Bell contract 2018

[Money]

1 hour ago, AlanFanecaFan said:

I’d be mighty interested in Mark Ingram at say 3 years $15 mill next year if they wanted to save a top 3 round draft pick.

He’ll get more than that. Jerick McKinnon just got 4 years, $30m. But I like Mark Ingram. 

I also like Tevin Coleman. 

[Livewire]

 

[3rivers]

anyone know what schefters source was for Bell possibly sitting out 8 weeks? Schefter is much more reliable that rappaport  thats for sure, but the idea of bell sitting out 8 weeks just doesn't  makes sense or does it? 

The draft pick of Samuels is making more sense now thats for sure.  I still think connor could be good , he just needs a chance and thats if his knee healed after the injury late last year.

[CKSteeler]

Bell is taking the Mike Wallace route. And a lot of fans will say they understand. It's about the guaranteed money! It's something they just repeat because guys in the media say it along with some agents. But it's nonsense. The Steelers have a very good track record of keeping guys they sign for longer than teams that pay out more money. Mike Wallace learned that the hard way when he went to a situation that didn't suit his skill set. He would have made more money in the long haul if he had stayed in Pittsburgh despite all that supposedly guaranteed money he was offered by Miami.

People forget that Mike Wallace was doing historical things early in his career. Like, we see Brown's numbers posted next to Rice's. Brown is obviously far better than Wallace, and the numbers show that. But Mike Wallace was on pace with the all time greats, too, over his first few years. Then everything fell apart. Bell is already declining physically and is going to have a few hundred more hits on him after this season.

This isn't a rah rah Steelers position. I don't begrudge any player trying to maximize their earnings. It's just a shortsighted approach in the long run. You give up building your resume up with one team (which has its own earning potential down the road, too), a team with a good record of paying and taking care of its players...you go to a team that is probably a bottom feeder with a lot of cap space to toss around but which will ultimately cut you in a few years. You don't end up making what you thought or could have.

[Chieferific]

9 hours ago, 3rivers said:

are teams still that naive? Without OL or good QB in this league, just forget it. Then consider CB's value today as well as WR.  Selfish RB's are down the list of priorities but wait and see.  Bell is in the wrong generation for what he wants. Too bad this will affect the team IMO, and not in a good way.  If he doesn't play until week 8, I expect both connor and samuels to rack up the yards and points. 

Can you name me a player regardless of position that was the top 1, 2 or 3 at his position that didn't get an giant contract in FA? I can't. And yes, teams are that naive. 

[jebrick]

6 hours ago, Chieferific said:

Can you name me a player regardless of position that was the top 1, 2 or 3 at his position that didn't get an giant contract in FA? I can't. And yes, teams are that naive. 

Can you name a FA player that got 100% more than the next highest paid player?  How about 80% more?  50%?

The salaries do in crease but teams do not hand out huge increases in FA.  The highest paid QB just tend to one up each other by 1-2M per year.  That is why there is not a big difference between Brees and Cousians( 25M vs 27M).  Bell would set a new bar at 10M per year.  He might even get up to 12M per year.  he is never going to see 13.5M= per year.

My bet is he gets between 10-12M per year but all guaranteed.  Then he can smoke some weed and do his rap albums.  The Steelers are never big in handing out guaranteed money.  Teams that are desperate hand out huge chunks like that and handcuff themselves with an uncuttable player.  There could always be a fool in the bunch.  They do not learn from Suh or Mike Wallace type signings.

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, jebrick said:

Can you name a FA player that got 100% more than the next highest paid player?  How about 80% more?  50%?

The salaries do in crease but teams do not hand out huge increases in FA.  The highest paid QB just tend to one up each other by 1-2M per year.  That is why there is not a big difference between Brees and Cousians( 25M vs 27M).  Bell would set a new bar at 10M per year.  He might even get up to 12M per year.  he is never going to see 13.5M= per year.

My bet is he gets between 10-12M per year but all guaranteed.  Then he can smoke some weed and do his rap albums.  The Steelers are never big in handing out guaranteed money.  Teams that are desperate hand out huge chunks like that and handcuff themselves with an uncuttable player.  There could always be a fool in the bunch.  They do not learn from Suh or Mike Wallace type signings.

Especially in a case like this, teams look at what the Steelers were throwing out there and will use it on a basis.

