with/without bell, what is our record?

[squidkid]

i honestly dont see more than 2 games difference in record with or without him.
the afcn is still extremely weak
the afcn will be won by the steelers with or without bell as long as ben is playing
bell wont carry this team to afcn titles once ben retires and certainly wont do so if we make the playoffs

what is everyone afraid of if bell goes elsewhere?
all everyone wants to do is brag about 'the steeler way' yet some want to break tradition and give away our future to keep bell.
what have we really won with bell that couldnt have been won without him? maybe a couple of regular season games?
the same ones crying about losing bell were the same ones crying that we cant survive without holmes, bettis, noll, cowher, wallace, polomalu etc etc etc.
if we were back to back superbowl champions and bell was the major reason why, i could see it. but we have failed miserably the last few years with him...unless all you care about is the regular season
i cant believe how many bell fans there are that claim they are steelers fans that want to win.

[Steelhere10]

11-7 so next question.

[squidkid]

[QUOTE=Steelhere10;721179]11-7 so next question.[/QUOTE


so, whats that...
9-7 regular season and super bow win?
10-6 going 1 and 1 in the playoffs?

[SidSmythe]

[QUOTE=Steelhere10;721179]11-7 so next question.[/QUOTE


so, whats that...
9-7 regular season and super bow win?
10-6 going 1 and 1 in the playoffs?

Why even give heed to his dink-headed answer??

ANYWAY

BELL is special but if it costs fixing holes on the DEFENSE then I think the Steelers would be foolish to consider him in the long run.

[feltdizz]

Here you go making up stuff again.

Who are these people who said we would be doomed without Bell, Holmes, Wallace and Cowher?

Thsoe folks don’t exist because most people had different opinions based on each scenario.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

dumb question... actual dollars out of the picture,in a perfect world, is Bell worth what AB is worth? AB gets what, 7-8 touches a game, where bell gets 25+....

Just an question - might be a better to frame the question not that it's 3 times AB due to 3 times the touches, but, EQUAL is all i'm asking... ?

[Captain Lemming]

dumb question... actual dollars out of the picture,in a perfect world, is Bell worth what AB is worth? AB gets what, 7-8 touches a game, where bell gets 25+....

Just an question - might be a better to frame the question not that it's 3 times AB due to 3 times the touches, but, EQUAL is all i'm asking... ?

We overpaid Brown too.
When is the last time elite money to either positioneed was key to winning a Lombardi?

[Captain Lemming]

if we were back to back superbowl champions and bell was the major reason why, i could see it. but we have failed miserably the last few years with him.

True.
Emmitt Smith way back in the 90s......that was exactly the case.
Bell? ANY ELITE BACK TODAY. Nope.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

We overpaid Brown too.
When is the last time elite money to either positioneed was key to winning a Lombardi?
well, if Atlanta doesn't have an idiot OC who doesn't just run 3 times and kick the FG, the last time would be 1 year ago.

But, during this era of Tom Brady, it's hard - he's been to half the AFC super bowls single handedly

[Northern_Blitz]

dumb question... actual dollars out of the picture,in a perfect world, is Bell worth what AB is worth? AB gets what, 7-8 touches a game, where bell gets 25+....


I don't think this isn't the right question either (because we're not deciding between Bell and Brown). We're deciding between Bell on the tag vs. Bell on a long deal vs. the next best option at RB.

So, I think the right thing to do is compare the cost vs. expected production of Bell on (1) the tag, (2) a long term deal with the cost vs. expected production of the next best option at RB + whatever cap savings might be had to strengthen other positions.

[williar]

Go tell that to the FO. For some reason, they seem to be mortgaging the farm trying to hold on to this disposable RB. They must know something we don't! Makes you go hmmmmmmmm...

[feltdizz]

well, if Atlanta doesn't have an idiot OC who doesn't just run 3 times and kick the FG, the last time would be 1 year ago.

But, during this era of Tom Brady, it's hard - he's been to half the AFC super bowls single handedly

The "who was the last team to win a SB" is a dumb argument. There is so much involved in winning a championship.

2 years ago we had Bell on a rookie contract and he goes out in the Pats game. The almighty De'Angelo who led the league the first four games of the season (such a worthless stat) comes in and can't punch it in from the one.

Then we struggled to score from the RZ with AB and our other WR's who weren't all pro candidates and the D couldn't stop the Pats.

