signing his tender and playing the 2018 season he would have gotten $14.5 million -AND- the next contract guarantee.   

Signing the tender and playing another year as the PIT RB (100's of carries) is/was the largest risk/threat to getting his next contract.

NOT playing in the NFL is the only logical decision if your goal is to be healthy at the end of the season.

Really the only way he wouldnt get the $ next year is if he were hurt.. so eliminate the most likely way for that to happen.

Edited by matuski
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

It was reported by NFL network, which is owned by the NFL.  I'm not sure how legally binding that would be, but I'm sure that if this situation were to go before a court, a player's lawyers would argue that the media representative of the NFL reporting this, and not being "corrected" by the NFL is binding.

What's more, this NFL network report came shortly after Bell returned to Pittsburgh, shortly before the 11/13 deadline.  I would assume that the report was a result of that.  Speculation is that Pittsburgh didn't want Bell to come back (maybe they'd have a wink-wink deal to not franchise him if he stayed away, they'd use the roster exemption on him, etc), so when he looked like he was, the NFL released the report.  I would also assume that Bell and/or his agent got this information from someone directly, which is what led to him deciding against signing on 11/13.

Thanks.  I was just wondering if the NFL had issued a press release on this -- I've read most of this thread but not all of it.

As for the binding effect, there would be none if it was only the NFL Network.  But I guess you could argue reliance and get into some nasty discovery and internal e-mails.  I'm a bit surprised that Bell didn't push for more clarification on this.  And I'm still AMAZED that his agent didn't get this addressed before the season started.

Share this post


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

I disagree, and I think a court would too, if the NFL tried to "back-track" from this report.  As I posted previously, I'd assume that Bell's agent got this information first-hand, as well, before they decided not to report by 11/13.

So you're envisioning a scene where an attorney for Bell is standing before a judge quoting some random NFL Network talking head, and the judge being like, "yeah ok, I guess it must be true, since the league didn't correct him."

Out of curiosity, when was the last time you saw the league office come out and refute something that was falsely reported in the media?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wakelawyer said:

Thanks.  I was just wondering if the NFL had issued a press release on this -- I've read most of this thread but not all of it.

As for the binding effect, there would be none if it was only the NFL Network.  But I guess you could argue reliance and get into some nasty discovery and internal e-mails.  I'm a bit surprised that Bell didn't push for more clarification on this.  And I'm still AMAZED that his agent didn't get this addressed before the season started.

I don't know why you'd assume that didn't happen.

I didn't hear it personally, but there have been a few references in this thread to a radio interview (or maybe podcast?) the agent did months ago where he asserted what we know now, about next year's cap being at the year 3 level.

Edited by davearm

Share this post


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

I don't know why you'd assume that didn't happen.

I didn't hear it personally, but there have been a few references in this thread to a radio interview (or maybe podcast?) the agent did months ago where he asserted what we know now, about next year's cap being at the year 3 level.

It was my understanding that the reports noted that Bell just learned about the chance that the QB tag would apply.  That would also seem to make sense given the fact that Bell has avoided discussing when he'll come back.  To me, that's the biggest issue.  If you're staying out all year, let your teammates know, go to an island and chill, and end the drama.  The fact that there wasn't a public announcement makes me wonder if he was still trying to figure out everything up until this Tuesday.

Share this post


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

I disagree, and I think a court would too, if the NFL tried to "back-track" from this report.  As I posted previously, I'd assume that Bell's agent got this information first-hand, as well, before they decided not to report by 11/13.

 

So here are the quotes:  

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero gives his "understanding," not any official position:

Quote

"My understanding is the NFL management council and the NFL Players' Association, the parties that negotiated the collective bargaining agreement, are on the same page that if Bell were tagged a third time, whether he shows up this season, whether he sits out the entire year, that tag would be at the higher quarterback number, not the lower number similar to what he would be due under the franchise tag this year," Pelissero said on NFL Up To the Minute on Tuesday. "It would be extremely unlikely for the Steelers to put that higher third franchise tag on Le'Veon Bell. That would set up a scenario where they'd tag him a third time, the number is upwards of $25 million and Bell, if he wanted to, could walk in the day he's tagged, sign it and be owed $25 million for one season."