And I 100% would be willing to bet that right now 31 NFL GM's are thinking to themselves "What do the Steelers know that makes them only guarantee $10million?"

[Chieferific]

He will make AT LEAST $15 million per. Some team will be dumb enough to do it. 

2 hours ago, jebrick said:

Can you name a FA player that got 100% more than the next highest paid player?  How about 80% more?  50%?

The salaries do in crease but teams do not hand out huge increases in FA.  The highest paid QB just tend to one up each other by 1-2M per year.  That is why there is not a big difference between Brees and Cousians( 25M vs 27M).  Bell would set a new bar at 10M per year.  He might even get up to 12M per year.  he is never going to see 13.5M= per year.

My bet is he gets between 10-12M per year but all guaranteed.  Then he can smoke some weed and do his rap albums.  The Steelers are never big in handing out guaranteed money.  Teams that are desperate hand out huge chunks like that and handcuff themselves with an uncuttable player.  There could always be a fool in the bunch.  They do not learn from Suh or Mike Wallace type signings.

That number is about to change significantly with Gurley, Zeke and DJ coming due. Bell will make at least $15 million per. Some team will be dumb enough to do it. History tells me so. 

[warfelg]

14 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

He will make AT LEAST $15 million per. Some team will be dumb enough to do it. 

That number is about to change significantly with Gurley, Zeke and DJ coming due. Bell will make at least $15 million per. Some team will be dumb enough to do it. History tells me so. 

AAV means very little.  Comes down to guarantees.  Steelers offered $10mil 100% guaranteed, up to $35mil based on games played and performance.  I heard that the games played wasn't a huge hurdle (12 each season) and the performance hurdles were low too (1,000 yards; 50 catches; 300 yards receiving; could have been any of the 3).  So watch for the guaranteed money.

It's that guaranteed money and the locking qualifiers for guaranteeing the money for the next year that Bell didn't like; and it's going to be what other teams look at and say "what do they know that we don't".

[Dcash4]

2 hours ago, jebrick said:

Can you name a FA player that got 100% more than the next highest paid player?  How about 80% more?  50%?

Not quite an apples to apples comparison when you consider what all these guys do. How many of those QB's or WR's getting contracts also were one of their teams best runners (hey Cam)? 

If Bell came out and said, I'm a WR who is willing to run the ball -- does this argument change against what its perceived is "okay" for him to make? Without trying to shoehorn guys into positions, what is the correct amount to pay someone? You would think it would be measured against his usefulness and success, correct?

Bell was 10th in the NFL in receptions last year. Doug Baldwin was the 10th biggest contract at the receiver position at $11.5M. Doug Baldwin had -8 rushing yards and does not block. Is it really absurd to believe that Bell - who has been top 3 in yards from scrimmage the last 3 years - is at least $3M more useful than Doug Baldwin? Bell also had more receptions than 7 of those top 10 contracts on the list. 

75 Rec, 991 yards, 8 TDs, 2 Rush, -8 yards, 0 TDs - 16 games

85 Rec, 655 yards, 2 TDs, 321 Rush, 1,291 yards, 9 TDs - 15 games

One of those players is significantly better than the other. One player is significantly more useful than the other. One player gets paid significantly more because of the letters that go next to his name in the program. 

If thats forever going to be the case, that this XYZ player gets paid this money because thats what other XYZ players get paid...then I hope when Kamara's contract gets up he says he wants to change positions and wont run the football anymore. Put me in the slot and let me get paid like those guys. 

 

[AFF]

13 hours ago, Money said:

He’ll get more than that. Jerick McKinnon just got 4 years, $30m. But I like Mark Ingram. 

I also like Tevin Coleman. 

Mark Ingram is also 29 years old though...but he’s a very good overall RB.

I could maybe see $6 mill AAV but his age will hinder him...and his recent suspension.

[3rivers]

On 2018-07-16 at 7:44 PM, TitanLegend said:

Steelers should be grateful Bell is a complete retard and turned this deal down. Paying an RB that much, especially one with the injury history and amount of carries/touches already on Bell, would have been one of the dumbest moves of the off-season.

Munchak's o-line will allow any RB to suffice. May not have Bell's skill set, but it's not needed to be a successful offense. Advanced stats support they don't need Bell as well:

 

This stats sheet you provided is what has me thinking that we would be ok moving forward without bell. Great player but he  doesn't make the team in this case.   OTOH,  they signed dupree to the 5th year option, which makes no sense to me at all.  Could have spent that on bell I suppose,  but I hope they are both gone next year. 