It really comes down to a play or 2 being made at critical times in order to win a championship... or maybe it's getting a flag to keep a drive alive on a questionable pass interference.

The reality is the FO needs to put the best team possible on the field and we have to decide if that's with or without Bell. We could move him tomorrow and get guys in here who produce or crap the bed. How many stellar FA's have we signed the last 2 years who haven't missed multiple games their first year?

Not saying it will happen but Vance, Haden and the huge TE.. they all missed at least 3 games their first year.

[Steel Maniac]

Go tell that to the FO. For some reason, they seem to be mortgaging the farm trying to hold on to this disposable RB. They must know something we don't! Makes you go hmmmmmmmm...

There not "holding him" per say. They are keeping him off the market until they set up their plan B and C. Which is free agency or the draft. That's all this is about. I think Colbert has woken up to the idea that we are about to go in another direction.

[RuthlessBurgher]

There not "holding him" per say. They are keeping him off the market until they set up their plan B and C. Which is free agency or the draft. That's all this is about. I think Colbert has woken up to the idea that we are about to go in another direction.

We currently have $14.5M already tied up in Bell when free agency starts next week. What money is Colbert going to use to take us in a different direction in free agency?

[feltdizz]

There not "holding him" per say. They are keeping him off the market until they set up their plan B and C. Which is free agency or the draft. That's all this is about. I think Colbert has woken up to the idea that we are about to go in another direction.
https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8p3hwTuaT1qdato8o4_r1_250.gif

but it's the other way

[Steel Maniac]

We currently have $14.5M already tied up in Bell when free agency starts next week. What money is Colbert going to use to take us in a different direction in free agency?

We are one million under the cap currently; There will be dead weight cut as well as restructuring. We have to clear more room. It takes usually 5 mil just to sign draft picks. So you know there is additional work the FO has to do.

[RuthlessBurgher]

We are one million under the cap currently; There will be dead weight cut as well as restructuring. We have to clear more room. It takes usually 5 mil just to sign draft picks. So you know there is additional work the FO has to do.

Yeah, but you just said "I think Colbert has woken up to the idea that we are about to go in another direction" when he just committed $14.5M to Bell. I understand that you personally want the team to go in a different direction, but I'm just wondering what clues there are that are leading you to believe that Colbert is about to go in a different direction?

[Slapstick]

Go tell that to the FO. For some reason, they seem to be mortgaging the farm trying to hold on to this disposable RB. They must know something we don't! Makes you go hmmmmmmmm...

But, they aren't mortgaging the farm...they are doing the exact opposite...

Mortgaging the farm would be giving in to his contract demands...

[feltdizz]

But, they aren't mortgaging the farm...they are doing the exact opposite...

Mortgaging the farm would be giving in to his contract demands...
Unless Colbert is lying (and it’s entirely possible) I think they are trying to get a long term deal done which by most folks definition on here would be mortgaging the future.

I dont see it that way way but I think Williar was using sarcasm due to the way the board acts like signing Bell will ruin us.

[Steel Maniac]

Yeah, but you just said "I think Colbert has woken up to the idea that we are about to go in another direction" when he just committed $14.5M to Bell. I understand that you personally want the team to go in a different direction, but I'm just wondering what clues there are that are leading you to believe that Colbert is about to go in a different direction?

Your looking at the tag as a financial commitment; It's not a commitment until he signs. So the tag is a holding tool right now. That's what I"m looking at. Does the tag automatically count towards the cap? Yes. But it can also be resended and then not count. Thus...not a hard commitment.

Until he signs, it is not a hard commitment.

So, with that said (and he's not going to sign anytime soon apparently) Colbert has time to plot a plan B and C.

[Steel Maniac]

Unless Colbert is lying (and it’s entirely possible) I think they are trying to get a long term deal done which by most folks definition on here would be mortgaging the future.

I dont see it that way way but I think Williar was using sarcasm due to the way the board acts like signing Bell will ruin us.

Feltz, how can you get a long term deal with a guy who wants 20 mil a year? We are not paying him 20 mil a year. We offered him 42 mil over 3 years last year which equates to 14 mil a year for 3 years. and he said no.

[Slapstick]

Unless Colbert is lying (and it’s entirely possible) I think they are trying to get a long term deal done which by most folks definition on here would be mortgaging the future.

That may be the opinion of some, but do you think that the Steelers will pay him what he thinks he is worth?

Unless that number comes down a bit, I do not...

