PDA

View Full Version : A $100 million contract for Bell would infuriate most, but should it? Hear me out...



RuthlessBurgher
03-29-2018, 04:17 PM
What we know so far about these Bell negotiations...

#1: Le'Veon wants to re-set the market for RB's. He recently said that he's looking for $17 million per season like Antonio Brown, and said that the sticking point now is the overall average per season even moreso that the total guaranteed money. An experienced capologist like Omar Khan can certainly artificially inflate the overall value of a contract as long as the guaranteed dollars remain reasonable (heck...even I can do that...keep reading).

#2: The team has shown, based on the application of two straight franchise tags that it was willing to have Bell on the team in 2017 for a $12M cap hit and in 2018 for a $14.5M cap hit. Is it feasible that Bell could remain on the team for several more seasons on long term deal and his cap hit does not extend beyond this $12M-$14.5M range in terms of his cap hit?

#3: Remember that Bell also famously said in his rap song that "I'ma need 15 a year and they know this." Could a deal be worked out that doesn't crush the Steelers' salary cap structure in which Bell actually gets $15M per year in real money over the next several seasons?

The key to satisfying all of these criteria could be the addition of a couple of dummy years at the end of long contract.

Something like this: A 6 year, $102M contract with a $24M guaranteed signing bonus.

The average per year on this seemingly HUGE (at first glance) contact is, in fact, $17M per year. But the signing bonus on the contract remains reasonable. It's just $4M per year spread over 6 years.

*This would satisfy stipulation #1 above*
Bell re-sets the RB market with a $17M per year long term deal.

However, the team could structure the base salaries to be somewhat reasonable throughout Bell's twenties, but then balloons up in those two "dummy" years at the end of the deal once Le'Veon hits the age of 30. You could have base salaries of $7.5M in 2018, $8.5M in 2019, $9.5M in 2020, and $10.5M in 2021, before ballooning up to $18M in 2022 and $24M in 2023 (the 2 aforementioned "dummy" years).

*This would satisfy stipulation #2 above*
Le'Veon's cap number would be $11.5M this season when he is 26 years old (a $3M savings off his current franchise tag cap hit), $12.5M next season when he is 27 years old, $13.5M when he is 28 years old, and $14.5M when he is 29 years old (instead of him taking up $14.5M in cap room right now, his cap hit wouldn't rise as high as $14.5M until 2021!). The dummy year cap hits would be $22M in 2022 when he is 30 and $28M in 2023 when he is 31, but we can cut him before his 30th birthday with only an $8M penalty against the cap (we could choose to eat that entire amount on the 2022 cap if he is designated a pre-June 1 release in 2022, or that amount could be spread out to $4M in each of 2022 and 2023 if he is designated a post-June 1 release).

Even if Bell realizes that the final two seasons once he turns 30 years old are just "dummy" years, he can see that over the first four "real" years of the deal, he will, in fact, make that $15 per year that he rapped about. He gets a $24M bonus at signing, plus a $7.5M salary this year, meaning that he pockets $31.5 in 2018. After making another $8.5M base salary in 2019, that's $40M earned. His $9.5M base salary in 2020 brings that up to $49.5M, and the $10.5M base salary in 2021, brings the grand total to $60M.

*This would satisfy stipulation #3 above*
Bell gets $60M over the next 4 years, which is precisely the $15M per year that he rapped about.

To summarize, a 6 year, $102 million contract for Le'Veon Bell sounds absolutely crazy on the surface, but it would make Bell happy by being able to re-set the RB market with a huge deal that appears to average $17M per year over 6 years, but in reality nets him $15M per year over 4 years, and the Steelers would be happy to have Bell remain on the team throughout his 20's with cap hits that actually saves us $3M on the cap this season and doesn't rise up to his $14.5M franchise tag number until the 4th (and final) year of this deal. The only dead money penalty would be an $8M cap hit in 2022, which can be spread out to a manageable $4M per year in 2022 and 2023 with a post-June 1 designation.

