When 4 YPC = $100m (A Le'Veon Bell story)

[VigilantZombie]

That's a fair point.

[Chieferific]

1 hour ago, TXsteeler said:

I'm suggesting opinions are based on subjective matters. You can't have an opinion based on objective facts because then it's just a fact, unless your on the wrong side of it in which case you are just wrong.

I can't claim that its not raining when it is, and Then defend myself by saying that it's just my opinion.

Ok, then some people have a subjective opinion that Bell won't get more in FA. His FA hasn't occurred so this isn't a fact and it isn't wrong. The variables in this opinion that make it subjective include his injury history, his off field issue, his potential holdout and he will be like 28 yo when looking to land a long-term deal. I don't agree with that opinion but who cares? 

You seem like someone who only thinks their OPINION is the right one.

[TXsteeler]

22 hours ago, Chieferific said:

Ok, then some people have a subjective opinion that Bell won't get more in FA. His FA hasn't occurred so this isn't a fact and it isn't wrong. The variables in this opinion that make it subjective include his injury history, his off field issue, his potential holdout and he will be like 28 yo when looking to land a long-term deal. I don't agree with that opinion but who cares? 

You seem like someone who only thinks their OPINION is the right one.

It's not an opinion that atleast ONE other team will outbid the steelers in a potential FA. There is just no way that the steelers latest offer to Bell is the most money he could get in FA, that's a straight fact. ATLEAST one other team would offer more just because they could and because an RB like bell would be more valuable to them than he is to us.

[Chieferific]

34 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

It's not an opinion that atleast ONE other team will outbid the steelers in a potential FA. There is just no way that the steelers latest offer to Bell is the most money he could get in FA, that's a straight fact. ATLEAST one other team would offer more just because they could and because an RB like bell would be more valuable to them than he is to us.

You just don't get it. I'll try 1 more time. YOU said (and I'm paraphrasing) opinions can't be based on objective facts . Bell getting more money in FA isn't an objective fact based on YOUR definition. It hasn't happened therefore it isn't fact. Some people don't think he'll get more NEXT YEAR after another year older playing on the FA tag. Do I agree? No? Do you agree? Obviously not. However, that is some peoples' OPINION cause it has not happened yet and there are variables (as previously stated) that support their claim. Please get it. 

[3rivers]

52 minutes ago, TXsteeler said:

It's not an opinion that atleast ONE other team will outbid the steelers in a potential FA. There is just no way that the steelers latest offer to Bell is the most money he could get in FA, that's a straight fact. ATLEAST one other team would offer more just because they could and because an RB like bell would be more valuable to them than he is to us.

Cap math wise, I would agree.  Todays league though, I am not sure and consider his injury and suspension history and how our FO will overpay it's draft picks, this is a close call.  Can we trade Bell if a team will pay him what he wants? I am not sure how the rules are for the franchise tag, but the browns just traded for landry. Our FO will overpay and sign Bell, just get used to it.

[TXsteeler]

44 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

You just don't get it. I'll try 1 more time. YOU said (and I'm paraphrasing) opinions can't be based on objective facts . Bell getting more money in FA isn't an objective fact based on YOUR definition. It hasn't happened therefore it isn't fact. Some people don't think he'll get more NEXT YEAR after another year older playing on the FA tag. Do I agree? No? Do you agree? Obviously not. However, that is some peoples' OPINION cause it has not happened yet and there are variables (as previously stated) that support their claim. Please get it. 

I'm talking about people acting as if Bell went to FA right now he wouldn't get more money. Maybe his value drops next season no matter what, but Bell is trying to pull a Kirk and force FA this season, and people act like he's dumb for doing so.

[TXsteeler]

46 minutes ago, 3rivers said:

Cap math wise, I would agree.  Todays league though, I am not sure and consider his injury and suspension history and how our FO will overpay it's draft picks, this is a close call.  Can we trade Bell if a team will pay him what he wants? I am not sure how the rules are for the franchise tag, but the browns just traded for landry. Our FO will overpay and sign Bell, just get used to it.

They will absolutely not do that. They are burning him out to try and win a Superbowl while Ben is still capable. We have 3 seasons left max unless they draft a new franchise QB this year.

[Alex]

I think Santonio Holmes situation would be a good analogy.

We traded up to get Santonio Holmes (irrelevant in this case). When he played for us, he got us that Super Bowl victory with the memorable catch. By the time next season rolls in, he was getting in trouble and his attitude affected the locker room- Colbert probably thought to himself- okay, Santonio got us at least a Super Bowl. We want another one; he's affecting the locker room. He gotta go. His valuation is with winning the super bowl- not the team. 

I would like to think the same goes with Bell. He's not a distraction, he's not easily replaceable as many would suggest, he's been our consistently best player (argumentative Antonio Brown has been too), and he changed how people perceive the running backs. People want to get rid of Bell- okay fine, tell me what happens when Big Ben actually hang up for real next year? Who else do we have? We would be in a big trouble, really. Having no Bell and Big Ben. This isn't about Bell asking for too much; it's about the team security, to go into next generation without Big Ben. It's really tough keeping both but trust me, they would be relieved financially if Big Ben retires. 

That's just my two cents. Bell isn't a bad character; he just got the leverage and we doesn't. That's why we are livid about this. 

[Chieferific]

57 minutes ago, Alex said:

I think Santonio Holmes situation would be a good analogy.