And NFL Network's Aditi Kinkhabwala reported that the NFL and Steeler don't currently "plan" to argue that the QB tag does not apply:

Quote

"I've been told by both league and team sources that neither the NFL nor the Steelers have any plan to argue that the second tag should carry over, should Le'Veon Bell not play this year," NFL Network's Aditi Kinkhabwala reported. "They are all in agreement that any potential tag would be the third (or the transition)."

 

Even if the NFL and NFL Network were the same entity (they're not), and the NFL Network could bind the Steelers and the NFL (it cannot), this falls far short of the type of admission that would bind a party.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

He sat out this season so that he could avoid that career-ending injury in order to get a larger paycheck in the future.  I understand the reasoning but don't agree with it since you cannot predict the future though.  He could have a career-ending injury in 2021 and not get to collect all of that big contract that he sat for and may have not been injured in 2018.   

All Bell (and most players and agents) seems to care about is the guaranteed dollar amount.  That figure will be in place before he takes another snap.

Share this post


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

Signing the tender and playing another year as the PIT RB (100's of carries) is/was the largest risk/threat to getting his next contract.

NOT playing in the NFL is the only logical decision if your goal is to be healthy at the end of the season.

Really the only way he wouldnt get the $ next year is if he were hurt.. so eliminate the most likely way for that to happen.

That is fine but taking that option costs $14.5 million right now. 

Share this post


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

Thanks.  I was just wondering if the NFL had issued a press release on this -- I've read most of this thread but not all of it.

As for the binding effect, there would be none if it was only the NFL Network.  But I guess you could argue reliance and get into some nasty discovery and internal e-mails.  I'm a bit surprised that Bell didn't push for more clarification on this.  And I'm still AMAZED that his agent didn't get this addressed before the season started.

I mentioned in a few posts that I think Bell (or his agent) did get clarification.  I think that is why he came back to Pittsburgh before the deadline. 

Since the wording in the CBA isn't completely clear (the assumption was that if he doesn't play under the tag, he could be tagged at the same level again, and I've read reports recently that say they are surprised at the NFL's concession on this point, because the wording of the CBA could allow them to make that argument), the NFL wouldn't voluntarily concede that point until they were forced to do so.  It would take a player getting to that point (getting tagged, and not playing at all under the tag) for it to become an issue. 

So, maybe Bell and his agent believed he would be tagged at the QB level even if he didn't play, but the league wouldn't concede that point.  So, the week before the deadline, Bell tweets that he's leaving Miami & shows up in Pittsburgh.  Within short order, we have the NFL network reporting that the NFL won't argue that Bell could be tagged again at the 2nd tag level if he doesn't play in 2018.  When Bell showed up, and the Steelers didn't want him back, he/his agent got the NFL to concede the point (then the report was leaked), and Bell didn't sign.

Again, this is what I think could have happened.  It makes sense, but I don't have any source/proof that it went down this way.

Share this post


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

 

Which does not take into account the year of earning power that he lost.  He isn’t going to play indefinitely.

True but he isnt worried about that.  He is worried about one more contract with the most guaranteed money he can get which he believes with be a lot more than 14.5 million.

 

Share this post


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

That is fine but taking that option costs $14.5 million right now. 

Correct.  He is skipping on 14.5 to remain healthy to cash in on multiples of that next year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Correct.  He is skipping on 14.5 to remain healthy to cash in on multiples of that next year.

Anyone who thinks he's getting "multiples" of that is dreaming.

He might get a total contract of multiples of that. And his rolling/future guarantees might be multiples of that, but then again, his offers from the Steelers contained those same types of rolling guarantees. His first year guarantee isn't likely to exceed what Gurley or Johnson got, and that was in the $22M to $25M range. To get that potential guarantee in 2019, he chose to bypass $14.5M in his pocket in 2018 PLUS the chance and probability that he was still going to get a nice contract in 2019 anyways. The risk of injury was more than he wanted, and the Steelers moved on... which is exactly what they should've done. Good decisions like that are why the Steelers remain good and competitive every year.