Yet, hope springs eternal...

[Steel Maniac]

Steelers have never let players dictate to them. And I don't think that starts now. Colbert has a figure that he wants Bell at and it's a figure that will allow us to address other areas of real need. If Bell is too rigid, then we move on.

[feltdizz]

Steelers have never let players dictate to them. And I don't think that starts now. Colbert has a figure that he wants Bell at and it's a figure that will allow us to address other areas of real need. If Bell is too rigid, then we move on.

AB did.. and he got more money.

[Slapstick]

AB did.. and he got more money.

...that put him into the echelon of highest paid WRs.

Bell refused a deal that put him far above and beyond what the highest paid RBs make.

[Northern_Blitz]

Your looking at the tag as a financial commitment; It's not a commitment until he signs. So the tag is a holding tool right now. That's what I"m looking at. Does the tag automatically count towards the cap? Yes. But it can also be resended and then not count. Thus...not a hard commitment.

Until he signs, it is not a hard commitment.

So, with that said (and he's not going to sign anytime soon apparently) Colbert has time to plot a plan B and C.

I think that the tag values counts against your cap once you put the tag on the player (not when they sign it).

If that's right, we'd have to rescind the tag on Bell before signing a big name UFA. If we don't do any more restructuring, it sounds like we might even need to do that for an "medium" name UFA (I think we'll do more restructuring.

[Steel Maniac]

AB did.. and he got more money.

AB wasn't playing a position thats been devalued for more then a decade either. AB got what we wanted to give him.

Bell wants to re-establish the market for all runningbacks. He said that himself. So it's not just about being the highest paid in the league at his position. He wants more then any runninback should get for a devalued position. I don't think he gets it.

[Ernie]

...that put him into the echelon of highest paid WRs.

Bell refused a deal that put him far above and beyond what the highest paid RBs make.

This is what Dizz fails to acknowledge when he throws out contract comparisons (AB, Tuitt, Heyward)...
We aren't comparing apples to apples in terms of Wr, DE, and RB market values.

None of our other top tier players are getting anywhere near 75% above #2 money at their respective positions.

[feltdizz]

...that put him into the echelon of highest paid WRs.

Bell refused a deal that put him far above and beyond what the highest paid RBs make.

both are true...

my point has been made.

the FO definitely can be dictated to by players when it comes to money.

[feltdizz]

This is what Dizz fails to acknowledge when he throws out contract comparisons (AB, Tuitt, Heyward)...
We aren't comparing apples to apples in terms of Wr, DE, and RB market values.

None of our other top tier players are getting anywhere near 75% above #2 money at their respective positions.

That wasn't my point when discussing Tuitt and Heyward.

When someone says "Bell played well but was still a problem because he was late to the walk thru and gave an interview about playing the Pats" it implies he was part of the reason we lost that game.

Focus on the side of the ball that lost that game and those who are paid well but didn't show up. Regardless of how much Bell makes one thing you can't say is he doesn't produce or isn't worth his cap hit.

He is definitely worth it.

Whether you like it or not Bell was paid 12 mill last year because the FO said he is worth 12 mil a year. If he is worth that he may be worth more given his stats, production and contributions on offense.

[Ernie]

That wasn't my point when discussing Tuitt and Heyward.

When someone says "Bell played well but was still a problem because he was late to the walk thru and gave an interview about playing the Pats" it implies he was part of the reason we lost that game.

Focus on the side of the ball that lost that game and those who are paid well but didn't show up. Regardless of how much Bell makes one thing you can't say is he doesn't produce or isn't worth his cap hit.

He is definitely worth it.

Whether you like it or not Bell was paid 12 mill last year because the FO said he is worth 12 mil a year. If he is worth that he may be worth more given his stats, production and contributions on offense.

I personally referred to Bell's late season antics as deal breakers in terms of risk/reward in the future. From a "He is definitely worth it" standpoint.... are his #s 75% better than the #2 back in the league?

[feltdizz]

I personally referred to Bell's late season antics as deal breakers in terms of risk/reward in the future. From a "He is definitely worth it" standpoint.... are his #s 75% better than the #2 back in the league?


I personally think so because I believe the RB position has been stagnant and artificially deflated by the NFL.

No way guys who get 20 touches a game should get paid 8 mill per year. That just insane.

I get why RB's are mad at Bell because he could've raised the bar last year.

but there is no way WR's get 8 touches a game IF that and get 15 mill per year. That's just crazy and the market needs to be corrected.

