Pittsburgh/Bell Situation

[showtime]

What's the problem with Bell, though?  He just turned 26, so he's not that old.  I actually thought he was older because of how some people were talking about him.  The guy is arguably the best running back in the NFL and has been for a few years now.  He deserves to be paid accordingly.

[showtime]

3 minutes ago, PFM18 said:

Rapsheet just reporting Bell is actually expected to report on Saturday.

Sounds like stuff needs to be sorted out between him, the players etc before he sees the field. 

I don't think he needs to sort out anything with the players.  He's an elite player and everyone will welcome him back with open arms.  No issues.

[PFM18]

3 minutes ago, showtime said:

I don't think he needs to sort out anything with the players.  He's an elite player and everyone will welcome him back with open arms.  No issues.

True, I agree they'll welcome him back when he returns but some of those players talked about stuff he probably wouldn't appreciate and it also sounded like some of them are disappointed. They all need to ensure they're on the same page for the season if he is coming back.

[11sanchez11]

11 minutes ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

Good for Bell. They want to keep paying him a year at a time and run him into the ground until all his value is gone

But at the same time isn't this the team's perspective? Why should I (the NFL team) pay you so much when I am unlikely to receive ROI because of wear and tear, injuries, your unwillingness to dominate touches still. You're one of the highest paid players in the NFL because the incredible amount of touches you get, it seems pretty important that you are able and willing to do that.

[showtime]

Just now, PFM18 said:

True, I agree they'll welcome him back when he returns but some of those players talked about stuff he probably wouldn't appreciate and it also sounded like some of them are disappointed. They all need to ensure they're on the same page for the season if he is coming back.

I heard that it had to do with at least one of them said something like, Bell told me he would report on Wednesday.  So when the Bell didn't, I guess it made that player(s) look bad.

[CP3MVP]

The question I ask myself in situations like this is what would Belichick do?

[11sanchez11]

2 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

The question I ask myself in situations like this is what would Belichick do?

So you like the Khalil Mack trade?

[3rivers]

1 hour ago, ET80 said:

Given this situation, what would his trade value look like? Steelers are basically SOL until Week 10, Bell is walking back into a hostile locker room - you've got to think a team can come in with a trade offer that is far less than what Bell is worth. Contract situation is different, but somebody has the cap room needed to make an offer.

Is there any team out there who'd fit this bill? 

Most teams already have a RB or two and are set. There are a few teams that would consider Bell a roster improvement at RB, and of those, how many have the cap space and then how many feel good about his character? Some teams really have low tolerance for drama, suspensions and selfish players. 

Teams that I can think of that could be interested would be:

jets - bad OL though

texans- see above

colts - see above

Bucs - see above

Browns - shaky OL,  should be much better than the ones above

If it takes these teams 2 + years to get the OL decent, that is 2 years wasted for him , but does that even matter to him? He doesn't have many options IMO, the demand isn't there. He won't have a sweepstakes of  teams mailing in mega $100M deals that he believes he should get as a dual threat player.  The deal the Steelers had was a good one, and he didn't sign, so he wants substantially more than 5/70 with 30G, but who has the space for this deal is also another reason there won't be much demand.

If he hits UFA next season, do the people here think more than 4 teams will be considering a serous offer and what do you think the offer will be that he eventually signs?

I see him  wanting 5/85 with 45G especially after all these other deals have been done.

[3rivers]

15 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

The question I ask myself in situations like this is what would Belichick do?

BB wouldn't allow the players to comment to the media and social media. He also would have never tagged the player 2 years in a row and would have traded him last year after he decided not to show up until just before week 1 and was slow for about 4 weeks.  BB runs the team, players play the game. 

[ET80]

5 minutes ago, 3rivers said:

texans- see above

This was a question that came up on talk radio today - the between the T stuff would be seriously hampered (this being said, Julie'n Davenport and Zach Fulton have looked good at LT / LG) but Bell's ability in the passing game would be a dynamic presence for Deshaun Watson. 

This being said - the money required, the past knee injuries and the suspensions from off the field issues would probably be too much of a deterrent for me to be comfortable as a fan. 

[CP3MVP]

17 minutes ago, 11sanchez11 said:

So you like the Khalil Mack trade?

Absolutely. I’m not paying any defensive player Qb money. I’ll take the 2 1’s

[stl4life07]

1 hour ago, TheVillain112 said:

Disagree here.  Steelers are smart to not sign Bell to a long term deal.  Even if you ignore the past injuries and suspensions for Bell, it's just not wise to spend a lot on a RB.

I'm of the mindset that RBs don't really matter (in terms of total scoring or W/L) in today's NFL.  Some reasons why:

https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/19933/saquon-barkley-may-be-a-generational-talent-but-he-ll-still-be-overdrafted

The running back position is back. Its one thing if that wasnt true but it is. Gurley got paid backs that will follow him like DJ, Gordon, Zeke, etc... will all get paid. Bell will get paid by some team when he hit the market. Sure the Steelers dont have to pay their backs but times are changing for the running back position. The Steelers dont want to be that team that uses up a back by running him into the ground for cheap on his rookie deal then tagging him twice then letting him walk in FA because and not It will give him what they truly deserve. The organization would look bad for that. 

[ET80]

21 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

The question I ask myself in situations like this is what would Belichick do?

Belicheck would have traded him to Tampa Bay for a 1st and 3rd by week 6 of last season.

Ask Jamie Collins about that.

[3rivers]

3 minutes ago, ET80 said:

This was a question that came up on talk radio today - the between the T stuff would be seriously hampered (this being said, Julie'n Davenport and Zach Fulton have looked good at LT / LG) but Bell's ability in the passing game would be a dynamic presence for Deshaun Watson. 

This being said - the money required, the past knee injuries and the suspensions from off the field issues would probably be too much of a deterrent for me to be comfortable as a fan. 

Skill wise when healthy, bell is a HOF talent. The problem is everything else as you eluded to and imagine if you were a GM with your job possibly on the line? The also consider if the steelers play even better with Connor, it doesn't help. They score more points without bell too , that might also weigh in on some minds.   A RB relies on OL and QB and WR's. If there are 8 in the box, good luck. 

[Soko]

He’s doing all he can do in negotiations. It’s not like OBJ where the clear hold up is just attitude or behavior - the Steelers just don’t want to pay him that much, period. And given the RB shelf life, they really have all the leverage.

A team can control a RB for 6-7 years (depending on if they’re a first rounder or not) at a reasonable, non-committal deal. If a guy comes in at 21-23, he’ll be 27-30 by then. It sucks, but it’s the nature of the position combined with a hole in the current process. 

I think teams shouldn’t be able to franchise a player for consecutive years.