There was a report that he turned down a long term deal from the Steelers that included $20M in guarantees in year one and a second year salary that would become guaranteed in the first days of the next league year. He wanted even more than that guaranteed up front. Some people won't believe that, which is cool. 

Share this post


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

Correct.  He is skipping on 14.5 to remain healthy to cash in on multiples of that next year.

He skipped on 20ish guaranteed and more on day 1 2019 so he could then skip on 14.5 so he could then sign for a team that gives him 28 guaranteed and keeps him at 15ish touches with no injury risk.  Looks good to me.

Where is that Steve Buscemi meme?

Share this post


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

He skipped on 20ish guaranteed and more on day 1 2019 so he could then skip on 14.5 so he could then sign for a team that gives him 28 guaranteed and keeps him at 15ish touches with no injury risk.  Looks good to me.

Where is that Steve Buscemi meme?

I can't really follow your post here, but it appears to be trolling?

 

Share this post


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

Anyone who thinks he's getting "multiples" of that is dreaming.

He might get a total contract of multiples of that. And his rolling/future guarantees might be multiples of that, but then again, his offers from the Steelers contained those same types of rolling guarantees. His first year guarantee isn't likely to exceed what Gurley or Johnson got, and that was in the $22M to $25M range. To get that potential guarantee in 2019, he chose to bypass $14.5M in his pocket in 2018 PLUS the chance and probability that he was still going to get a nice contract in 2019 anyways. The risk of injury was more than he wanted, and the Steelers moved on... which is exactly what they should've done. Good decisions like that are why the Steelers remain good and competitive every year.

There was a report that he turned down a long term deal from the Steelers that included $20M in guarantees in year one and a second year salary that would become guaranteed in the first days of the next league year. He wanted even more than that guaranteed up front. Some people won't believe that, which is cool. 

If your nitpicking is about the "multiples" - I can see that possibility.  The rest of your post is full of misinformation.

This decision was not made by the Steelers.  The Steelers tagged him because they wanted him, Bell chose not to sign it.  Bell was the one to "move on". That "report" about the Steelers long term deal is repeatedly brought up, yet never confirmed, appeared to be leaked by the Steelers, and upon inspection even the leaked offer wasn't truly a $20m deal.

There is the risk he won't get t he amount of money he is after.... that is possible.  I would personally bet on a long term deal with a guarantee the likes of Gurley and DJ (2X ish), and a total around $40 (multiples).  We shall see.

eta - I believe you are one of those that repeatedly brings up the "offer" that up to recently only ever amounted to a rumor.  If that was ever vetted out, please link.  I haven't paid a ton of attention to it in a while.   $20m guaranteed is still low, but would certainly change my understanding of the situation.  ?

 

 

Edited by matuski

Share this post


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

If your nitpicking is about the "multiples" - I can see that possibility.  The rest of your post is full of misinformation.

This decision was not made by the Steelers.  The Steelers tagged him because they wanted him, Bell chose not to sign it.  Bell was the one to "move on". That "report" about the Steelers long term deal is repeatedly brought up, yet never confirmed, appeared to be leaked by the Steelers, and upon inspection even the leaked offer wasn't truly a $20m deal.

There is the risk he won't get t he amount of money he is after.... that is possible.  I would personally bet on a long term deal with a guarantee the likes of Gurley and DJ (2X ish), and a total around $40 (multiples).  We shall see.

eta - I believe you are one of those that repeatedly brings up the "offer" that up to recently only ever amounted to a rumor.  If that was ever vetted out, please link.  I haven't paid a ton of attention to it in a while.   $20m guaranteed is still low, but would certainly change my understanding of the situation.  ?