It's unfortunate that it might be us but someone has to do it. Maybe we hold out and let another team break out the big bucks but Rb's deserve to be paid like it's 2018 in the NFL.


oh, and I also think his late season "antics" were laughable. Deal breakers? Just say you don't want to pay that much but how can you say those 2 things were deal breakers? Smoking weed? sure.. smacking your lady? sure...

late to a walk thru or talking to the media? that's extremely low on the list of deal breakers but we all have our own reasons for not wanting a game changer on our team.

[RuthlessBurgher]

but there is no way WR's get 8 touches a game IF that and get 15 mill per year. That's just crazy and the market needs to be corrected.


Report: Mike Evans agrees to five-year, $82.5 million extension

Posted by Charean Williams on March 9, 2018, 3:52 PM EST

Buccaneers receiver Mike Evans has a new deal.

Evans has agreed to a five-year, $82.5 million extension that includes $55 million guaranteed, according to multiple reports. He now is under contract through the 2023 season.

Evans, the seventh overall pick in 2014, had been set to make $13.2 million this season on his fifth-year option.

He has topped the 1,000-yard season in each of his first four seasons and already ranks third in team history for career receiving yards. Evans, 24, has 309 career catches and 32 touchdowns and has played at least 15 games every season.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/03/09/report-mike-evans-agrees-to-five-year-82-5-million-extension/

[feltdizz]

It’s crazy how WR’s get so much money but RB’s touch the ball 3 times as much a game and get a fraction.

[Slapstick]

Because the NFL is now about splash plays and chunks of yardage...

Le’Veon Bell averaged 4 yards per carry and scored 9 TDs...

Antonio Brown averaged more than 15 yards per catch with 9 TDs...

[squidkid]

so no one wants to actually answer the question?

[Ernie]

I personally think so because I believe the RB position has been stagnant and artificially deflated by the NFL.

No way guys who get 20 touches a game should get paid 8 mill per year. That just insane.

I get why RB's are mad at Bell because he could've raised the bar last year.

but there is no way WR's get 8 touches a game IF that and get 15 mill per year. That's just crazy and the market needs to be corrected.

It's unfortunate that it might be us but someone has to do it. Maybe we hold out and let another team break out the big bucks but Rb's deserve to be paid like it's 2018 in the NFL.


oh, and I also think his late season "antics" were laughable. Deal breakers? Just say you don't want to pay that much but how can you say those 2 things were deal breakers? Smoking weed? sure.. smacking your lady? sure...

late to a walk thru or talking to the media? that's extremely low on the list of deal breakers but we all have our own reasons for not wanting a game changer on our team.

You make some good points about the "Market needing corrected"... Its a discussion worth having. And at your request... I'll "Just say it" along with 95% of the membership on here.... I don't want him at 15+ million a year....Period... It's as simple as that...really.

[Sugar]

so no one wants to actually answer the question?

This year, I think that the team goes 11-5 with Bell.

IF (IF, IF, IF) they don't re-sign Bell, but use the dough to shore up the D, I see 12-4.

It's way too early to know though because so much still has to happen.

[feltdizz]

Because the NFL is now about splash plays and chunks of yardage...

Le’Veon Bell averaged 4 yards per carry and scored 9 TDs...

Antonio Brown averaged more than 15 yards per catch with 9 TDs...

He also averages 129 yards from scrimmage in the first 5 years More than any other player since the 1970 AFL merger.

There is no way you can deny his numbers per game since he entered the league. NFL may be about splash plays but those are few and far between.

The market is skewed.

[feltdizz]

so no one wants to actually answer the question?

Someone did already

10-7 without Bell

We are 24-3 when Bell gets 20 carries

We are 9-0 when Bell has 25 carries

We are 10-16 when Bell has less than 20 carries

Did that answer your question?

[Slapstick]

He also averages 129 yards from scrimmage in the first 5 years More than any other player since the 1970 AFL merger.

There is no way you can deny his numbers per game since he entered the league. NFL may be about splash plays but those are few and far between.

The market is skewed.

Yes, splash plays can be considered few and far between...which is why you pay guys capable of making them...

[squidkid]

Someone did already

10-7 without Bell

We are 24-3 when Bell gets 20 carries

We are 9-0 when Bell has 25 carries

We are 10-16 when Bell has less than 20 carries

Did that answer your question?


actually no.
the question was quite simple
record with bell......?
record without bell......?
two questions that require two answers

do you understand that?