We traded up to get Santonio Holmes (irrelevant in this case). When he played for us, he got us that Super Bowl victory with the memorable catch. By the time next season rolls in, he was getting in trouble and his attitude affected the locker room- Colbert probably thought to himself- okay, Santonio got us at least a Super Bowl. We want another one; he's affecting the locker room. He gotta go. His valuation is with winning the super bowl- not the team. 

I would like to think the same goes with Bell. He's not a distraction, he's not easily replaceable as many would suggest, he's been our consistently best player (argumentative Antonio Brown has been too), and he changed how people perceive the running backs. People want to get rid of Bell- okay fine, tell me what happens when Big Ben actually hang up for real next year? Who else do we have? We would be in a big trouble, really. Having no Bell and Big Ben. This isn't about Bell asking for too much; it's about the team security, to go into next generation without Big Ben. It's really tough keeping both but trust me, they would be relieved financially if Big Ben retires. 

That's just my two cents. Bell isn't a bad character; he just got the leverage and we doesn't. That's why we are livid about this. 

A couple of things here...I'm not big on the validity of so called distractions. I think they are overblown. However, to claim that Bell's contract demands and his threat to hold out and/or retire aren't a distraction may only hold true because it's the off season. If he holds out (which I expect him to do) during the season then it will be a distraction. Of course it will be debatable as to how much of an affect it had on the team. Secondly, I'd agree that it's a tossup between he and AB as to which is the "best" player. However in regards to Ben's impending retirement, it is harder to find a great QB than then it is a great RB. It is easier to win with a great QB and no RB than it is to win with a great RB and no QB. I really don't think a case can be made otherwise. While I don't think you were suggesting that I don't think having Bell and a mediocre QB will make much of a difference. Maybe you can get to 9 or 10 wins but I'd expect an early exit from the Post-Season with that roster. Lastly, you state that Bell doesn't have bad character. I don't necessarily disagree with that but I think you can at the very least say he has questionable character. Whatever your thoughts are towards marijuana are irrelevant. It's against NFL policies and he violated it at least twice. That speaks to questionable character not "good" character. 

[3rivers]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

That's just my two cents. Bell isn't a bad character; he just got the leverage and we doesn't. That's why we are livid about this. 

if our D wasn't so bad vs the bottle jags , I wouldn't be livid about them signing bell for what they will sign him for. My reasons are that the D needs too much help for us to sign Bell. 

[VigilantZombie]

Here's the question I would have  it's become very apparent that  lazy on Bell really  cares first and foremost about the money he is getting paid  so going into this season if he is not on a new contract that shoots his desires  how much effort are we going to get out of him

[43M]

54 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

Here's the question I would have  it's become very apparent that  lazy on Bell really  cares first and foremost about the money he is getting paid  so going into this season if he is not on a new contract that shoots his desires  how much effort are we going to get out of him

Its silly to claim a player who has one of the better work ethics in the league is "lazy".     The effort he will give has nothing to do with his work ethic and everything to do with not having a contract.

Even though I dont want to pay Bell the money he wants, I think he absolutely deserves more long term security, and if there is a team out there willing to give it to him on top of giving us a 1st rounder....we should seize that opportunity.    If this team passes up that opportunity and goes into the season with him without having a long term deal in place and are just content on letting him walk next offseason, this team run by morons.      Im not saying that opportunity will present itself....just that if it DID go down that way, I wouldnt be happy. 

Bottom line....Bell deserves a new contract.   Whether we give him one isnt up to me....but if it becomes apparent by the draft that we arent going to agree to a deal, then they should be looking at every opportunity to trade him away for no less than an early 2nd round pick. 

[VigilantZombie]

25 minutes ago, FourThreeMafia said:

Its silly to claim a player who has one of the better work ethics in the league is "lazy".     The effort he will give has nothing to do with his work ethic and everything to do with not having a contract.

Even though I dont want to pay Bell the money he wants, I think he absolutely deserves more long term security, and if there is a team out there willing to give it to him on top of giving us a 1st rounder....we should seize that opportunity.    If this team passes up that opportunity and goes into the season with him without having a long term deal in place and are just content on letting him walk next offseason, this team run by morons.      Im not saying that opportunity will present itself....just that if it DID go down that way, I wouldnt be happy. 

Bottom line....Bell deserves a new contract.   Whether we give him one isnt up to me....but if it becomes apparent by the draft that we arent going to agree to a deal, then they should be looking at every opportunity to trade him away for no less than an early 2nd round pick. 

First off. I as voice texting. The lazy on.... I didn't even know my phone typed that it wasn't intentional.

 I want him to be signed to a long-term deal as well just not one that cripples a team from being able to keep their players of necessity moving forward. You can't very well justify signing one guy which will ultimately cost you having to let multiple others walk in the free agency that you would otherwise want to keep. You simply have to make the best football business decision. I think signing him to an outrageously large contract may very well not be the best football business decision. Having said that it feels like at least at least two parties are not going to reach a deal in with that sad I do believe that we should be looking at every possible opportunity if one should present itself to trade Le'Veon Bell for at least as you said an early second if not a first-round pick also feel like we need to be looking at trade partners that are in the NFC and did not the AFC because I don't think it would be wise to make him direct competition every year potentially.

[Chieferific]

11 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

...we should be looking at every pot enchilada tunity if one should prevent itself to trade 

You should look at every pot enchilada tunity to stop voice texting. 

[VigilantZombie]

11 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

You should look at every pot enchilada tunity to stop voice texting. 

Copy that lmfao