 

 

Yes, Bell made the decision to not sign the tender, and at that point, the Steelers gave it no more thought and made it known that if/when he'd report, he'd go another 2 weeks with a roster exemption. Maybe Bell wasn't initially intending for the holdout to last this long, things changed, whatever. It worked out great for the Steelers, because they haven't missed a beat and they have an extra $14.5M to play with next year.

I'm not the only one who's referenced the offer from the Steelers, but I have. The initial report was that the Steelers only offered him $10M in guarantees, which was a laughable report even at the time because the Steelers aren't a stupid organization. But there will never be a true verification of what the Steelers did or didn't offer him. The most "realistic" information came from Florio, and this offer was from before Gurley or Johnson got theirs. (If someone wants to argue Bell with his history is worth as much as Gurley, we can agree to disagree lol) Wasn't enough, end of story, and you won't find many if any Steelers fans who are sorry that it didn't work out.

 

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk was the latest with some new nuggets of information to share about the deal Bell rejected on Friday, and if his source turns out to accurate, the contract the Steelers’ star running back turned down actually provided very similar guarantees to those given to Todd Gurley.

While it was publicly reported as a $60 million deal that included $45 million guaranteed, the reality of Gurley's contract is that the actual guarantees are worth just $21.95 million. The bulk of the remaining guarantees come in the form of roster bonuses and injury guarantees after 2019 and the Rams can still cut him at any point to avoid paying him significant portions of the deal.

Pittsburgh reportedly were offering Bell a $10 million signing bonus and ALSO a $10 million roster bonus in 2018, according to Florio. When added to the minimum base salary they could have paid him as per league rules, Bell would have been guaranteed $20.79 million in year one alone. A suggested cash flow of $47 million over the first three years of the deal sounds credible, given that would equate to around $13 million in 2019 and 2020 and likely made up of roster bonuses and a large base salary as the Steelers have done with other star players on the roster.

With Pittsburgh’s offer consistently having been reported as being worth in the region of $70 to $72 million over five years, that would imply earnings in the region of $12 million in each of the last two years of the offer. If all these suppositions hold true, the back end of the deal might have been a reason to reject the contract, but the level of guarantees were not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A roster bonus is not guaranteed.  By definition, you have to be on the roster as of a specified date in the future to get that payout.

Bell is after fully guaranteed $$$ at signing.  Sounds like that amount was $10M, as reported previously.

(FWIW, the report I seem to recall was $10M signing bonus and $4.5M salary for 2018, putting the total right at the tag amount, then various roster bonuses and "rolling guarantees" after 2018.)

Share this post


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

A roster bonus is not guaranteed.  By definition, you have to be on the roster as of a specified date in the future to get that payout.

Bell is after fully guaranteed $$$ at signing.  Sounds like that amount was $10M, as reported previously.

(FWIW, the report I seem to recall was $10M signing bonus and $4.5M salary for 2018, putting the total right at the tag amount, then various roster bonuses and "rolling guarantees" after 2018.)

False.  A roster bonus can absolutely be guaranteed.  Making it a roster bonus is just a legal semantic, nothing more.  The cap rules treat signing bonuses and roster bonuses very differently, if the team was breaking it out that way it's 100% due to how they want to handle the accounting.  They can make it a signing bonus, a roster bonus that activates the same day the contract is signed, a deferred signing bonus that's still a signing bonus but paid later, a roster bonus paid at a later date.  If the contract guarantees it, it's guaranteed. 

Edited by Hankmoody

Share this post


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

Anyone who thinks he's getting "multiples" of that is dreaming. 

He might get a total contract of multiples of that. And his rolling/future guarantees might be multiples of that, but then again, his offers from the Steelers contained those same types of rolling guarantees. His first year guarantee isn't likely to exceed what Gurley or Johnson got, and that was in the $22M to $25M range. To get that potential guarantee in 2019, he chose to bypass $14.5M in his pocket in 2018 PLUS the chance and probability that he was still going to get a nice contract in 2019 anyways. The risk of injury was more than he wanted, and the Steelers moved on... which is exactly what they should've done. Good decisions like that are why the Steelers remain good and competitive every year. 

