Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Pretty ####ty if they did that. I don't understand why teammaters and fellow union members would side with ownership over a player when it's about trying to get players paid. Just imagine at your job if you were trying to get a raise after years of elite performance and an incredible workload only to have your coworkers put you on blast or even put you in harms way. That's really messed up.
They could have added a stipulation where a drug suspension voids any future guaranteed money or makes the entire contract voidable.
Give him a few sacks, too. Remember, he occasionally played DE at Pitt (in fact, he was recruited as a DE).
If it was 100% about the paycheck, then I would agree. But there is this little thing called the Lombardi Trophy that they collectively are trying to earn, and what Bell is doing is making it more difficult.
Fair point about the drug suspensions. I'm sure it was pot, which if caught would suspend half the league. But that would/should cost him. That being said, they have conduct clauses even with guaranteed money that would protect them. As for injury history, see Gurley's college career for comparison. Gurley's contract set the bar/market. Just like Cousins did with the guaranteed QB money. Pay the man his money. Or don't.
I agree with you his production would suffer. The point is the guy you were trying to bet never said it wouldn't.
yeah absolutely. bell:gurley is not apples to apples. gurley is much younger (in rb years), healthier and has no off-the-field concerns. also the rams have a qb on a rookie contract still so they can afford the cap hit easier and are also at the start of their super bowl window as opposed to the end of it. for all these reasons it makes much more sense for the rams to lock him up now.
I recall hearing this was part of the contract offer two years and Bell didn't want it in the offer.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
WHy would anyone but a dope trade Bell for discounted FUTURE assets. Bell IS a future asset, and a top future asset.
Right. In the cases of players holding out, they are obviously holding out for more money. Their intentions are known.
Maybe follow along with the entire conversation?
You can always just ask rather than send a terrible offer.
How is he a ####? They offered him a contract (tag). He’s under no obligation to sign it.
I know they aren’t framing it that way but it’s what they are doing. Bell wanted to see RBs get paid what he thinks they deserve. He’s trying to get the best contract for himself. His teammates are putting him on blast. They aren’t taking his side. The other side is the Steelers management.
You and I simply have a difference of opinion. You feel this is purely a Bell vs owners Black/White issue... and if they’re not with him they’re with ownership.
No sweat. Here’s to some good bourbon drinking this weekend and week 1 action.You and I simply have a difference of opinion. You feel this is purely a Bell vs owners Black/White issue... and if they’re not with him they’re with ownership.
I feel it’s more of a fluid grey-area situation with more variables/sides at play, not the least of which is “the team” and their desire for unified goal of winning the super bowl.
No biggie. People disagree all the time on here. Cheers GB
Could be he and his agent turn down any offer with this clause, secondary smoke you know
Seems like they should have just signed the extension 2 years ago. Could have done a huge 5 year deal and had him from 24-29. If he agreed to a clause that he gets suspended for drugs again and some percent is voided, it would have made more sense than this current mess has become. I guess that’s hindsight though.
Indeed! Steelers are gonna flush the Browns with or without Bell. And I don’t even care about either team.
I would too.
Agreed. It does seem like Bell was going to do the bell thing and report, saw the gurley deal and said “f this”. No one is wrong in this situation. The Steelers are putting team before player, Bell is looking out for his best interests, and the fans can go screw bc the nfl knows you are going to watch the Steelers with Conner as much as you are going to watch them with Bell.
Pretty much this. Do they even have room for a large Bell extension? With Big Ben and Brown I imagine taking up a big chunk of room, it seems unusual to give that many skill positions top dollar. (I haven't looked)
Probably. The way the cap grows each year and the fact Ben won’t be around much longer, they could likely make it work. They just were never planning on it. Bell is kind of seeing what the future is for most elite RBs: year to year valuation.
Steelers fans and talk-radio hosts around here think the offense will be better, without Haley (& Bell)?
19 mill was more than Julio and AJ got around the same time, plus higher AAV than them,
This should be more of a beer thing ...Bourbon makes me wanna Karaoke...Beer makes me wanna football
Putting a half-### effort on tape for eternity only hurts their own career. Wouldn't be too bright.
They didn’t offer $30M in guaranteed money; they offered $10M. The $30-some million first reported was not truly guaranteed. This has been reported & covered in this thread.
UDFA rookie starting his first game at left tackle for the Browns on Sunday. 
