How much has Bell befitted from Pittsburgh’s offensive talent?

[BayRaider]

 LeVeon is not a product of his OLine, I would honestly still take him over any RB not named Todd Gurley and possibly Kamara/Hunt (but I’d still probably take him #2).

James Connor is really that good. Dude was an absolute beast at PITT (college). I would not be surprised if Connor is a Top 5 RB himself. Yes it makes no sense for the Steelers to continue with Bell with how good Connor has performed but the downplaying on Bell is a little ridiculous. The Steelers actually had 2 Top 5-6 RBs. And the line doesn’t hurt, either. 

[KellChippy]

2 minutes ago, skywlker32 said:

No one is saying that Bell is bad necessarily, at least from what I have seen, but Bell may not be good enough to be worth a Gurley or David Johnson level contract if he is that easily replaced.

I was of the opinion he wasn’t worth it for Pitt before I knew Conner was this good.  

Were there any extension talks earlier in Bell’s career when Pitt wouldn’t have had to give him a crazy contract?  I’m not keen on the rules of extending rookie contracts, but I guess that would have been shortsighted of Bells agent to sign early.

[ttitansfan4life]

I think we can all agree that Munchak is still the GOAT. That line was a joke before he arrived.

[August4th]

25 minutes ago, ttitansfan4life said:

I think we can all agree that Munchak is still the GOAT. That line was a joke before he arrived.

he has been a godsend tbh want him here for 10 more years

[TitanLegend]

1 hour ago, ttitansfan4life said:

I think we can all agree that Munchak is still the GOAT. That line was a joke before he arrived.

By far the worst part of hiring him as HC here was losing him as OL coach.

There's never been a better OL coach in the league since I've been watching. Feel at this point he has to have an argument as the best to ever do it.

[Fresh Prince]

The hate is strong in this thread. 

[footbull3196]

6 hours ago, TheVillain112 said:

I don't necessarily disagree, but IMO it helps to have an OL that's going to open up holes if you give them time to.  What I mean by that is, Bell looks amazing in Pittsburgh waiting for the holes to open up, and then hits the hole and breaks tackles better than anyone else in the NFL.  Now if he goes to a team where he waits for the hole to open up but the OL isn't good enough to consistently open those holes, will it then look like he's dancing in the backfield too much? 

I don't know if I can definitively answer that question one way or another...

Not to mention it also helps to have a HOF QB and HOF WR as well as an upper tier WR #2 that keeps defenses on their heels and takes defenders out of the box.  It's not like Bell has to worry about facing the boxes that Zeke does

[3rivers]

On 2018-11-06 at 4:20 PM, ET80 said:

We've seen James Connor and DeAngelo Williams do very well behind this OL - so while I think Le'Veon is still a good player, I think he benefits from a very good blocking scheme.

Bell was an exceptional RB and at one time I even thought he might have been the best offensive player other than Brady, Rodgers or Brees, but this was a few years ago. The OL is the key to the RB's success. Put bell on a team with a bad OL, and he will not be near as effective.  I think this is why he never signed before the trade deadline, because if he went to a bad OL, his numbers would be much less than Connors and bell would lose more value going into UFA.  Some RB's benefit from the OL and scheme more than others. 

The steelers OL is good, but I wouldn't say they are great. Dwill and Connor are both good backs with a good OL and cast, so the results are similar.  It was too bad that Dwill got hurt that one season, it would have been interesting to see how they did going into the playoffs despite the D not being up to playoff standards if there is such a thing anymore.

Mike Munchak deserves the credit, because he really turned the OL around. Colbert got some of the players, but Munchak might have also had input there too

[BayRaider]

If we are calling all RBs a product of their line then the only good RB in NFL History was Barry Sanders. 

[ET80]

41 minutes ago, 3rivers said:

Mike Munchak deserves the credit, because he really turned the OL around

I completely forgot he was in Pittsburgh. Here is the correct answer to this question. Might as well lock up this thread.

[3rivers]

41 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

If we are calling all RBs a product of their line then the only good RB in NFL History was Barry Sanders. 

Barry was THE exception, but the point was, the OL deserves a good part of the credit.  They don't get the credit they deserve, but they get the spotlight when there is a false start of holding call.   I hope bell goes to a team with a mediocre OL, but between that and finding a team that needs him and can afford him, the possibilities are very limited. 

 

14 minutes ago, ET80 said:

I completely forgot he was in Pittsburgh. Here is the correct answer to this question. Might as well lock up this thread.

He deserves the credit. 3 different RB's with similar results and injuries on the OL as well. That is great coaching by Munchak and that can't be disputed. Look at how the titans are without Grimm, IIRC they aren't as good overall on the OL.  

[dtait93]

Bell's best totals: 1,361 yards (2014), 9 rushing TD's (2017), 4.9 ypc (2015 and 2016), 85 receptions (2017), 10.3 y/r (2014), 3 receiving TD's (2014)

Conner this year through 9 games: 706 yards, 9 rushing TD's, 4.7 ypc, 38 receptions, 10.0 y/r, 1 receiving TD

Either Conner is almost as good as Bell when Bell was at the peak of each category, or the Steeler's o-line has much more to do with either of their success.

I'll go with the latter and say that Bell benefited immensely from the Steeler's o-line. He will look a lot worse when a top tier o-line, a HoF QB, and a HoF WR aren't on his side of the line of scrimmage.