[Chieferific]

3 hours ago, warfelg said:

AAV means very little.  Comes down to guarantees.  Steelers offered $10mil 100% guaranteed, up to $35mil based on games played and performance.  I heard that the games played wasn't a huge hurdle (12 each season) and the performance hurdles were low too (1,000 yards; 50 catches; 300 yards receiving; could have been any of the 3).  So watch for the guaranteed money.

It's that guaranteed money and the locking qualifiers for guaranteeing the money for the next year that Bell didn't like; and it's going to be what other teams look at and say "what do they know that we don't".

I agree with that. I'm merely stating that he will get $15 million per. With that said, it wouldn't surprise me if the contract didn't last 5 years especially considering his age. 

[Dcash4]

The "Since 2013" numbers with and Without Bell are pretty meaningless, and a fairly laughable stats if that's your be all end of of the discussion. It doesn't account for the games Bell played without Ben, doesnt account for how many points were scored by defense or special teams, doesnt account for time of possession or total possession, doesnt account for win percentage, doesnt account for apples to apples roster construction year over year...

The games without Ben in 2015, Bell was pretty great -- especially considering that no one was afraid of Mike Vick or Landry Jones. 2016 is another part where the stats dont tell the story. From week 10 on, we leaned heavily on the running game instead of Ben passing to nobodys. Bell was tremendous in those games and we dominated the TOP -- which can lead to less scoring, but we won all of the games. Look at the Chiefs playoff game that year -- Bell KILLED it....we scored 18 points. His success and the overall score are related, but they do not define each other. Ben handing the ball off on the 1 instead of making a bad read and interception that game was a 7 point swing -- those 7 points are not a reflection of Bell, but looking at at PPG number, you wouldnt see that context. 

It also doesnt describe how the 2015 season that Bell missed the majority of, we still had a top 8 running back as well as arguably the most talented overall offense in that time period. 

There are a lot of arguments I will hear out...but throwing out the PPG and then sitting back laughing like you won....its just stupid. 

 

[43M]

15 hours ago, Dcash4 said:

The "Since 2013" numbers with and Without Bell are pretty meaningless, and a fairly laughable stats if that's your be all end of of the discussion. It doesn't account for the games Bell played without Ben, doesnt account for how many points were scored by defense or special teams, doesnt account for time of possession or total possession, doesnt account for win percentage, doesnt account for apples to apples roster construction year over year...

The games without Ben in 2015, Bell was pretty great -- especially considering that no one was afraid of Mike Vick or Landry Jones. 2016 is another part where the stats dont tell the story. From week 10 on, we leaned heavily on the running game instead of Ben passing to nobodys. Bell was tremendous in those games and we dominated the TOP -- which can lead to less scoring, but we won all of the games. Look at the Chiefs playoff game that year -- Bell KILLED it....we scored 18 points. His success and the overall score are related, but they do not define each other. Ben handing the ball off on the 1 instead of making a bad read and interception that game was a 7 point swing -- those 7 points are not a reflection of Bell, but looking at at PPG number, you wouldnt see that context. 

It also doesnt describe how the 2015 season that Bell missed the majority of, we still had a top 8 running back as well as arguably the most talented overall offense in that time period. 

There are a lot of arguments I will hear out...but throwing out the PPG and then sitting back laughing like you won....its just stupid. 

 

Any stats without context are ridiculous....but there is nothing Ive seen that tells me Bell is worth the $17m per year he seems to want.  

I maintain that a huge part of any RBs success in the running game is the OLine.    As impressive as Bell can be as a runner, he has been shut down at times when the line isnt clicking on all cylinders.   Thats not really a slight against Bell, but its also why I hold the stance that ABSOLUTELY NO RB is worth the money he wants.     If someone is willing to pay him that next year.....have at it....and good for Bell.....but I still maintain we should have traded him and if possible, would trade him now.

The only thing about Bell Ill miss is his ability as a receiver and blocker.    His running skills can be replaced pretty easily IMO.    

And finally....I simply dont trust him enough to get huge money....I dont trust him once he gets paid and I dont trust him to stay healthy when we need him most. 

I dont wish any ill will on him....Im just over him.    Lets move on.