[Captain Lemming]

He also averages 129 yards from scrimmage in the first 5 years More than any other player since the 1970 AFL merger.

There is no way you can deny his numbers per game since he entered the league. NFL may be about splash plays but those are few and far between.

The market is skewed.

Steelers job is not to "fix the market" it is to win games.

If what one player demands exceeds EVERY PLAYER AT HIS POSITION by like a third, it is just not smart as the rest of the league can pay a back and have 6-12 million more than you have to pay everyone else.

We lost a playoff game having scored over 40 points Dizz.
We don't need to fix the runningback market.
We need to fix our defense.

[Captain Lemming]

actually no.
the question was quite simple
record with bell......?
record without bell......?
two questions that require two answers

do you understand that?

Squid, I'm on your side dude on this one but do your own work if you want to make a point.

[Steel Maniac]

Steelers job is not to "fix the market" it is to win games.

If what one player demands exceeds EVERY PLAYER AT HIS POSITION by like a third, it is just not smart as the rest of the league can pay a back and have 6-12 million more than you have to pay everyone else.

We lost a playoff game having scored over 40 points Dizz.
We don't need to fix the runningback market.
We need to fix our defense.

We are not the redskins; going out doling out money all over the place. And for the reasons the captain just stated, I expect us to look elsewhere. It just doesn’t make sense to give out that type of money when so many rb’s are coming out in the draft and free agent rb options are available.

[NorthCoast]

He also averages 129 yards from scrimmage in the first 5 years More than any other player since the 1970 AFL merger.

There is no way you can deny his numbers per game since he entered the league. NFL may be about splash plays but those are few and far between.

The market is skewed.Bell's touches per game are skewed, which skews the yards. Bell has only led the league in yds/att one time in his career. As a receiver, he has never led the league in yds/rec among RBs with 25 or more receptions.
PHI proved that a team can field a budget RB backfield and win a Superbowl. They did this with an outstanding defense and sound playcalling. Steelers need to get back to their roots... strong, stifling defense, with a good offensive balance.

[Buzz]

so no one wants to actually answer the question?
By my calculations (please feel free to check the numbers yourself), since Bell came into the league the Steelers are 43-23 (.652) when he plays and 13-8 (.619) when he doesn't.

That's a fairly significant difference, IMO. How significant? Well, that's what this thread is about.

[Buzz]

Correlation study: Super Bowl Winners and First-Team All-Pro RBs

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/03/correlation-study-super-bowl-winners-and-1st-team-all-pro-rbs/

[squidkid]

By my calculations (please feel free to check the numbers yourself), since Bell came into the league the Steelers are 43-23 (.652) when he plays and 13-8 (.619) when he doesn't.

That's a fairly significant difference, IMO. How significant? Well, that's what this thread is about.


actually its not.
whats that equate to, about a game a year?
what would have changed since bells been here come regular season and playoffs?................not much if anything

[squidkid]

Squid, I'm on your side dude on this one but do your own work if you want to make a point.


i did in my original post. i said without bell our record mighjt be 1 or 2 more losses

[feltdizz]

Steelers job is not to "fix the market" it is to win games.

If what one player demands exceeds EVERY PLAYER AT HIS POSITION by like a third, it is just not smart as the rest of the league can pay a back and have 6-12 million more than you have to pay everyone else.

We lost a playoff game having scored over 40 points Dizz.
We don't need to fix the runningback market.
We need to fix our defense.

steelers job is to draft and retain the best players.

Apparently they think he is worth 12 mill and 14.5 mill.

[feltdizz]

i did in my original post. i said without bell our record mighjt be 1 or 2 more losses

give the numbers flat out if you have them.

Stop playing games.

[Buzz]

actually its not.
whats that equate to, about a game a year?
what would have changed since bells been here come regular season and playoffs?................not much if anything
I'm not arguing for paying Bell what he's looking for. However, one or two wins a year can be the difference between making the playoffs and staying home, between HFA and a bye or going on the road for a postseason game.

[Captain Lemming]

steelers job is to draft and retain the best players.

Actually the “job” is to build the best “team” with a finite set of resources. That may mean acquiring free agents who are “not” drafted a all.
That is the problem Dizz, you are so wrapped up in “keeping” everybody no matter the demand even if we could have more cumulative talent letting someone go.