Maybe I'm crazy (I'm sure many of you think I'm crazy right now) but something like this could potentially satisfy what each side is looking for in these negotiations.

Eddie Spaghetti
03-29-2018, 04:27 PM
yeah, no thanks

RuthlessBurgher
03-29-2018, 04:45 PM
yeah, no thanks

Yeah, that was the response I expected.

But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

$11.5M cap hit in 2018 at age 26
$12.5M cap hit in 2019 at age 27
$13.5M cap hit in 2020 at age 28
$14.5M cap hit in 2021 at age 29
Cut Bell after 4 seasons before he turns 30 with post June 1 designation.
$4M dead money cap hit in 2022
$4M dead money cap hit in 2023

And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).

Eddie Spaghetti
03-29-2018, 04:47 PM
I appreciate the thought that went into it, I just don't agree with that kind of coin no matter how it's structured

we got the best years of LB at a reasonable cost. let another team spend big $$ for the inevitable decline

Northern_Blitz
03-29-2018, 04:56 PM
Yeah, that was the response I expected.

But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

$11.5M cap hit in 2018 at age 26
$12.5M cap hit in 2019 at age 27
$13.5M cap hit in 2020 at age 28
$14.5M cap hit in 2021 at age 29
Cut Bell after 4 seasons before he turns 30 with post June 1 designation.
$4M dead money cap hit in 2022
$4M dead money cap hit in 2023

And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).

While I agree that it might satisfy Bell's contract demands, I personally dislike disingenuous contracts like this. I think that they only really help the agents (who get commissions based on total deal value).

I can't remember a case where the Steelers entered into a contract like this (i.e. where they structured a contract to balloon the total value with the intent of cutting players before they ever reached the end of the deal). I think that entering into deals like this costs the team credibility when negotiating future contracts.

I think that it tends to hurt the team in terms of (a) dead money and (b) future credibility and it hurts the player because (1) they don't get as much money as they think they'll get and (2) the pay significantly higher fees to their agents even though their future earnings won't reflect the total value of the contract.

These objections are aside from my specific objections to signing a RB with as many carries as Bell to a long term contract that breaks the RB market.

squidkid
03-29-2018, 05:17 PM
nice work figuring all the numbers but i just dont see him(or any other player) being paid more than twice as much as the next guy.
if any other team did something like this, this forum would lose its mind making fun of them.

would you give a qb 54+ million per year because stafford got 27?
pay a de/dl 38+ million because v miller and a suh got 19?
would you pay AB 34 million?
come on, no way

Steel Maniac
03-29-2018, 05:24 PM
Yeah, that was the response I expected.

But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

$11.5M cap hit in 2018 at age 26
$12.5M cap hit in 2019 at age 27
$13.5M cap hit in 2020 at age 28
$14.5M cap hit in 2021 at age 29
Cut Bell after 4 seasons before he turns 30 with post June 1 designation.
$4M dead money cap hit in 2022
$4M dead money cap hit in 2023

And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).

One reason I don't like it because I think he'll be done physically by age 28. The next is I think his injury history..he's only finished one season out of five healthy.

Id much rather commit to some kid in the coming draft. Remember, I said a few months ago that I was hoping that Bell not being signed was a stall routine that would allow Colbert to get to the draft? Well, I'm thinking now that's exactly what's going on. Colbert wants to draft a legit option for us at runningback and then we'll go from there.

feltdizz
03-29-2018, 05:30 PM
interesting idea.

I really think we want to keep Bell and I think tweaking numbers on paper makes sense.

IMO the whole “twice as much” as the next RB is a terrible argument when you look at what Bell brings to our offense.

I think the NFL has gotten away with robbery when it comes to the RB position.

Run the ball 20 times a game, catch it another 5 times.. oh, and split out wide a few times... by the way, remember to block these huge LB and DL’s running free too.