There was a report that he turned down a long term deal from the Steelers that included $20M in guarantees in year one and a second year salary that would become guaranteed in the first days of the next league year. He wanted even more than that guaranteed up front. Some people won't believe that, which is cool. 

Bell has a lot more leverage than Gurley did though.  Gurley still had years 4 and 5 of his deal to play out with maybe $12M total between them.  He also wasn't allowed to go find any team in the league to beat that deal, and $21M in the pocket now was obviously worth taking the other team-friendly terms.  Bell has no such constraints now.  Teams have only one way to guarantee Bell's services, and that's to pony up.  Gurley and DJ had no such threat of walking away from the table.

Share this post


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

False.  A roster bonus can absolutely be guaranteed.  Making it a roster bonus is just a legal semantic, nothing more.  The cap rules treat signing bonuses and roster bonuses very differently, if the team was breaking it out that way it's 100% due to how they want to handle the accounting.  They can make it a signing bonus, a roster bonus that activates the same day the contract is signed, a deferred signing bonus that's still a signing bonus but paid later, a roster bonus paid at a later date.  If the contract guarantees it, it's guaranteed. 

Except if they try to “guarantee a roster bonus next year on the day the contract is signed” it becomes a signing bonus for cap purposes.  They can push roster bonuses onto future years’ cap precisely because they don’t become a financial commitment to the team until the player is “on the roster” at that point,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2018 at 10:45 AM, Bayhawks said:

I'll take that bet, boi.

When Bell comes back, Conner won't get the majority of RB touches, like Bell has his whole career.  How much?

:lmao:

Share this post


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

False.  A roster bonus can absolutely be guaranteed.  Making it a roster bonus is just a legal semantic, nothing more.  The cap rules treat signing bonuses and roster bonuses very differently, if the team was breaking it out that way it's 100% due to how they want to handle the accounting.  They can make it a signing bonus, a roster bonus that activates the same day the contract is signed, a deferred signing bonus that's still a signing bonus but paid later, a roster bonus paid at a later date.  If the contract guarantees it, it's guaranteed. 

Only in the narrow case where the roster bonus activates on the day the contract is signed would it belong in the guaranteed category.

EDIT: and Arodin says this is actually recategorized as a signing bonus.  Which, obviously, it should be.

Edited by davearm

Share this post


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

Except if they try to “guarantee a roster bonus next year on the day the contract is signed” it becomes a signing bonus for cap purposes.  They can push roster bonuses onto future years’ cap precisely because they don’t become a financial commitment to the team until the player is “on the roster” at that point,

That's not the case, see Aaron Rodgers' contract vs. Gurleys's as an example.  There is a provision somewhere regarding roster bonuses as they relate to the signin bonus, maybe you are thinking of that?  Something to the tune of if get exceed x% of the signing bonus then they are treated as a signing bonus.  The details escape me and I am on the road so limited ability to look it up right now.

They can push roster bonuses into future years because they haven't been paid out yet - otherwise guaranteed salaries would meet your criteria as well.

 

Edited by Hankmoody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2018 at 8:32 AM, matuski said:

I can't really follow your post here, but it appears to be trolling?

 

No not trolling intentionally sorry.  I'll bait a bit and post with a buzz a times but that is all.

I assumed his guaranteed offer was in the 20 ish range prior to the July deadline.  If true then I think the odds of him making up the loss of 2018 are less than 50%.  Looks like that offer may not have been that much but I guess we will never know.

Once he turned that down - i  agree that he should have been prepared to sit the year because then there is no contract and in that context the tag sucks.

We can however fairly criticize him at that point for the twitter show because that immature behavior was unprofessional.  The offer at that point was fixed by the rules - 14.5 for the year.  Take it or leave it and move on.  If I was looking to sign a top RB this would be a topic of discussion.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2018 at 11:33 AM, The General said:

Big props to @-fish- I think it was him who called this ####. If not him whoever did it. Heard it here first, before any talking head guy on TV who does this for a living.

I think that was another poster, though -fish- might have very well called it. 