Apparently they think he is worth 12 mill and 14.5 mill.

No argument. They may well “think” he is worth it. Does not make it correct.
We can pay Bell all we want but if our porous defense makes THE OTHER TEAMS back more productive than him and made backup QBs look like Montana as happened against the playoff we are at a disadvantage.

[Slapstick]

Squid, I'm on your side dude on this one but do your own work if you want to make a point.

:lol::lol::lol:

[Slapstick]

I'm not arguing for paying Bell what he's looking for. However, one or two wins a year can be the difference between making the playoffs and staying home, between HFA and a bye or going on the road for a postseason game.

Unfortunately, doing better than 13-3 isn’t a reasonable expectation in the NFL....

[feltdizz]

Actually the “job” is to build the best “team” with a finite set of resources. That may mean acquiring free agents who are “not” drafted a all.
That is the problem Dizz, you are so wrapped up in “keeping” everybody no matter the demand even if we could have more cumulative talent letting someone go.



No argument. They may well “think” he is worth it. Does not make it correct.
We can pay Bell all we want but if our porous defense makes THE OTHER TEAMS back more productive than him and made backup QBs look like Montana as happened against the playoff we are at a disadvantage.

Everybody? No, just the best.

I didnt advocate for Wallace and I’m fine with losing Bryant.

Guys like AB, Shazier and Bell? Those are the guys you keep. Unfortunately Shazier was hurt. If JuJu keeps playing like his rookie year, I will want to keep him and folks like you will point to past SB winners and say all we need is players like the ones they had.

Your problem is envy. You see a recent SB winner and think we can copy their formula to win. That’s not how it works.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

i did in my original post. i said without bell our record mighjt be 1 or 2 more losses
considering we're a team in a division where 1-2 games typically is the difference in winning the division and not, I'm really not sure how that's NOT significant.

[SteelerOfDeVille]

I'm not arguing for paying Bell what he's looking for. However, one or two wins a year can be the difference between making the playoffs and staying home, between HFA and a bye or going on the road for a postseason game.missed this... we made a similar point.

[feltdizz]

considering we're a team in a division where 1-2 games typically is the difference in winning the division and not, I'm really not sure how that's NOT significant.

shhh.. I'm sure he has a point in here somewhere

[squidkid]

Everybody? No, just the best.

I didnt advocate for Wallace and I’m fine with losing Bryant.

Guys like AB, Shazier and Bell? Those are the guys you keep. Unfortunately Shazier was hurt. If JuJu keeps playing like his rookie year, I will want to keep him and folks like you will point to past SB winners and say all we need is players like the ones they had.

Your problem is envy. You see a recent SB winner and think we can copy their formula to win. That’s not how it works.

does paying a rb twice as much as the next highest paid rb and neglect the defense 'the way it works'...........

[squidkid]

I'm not arguing for paying Bell what he's looking for. However, one or two wins a year can be the difference between making the playoffs and staying home, between HFA and a bye or going on the road for a postseason game.


its hardly has been the case since bell has been here and tomlins teams havent proven home field advantage or a bye is an advantage
and 1 or 2 games may become 1 or none if the money is spent on defense

[feltdizz]

does paying a rb twice as much as the next highest paid rb and neglect the defense 'the way it works'...........

I think we have to wait and see if we are neglecting the D.

We added TJ Watt, Haden, Sutton, Aluah, Brian Allen and JJ Wilcox last year while paying Bell 12 mill.

This idea that we can’t improve the D with Bell is ridiculous. We improved the D last year we just lost Shazier to injury.

[Captain Lemming]

Your problem is envy. You see a recent SB winner and think we can copy their formula to win. That’s not how it works.

Copy "other" teams?
Historically we have NEVER invested big money on "skill" offensive players. Never!

QB then defense. Steelers, the Pats, the Hawks, the Broncos, the Giants, the Packers, Ravens.....heck evendors the Saints.....not a single top salaried receiver or back in the cumulative 20 or so SB Champs in that list.

Marvin Harrison is the only guy since like 2001 with a ring and defense carried THAT team.

Where are your examples of recent success when focusing resources on skill positions?

[Steel Maniac]

Stop being logical Captain. Feltz hates that.

[Buzz]

1 or 2 games may become 1 or none if the money is spent on defense
True enough. Look, I'm just telling you, I don't think winning record with vs. without Bell is a good argument for the point you're trying to make.