But it lets pay you 8 mill a year while giving WR’s 17 mill a year to catch it 7 to 9 balls a game.

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 05:43 PM
But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

Depends if one considers that paying 12 million to endure a playoff loss in which the other teams back outperformed Bell largely because our defense was too porous was a good investment to begin with.


And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).



I for one don't think satiating Bells ego-centric need to brag he corrected the market in a rap song should be high on the teams priorities in allocating finite funds.

But that is just me. I have no doubt the team leans in the direction you laid out.

As someone against even what is reported to already have been offered, I can only hope Bell finds such an offer unacceptably low. Would not surprise if he does.

NorthCoast
03-29-2018, 05:59 PM
You put some nice work into this but bottom line is paying for a guy that appears to be about the money and making a statement and not about the game.

No thanks.

Shawn
03-29-2018, 06:12 PM
Ok Ruth lets negotiate...I hear you and you make some good points. Bell is a WR, RB wrapped up into one and is a game plan nightmare. I understand his reason for believing he deserves that kind of money. The issue I have is this...he can't stay healthy. He hasn't consistently been on the field for a variety of reasons and he's not getting any younger. How many years of this kind of play does he really have left?

So, if I knew he could stay healthy, knew he wouldn't smoke that hydro...then yeah I would sign up for that. The problem is that we don't...and that's what makes this kind of thing tough.

Oviedo
03-29-2018, 06:46 PM
What we know so far about these Bell negotiations...

#1: Le'Veon wants to re-set the market for RB's. He recently said that he's looking for $17 million per season like Antonio Brown, and said that the sticking point now is the overall average per season even moreso that the total guaranteed money. An experienced capologist like Omar Khan can certainly artificially inflate the overall value of a contract as long as the guaranteed dollars remain reasonable (heck...even I can do that...keep reading).

#2: The team has shown, based on the application of two straight franchise tags that it was willing to have Bell on the team in 2017 for a $12M cap hit and in 2018 for a $14.5M cap hit. Is it feasible that Bell could remain on the team for several more seasons on long term deal and his cap hit does not extend beyond this $12M-$14.5M range in terms of his cap hit?

#3: Remember that Bell also famously said in his rap song that "I'ma need 15 a year and they know this." Could a deal be worked out that doesn't crush the Steelers' salary cap structure in which Bell actually gets $15M per year in real money over the next several seasons?

The key to satisfying all of these criteria could be the addition of a couple of dummy years at the end of long contract.

Something like this: A 6 year, $102M contract with a $24M guaranteed signing bonus.

The average per year on this seemingly HUGE (at first glance) contact is, in fact, $17M per year. But the signing bonus on the contract remains reasonable. It's just $4M per year spread over 6 years.

*This would satisfy stipulation #1 above*
Bell re-sets the RB market with a $17M per year long term deal.

However, the team could structure the base salaries to be somewhat reasonable throughout Bell's twenties, but then balloons up in those two "dummy" years at the end of the deal once Le'Veon hits the age of 30. You could have base salaries of $7.5M in 2018, $8.5M in 2019, $9.5M in 2020, and $10.5M in 2021, before ballooning up to $18M in 2022 and $24M in 2023 (the 2 aforementioned "dummy" years).

*This would satisfy stipulation #2 above*
Le'Veon's cap number would be $11.5M this season when he is 26 years old (a $3M savings off his current franchise tag cap hit), $12.5M next season when he is 27 years old, $13.5M when he is 28 years old, and $14.5M when he is 29 years old (instead of him taking up $14.5M in cap room right now, his cap hit wouldn't rise as high as $14.5M until 2021!). The dummy year cap hits would be $22M in 2022 when he is 30 and $28M in 2023 when he is 31, but we can cut him before his 30th birthday with only an $8M penalty against the cap (we could choose to eat that entire amount on the 2022 cap if he is designated a pre-June 1 release in 2022, or that amount could be spread out to $4M in each of 2022 and 2023 if he is designated a post-June 1 release).