I called it a week beforehand, though I'm not sure if we're talking about the year. I thought he'd report to satisfy his free agency.

This has been ugly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 11/16/2018 at 2:33 PM, The General said:

Big props to @-fish- I think it was him who called this ####. If not him whoever did it. Heard it here first, before any talking head guy on TV who does this for a living.

Thank you.

I didn't want to bludgeon people with the revelation. I tried a few times, but it didn't seem to catch hold.

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/677842-leveon-bell/?do=findComment&comment=21390772

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/677842-leveon-bell/?do=findComment&comment=21390784

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/677842-leveon-bell/?do=findComment&comment=21395906

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/771559-how-is-the-lbelljconner-situation-going-to-play-out/?do=findComment&comment=21442393

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/677842-leveon-bell/?do=findComment&comment=21476488

Edited by Futeki
Corrected the links
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

No not trolling intentionally sorry.  I'll bait a bit and post with a buzz a times but that is all.

I assumed his guaranteed offer was in the 20 ish range prior to the July deadline.  If true then I think the odds of him making up the loss of 2018 are less than 50%.  Looks like that offer may not have been that much but I guess we will never know.

Once he turned that down - i  agree that he should have been prepared to sit the year because then there is no contract and in that context the tag sucks.

We can however fairly criticize him at that point for the twitter show because that immature behavior was unprofessional.  The offer at that point was fixed by the rules - 14.5 for the year.  Take it or leave it and move on.  If I was looking to sign a top RB this would be a topic of discussion.

 

 

What Twitter show?

And the $14.5 isn’t fixed by the rules; Pitt could have offered him more at any time for the year.  The CBA says it must be at least $14.5, not exactly $14.5

Edited by Bayhawks
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2018 at 9:37 AM, davearm said:

A roster bonus is not guaranteed.  By definition, you have to be on the roster as of a specified date in the future to get that payout.

Bell is after fully guaranteed $$$ at signing.  Sounds like that amount was $10M, as reported previously.

(FWIW, the report I seem to recall was $10M signing bonus and $4.5M salary for 2018, putting the total right at the tag amount, then various roster bonuses and "rolling guarantees" after 2018.)

No... In that case, the $10M signing bonus and the $10M roster bonus both wouldve been guaranteed for 2018 immediately.  Unless, of course, you think the Steelers would've given him that contract in July, handed him $10M, and then cut him before the roster bonus would kick in for the season started a month later. The total guarantees in year one in that offer would've been just under $21M according to Florio's report. 

If you don't believe that report, cool. In the end, it doesn't matter. He said no regardless, and the Steelers are better off for it. Hope it works out for him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 12:38 PM, Godsbrother said:

By signing his tender and playing the 2018 season he would have gotten $14.5 million -AND- the next contract guarantee.   

You have absolutely no way of knowing this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 2:01 PM, Godsbrother said:

That is fine but taking that option costs $14.5 million right now. 

No. It guarantees more money in March. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 7:19 PM, matuski said:

Correct.  He is skipping on 14.5 to remain healthy to cash in on multiples of that next year.

Amazing to me that there are so many people here who can’t understand that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 10:14 PM, Steelers4Life said:

Anyone who thinks he's getting "multiples" of that is dreaming.

He might get a total contract of multiples of that. And his rolling/future guarantees might be multiples of that, but then again, his offers from the Steelers contained those same types of rolling guarantees. His first year guarantee isn't likely to exceed what Gurley or Johnson got, and that was in the $22M to $25M range. To get that potential guarantee in 2019, he chose to bypass $14.5M in his pocket in 2018 PLUS the chance and probability that he was still going to get a nice contract in 2019 anyways. The risk of injury was more than he wanted, and the Steelers moved on... which is exactly what they should've done. Good decisions like that are why the Steelers remain good and competitive every year.

There was a report that he turned down a long term deal from the Steelers that included $20M in guarantees in year one and a second year salary that would become guaranteed in the first days of the next league year. He wanted even more than that guaranteed up front. Some people won't believe that, which is cool. 

Bell’s agent already knows what money he is getting. There is an absolute guaranty he has received bare minimum numbers from the teams that are interested. 

Some of y’all are really out of touch here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Steelers Intend To Utilize Transition Tag On Bell

Not sure what the point is for that. They aren’t going to match.

Interesting that they wanted Bell back as a receiver and only would have used him rushing to give Conner a breather running the ball.

Remember, the Steelers have $14.5M of extra cap space to play with next year because Bell didn't sign this year. They'll do whatever they can do to maximize the return they get assuming he leaves.

Theres more going on here behind the scenes than any of us knows.

Share this post


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

Bell’s agent already knows what money he is getting. There is an absolute guaranty he has received bare minimum numbers from the teams that are interested. 

Some of y’all are really out of touch here. 

Haven't hear the term "tampering" in a while but this sounds like it qualifies...

Someone made the suggestion that Bell could have played this season and obtained an insurance policy to protect against major injury.  While that may be true, perhaps Bell's relationship with the Steelers had deteriorated past that point.  I'm sure Bell has felt underpaid for some time.  So Bell sits out the year to protect his NEXT contract.  Should be easy to understand since, in the event of a major injury, this could have been the last 14.5 he earned. 

How much can he make going forward?  Interesting question and I'm sure we could be amazed by the deep pockets somebody is able to display.  Bell will be 27 -  not a spring chicken but still in his prime.  One would still this might impact the length of the next deal.  Is three years the max?  How well will be take care of himself with a year off?   Did this year's messy negotiations paint him as a problem signing or do NFL team's consider it "just business"?  I'd lean toward the latter.

Let's project some numbers to facilitate the discussion.  If you're Bell, do you sign a 3 year, 45 million contract with, say, 15M now and 32M guaranteed?  I could see a 4th year and the guaranteed money being a point of contention.  I could see the numbers creeping up but I think this is in the ballpark.  If it is, you could say Bell's earning floor was 14.5 million if he played and was hurt this season vs 32 million by not playing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Steelers Intend To Utilize Transition Tag On Bell

Not sure what the point is for that. They aren’t going to match.

Interesting that they wanted Bell back as a receiver and only would have used him rushing to give Conner a breather running the ball.

No one has any way of knowing this.  This isn't fantasy football, this is the elite of the elite making decisions with winning football games coming first.  If signing/matching an offer accomplishes that, that's what they'll do.  A possible future 3rd doesn't even move the needle with these types of decisions.

Share this post


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

Bell’s agent already knows what money he is getting. There is an absolute guaranty he has received bare minimum numbers from the teams that are interested. 

Some of y’all are really out of touch here. 

Well, talk is just that. What teams tell agents and what really happens at the end of the day could be different.  Could that happen? Sure that could occur. Not sure if I was his agent or if I represented a team I would believe what either party says till negotiations begin. I personally would have concerns with a back that is year older and demanding the amount of money he wants. I think the Steelers have just proved you can go cheaper and have success.  Has to be a team with a lot of cash and a window to winning in a Superbowl. Bell is going to be 27 next year I believe. Gives you maybe 3 years and more likely 2 years and you have to be willing to take on his risk injury and suspension factor. Not to mention a back that has taken a year off. All of that said it takes just one team to make that call. Just not something I would ever do then again I'm not in an NFL front office and my job is not the line. 

Edited by osubuckeyeman

Share this post


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

Remember, the Steelers have $14.5M of extra cap space to play with next year because Bell didn't sign this year. They'll do whatever they can do to maximize the return they get assuming he leaves.

Theres more going on here behind the scenes than any of us knows.

As has already been discussed; using the transition tag & not matching could very well minimize the return they get (accords to overthecap.com link posted earlier, not matching an offer sheet for a transition player gets the Steelers nothing).

Unless the info overthecap has is wrong, an transition tag would be very risky.

Share this post


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

As has already been discussed; using the transition tag & not matching could very well minimize the return they get (accords to overthecap.com link posted earlier, not matching an offer sheet for a transition player gets the Steelers nothing).