Even if Bell realizes that the final two seasons once he turns 30 years old are just "dummy" years, he can see that over the first four "real" years of the deal, he will, in fact, make that $15 per year that he rapped about. He gets a $24M bonus at signing, plus a $7.5M salary this year, meaning that he pockets $31.5 in 2018. After making another $8.5M base salary in 2019, that's $40M earned. His $9.5M base salary in 2020 brings that up to $49.5M, and the $10.5M base salary in 2021, brings the grand total to $60M.

*This would satisfy stipulation #3 above*
Bell gets $60M over the next 4 years, which is precisely the $15M per year that he rapped about.

To summarize, a 6 year, $102 million contract for Le'Veon Bell sounds absolutely crazy on the surface, but it would make Bell happy by being able to re-set the RB market with a huge deal that appears to average $17M per year over 6 years, but in reality nets him $15M per year over 4 years, and the Steelers would be happy to have Bell remain on the team throughout his 20's with cap hits that actually saves us $3M on the cap this season and doesn't rise up to his $14.5M franchise tag number until the 4th (and final) year of this deal. The only dead money penalty would be an $8M cap hit in 2022, which can be spread out to a manageable $4M per year in 2022 and 2023 with a post-June 1 designation.

Maybe I'm crazy (I'm sure many of you think I'm crazy right now) but something like this could potentially satisfy what each side is looking for in these negotiations.

Actually I think you propose a win win for all involved

While many seem to hate on Bell for being up front with his desires, a case could be made that he may be valuable to the team than AB.

I'd be ok with what you propose

feltdizz
03-29-2018, 07:21 PM
Actually I think you propose a win win for all involved

While many seem to hate on Bell for being up front with his desires, a case could be made that he may be valuable to the team than AB.

I'd be ok with what you propose

Not sure if he is more valuable but I think he makes AB’s job A LOT easier when he is on the field.

The ability to split out wide and play 3 downs really creates a mismatch. Jack Ham and Bettis were very candid about how special Bell is to our offense. Ham flat out said there is nothing he could do to stop Bell in the passing game if he played against him.


https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/jack-ham-ezekiel-elliott-cant-hold-leveon-bells-jock-as-a-receiver/

Bell isn’t just running wheel routes and screens.

Buzz
03-29-2018, 07:29 PM
Steelers offered LB a nice deal last year, and he refused it. He's got one more year of mileage on him now. At this point, I'd be looking for a couple of good backs to replace him, for less money.

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 08:07 PM
Steelers offered LB a nice deal last year, and he refused it. He's got one more year of mileage on him now. At this point, I'd be looking for a couple of good backs to replace him, for less money.

That would be stupid.

The Eagles did just that and look what it got themmmm .....wait....nevermind :)

feltdizz
03-29-2018, 08:13 PM
Steelers offered LB a nice deal last year, and he refused it. He's got one more year of mileage on him now. At this point, I'd be looking for a couple of good backs to replace him, for less money.

2 good backs pretty much means 2 less picks that could help our defense.

Funny how folks want a better D but are willing to draft more running backs instead of defenders.

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 08:16 PM
Not sure if he is more valuable but I think he makes AB’s job A LOT easier when he is on the field.

So true......remember when Bell missed 10 games how Browns game tanked....2015..wait...career highs in both catches AND yardage......gotta look at that again, must be a mistake. :)

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 08:27 PM
So true......remember when Bell missed 10 games how Browns game tanked....2015..wait...career highs in both catches AND yardage......gotta look at that again, must be a mistake. :)

OK, now I understand how Brown had a career year without Bells help Ben started only 11 games that year.
WAIT, that is what should NOT happen!!!!
Mike Vick and Landry split FIVE GAMES most of another game and Brown had a career year?
As did Bryant!!!!

How is that even possible when Bell is so crucial to making the everybody else better?