Unless the info overthecap has is wrong, an transition tag would be very risky.

What I can say is this: the report this morning said the final push to get Bell in last Tuesday ended when the Steelers wouldn't agree to not use the transition tag in the off-season. Bell doesn't want the Steelers to use it and the Steelers could've agreed to that easily if they didnt plan to. They have an additional $14.5M in 2019 to help them match any front loaded contract offered to him by any other team.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Steelers know what they're doing better than any of us on a message board, and if it was that simple, it wouldn't have been a sticking point on both sides. My bet is that if the Steelers use it, they'll know they have any ability to match a contract that they want. 

Share this post


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

Haven't hear the term "tampering" in a while but this sounds like it qualifies...

Someone made the suggestion that Bell could have played this season and obtained an insurance policy to protect against major injury.  While that may be true, perhaps Bell's relationship with the Steelers had deteriorated past that point.  I'm sure Bell has felt underpaid for some time.  So Bell sits out the year to protect his NEXT contract.  Should be easy to understand since, in the event of a major injury, this could have been the last 14.5 he earned. 

How much can he make going forward?  Interesting question and I'm sure we could be amazed by the deep pockets somebody is able to display.  Bell will be 27 -  not a spring chicken but still in his prime.  One would still this might impact the length of the next deal.  Is three years the max?  How well will be take care of himself with a year off?   Did this year's messy negotiations paint him as a problem signing or do NFL team's consider it "just business"?  I'd lean toward the latter.

Let's project some numbers to facilitate the discussion.  If you're Bell, do you sign a 3 year, 45 million contract with, say, 15M now and 32M guaranteed?  I could see a 4th year and the guaranteed money being a point of contention.  I could see the numbers creeping up but I think this is in the ballpark.  If it is, you could say Bell's earning floor was 14.5 million if he played and was hurt this season vs 32 million by not playing.

 

It happens with every FA player. You think those contracts that magically get announced at 12:01 on FA day just happened in 60 seconds? They changed the freaking rules there is so much tampering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

Well, talk is just that. What teams tell agents and what really happens at the end of the day could be different.  Could that happen? Sure that could occur. Not sure if I was his agent or if I represented a team I would believe what either party says till negotiations begin. I personally would have concerns with a back that is year older and demanding the amount of money he wants. I think the Steelers have just proved you can go cheaper and have success.  Has to be a team with a lot of cash and a window to winning in a Superbowl. Bell is going to be 27 next year I believe. Gives you maybe 3 years and more likely 2 years and you have to be willing to take on his risk injury and suspension factor. Not to mention a back that has taken a year off. All of that said it takes just one team to make that call. Just not something I would never do then again I'm not in an NFL front office and my job is not the line. 

Agents and Gms have relationships built on trust. You’re living in another world if you don’t think bell’s agent doesn’t know the bare minimum he’s going to get. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

Steelers Intend To Utilize Transition Tag On Bell

Not sure what the point is for that. They aren’t going to match.

Interesting that they wanted Bell back as a receiver and only would have used him rushing to give Conner a breather running the ball.

Then Bell should have taken the $$$$ and ran with it.   Played in the slot to save the "wear and tear" on his body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Le'Veon Bell - RB -  Steelers

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports impending free agent Le'Veon Bell is seeking $17 million annually.

It's $3 million higher than Todd Gurley's average salary. Bell also wants $45 million guaranteed. It's a lot of money for a 27-year-old coming off a holdout at a devalued position, but Bell is going to get overpaid this offseason. With the Steelers expected to transition tag Bell, teams may be forced to frontload Bell's contract.

Source: NFL Network 

Nov 18 - 12:03 PM

Share this post


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

What Twitter show?

And the $14.5 isn’t fixed by the rules; Pitt could have offered him more at any time for the year.  The CBA says it must be at least $14.5, not exactly $14.5

Good point.

 

But only for year 2018 right?  The weekly amount was not super contentious I think?  More about how many weeks do I get even if I am out?

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.