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 08:32 PM
We also had:
More passing yards (therefore career seasons for the receivers)
More rushing yards
Obviously....more total yards

And drumroll please.......more POINTS than this season.

But we have no choice but to pay Bell more than entire running back rosters or the offense will implode on itself.
15 plus mil a year that could be used to shore up real needs with real talent.

Captain Lemming
03-29-2018, 08:37 PM
2 good backs pretty much means 2 less picks that could help our defense.

Funny how folks want a better D but are willing to draft more running backs instead of defenders.

Or we could pick up any one one many “good” backs that are plentiful and cheap. SB champs did it.
Heck WE did it and didn’t miss a beat with DeAngelo.

Disco1981
03-29-2018, 08:47 PM
We also had:
More passing yards (therefore career seasons for the receivers)
More rushing yards
Obviously....more total yards

And drumroll please.......more POINTS than this season.

But we have no choice but to pay Bell more than entire running back rosters or the offense will implode on itself.
15 plus mil a year that could be used to shore up real needs with real talent.

I think the Captain trumped you all...Not based on opinions, But facts...Night Night :tt2

NorthCoast
03-29-2018, 09:18 PM
There are two camps; Bell is invaluable to the offense and Bell, while talented is not needed to win a SB. The Steeler brass seems to have come down to the latter opinion else a long term deal would have happened already,

feltdizz
03-29-2018, 09:45 PM
We also had:
More passing yards (therefore career seasons for the receivers)
More rushing yards
Obviously....more total yards

And drumroll please.......more POINTS than this season.

But we have no choice but to pay Bell more than entire running back rosters or the offense will implode on itself.
15 plus mil a year that could be used to shore up real needs with real talent.

We also lost 6 games and needed a miracle by Shazier and Pac Man to beat the Bengals in the playoffs.

The closest we got to a AB was with AB and Bell on the field. We should have beat the Pats this year and AB was injured early in the game. When Bell went down the AFCCG DW was a non factor and AB couldn’t get open.

feltdizz
03-29-2018, 09:47 PM
There are two camps; Bell is invaluable to the offense and Bell, while talented is not needed to win a SB. The Steeler brass seems to have come down to the latter opinion else a long term deal would have happened already,

This isn’t true. We tried to get Bell long term last year last year. We may be trying to get one down this year.

Its really up to Bell to agree to the offer we give him.

We definitely think he is needed because we paid him 12.5 mill last year and gave him an offer and it looks like we will pay another 14.5 this year.

Steel Maniac
03-29-2018, 11:04 PM
Or we could pick up any one one many ďgoodĒ backs that are plentiful and cheap. SB champs did it.
Heck WE did it and didnít miss a beat with DeAngelo.

boom.....checkmate.

Captain Lemming
03-30-2018, 02:04 AM
We also lost 6 games and needed a miracle by Shazier and Pac Man to beat the Bengals in the playoffs.

One more playoff win than THIS season. :)


When Bell went down the AFCCG DW was a non factor

Team was down 10 zip when Bell was in the game in the first quarter (got hurt as quarter was ending). I ain't no math wiz but I think over 4 quarters we were on pace to lose 40-0 while Bell and Brown were in the game.

DeAngelo was no beast that day true.

But, during his first series DeAngelo out gained Bell's total performance and HE scored our first touchdown on a 5 yard run.


and AB couldn’t get open.

You mean..........while Bell was in the game right?
AB had zero catches with Bell in the game Dizz. His first catch was during DeAngelos first series.

Nice try Dizz. :)

Captain Lemming
03-30-2018, 02:16 AM
This isn’t true. We tried to get Bell long term last year last year. We may be trying to get one down this year.

Its really up to Bell to agree to the offer we give him.

We definitely think he is needed because we paid him 12.5 mill last year and gave him an offer and it looks like we will pay another 14.5 this year.

I do agree with this. While I think it's dumb, the team likely is perfectly willing to sign Bell long term. Bell has no incentive to agree to anything right now. He could well accept the long term deal or close the gap in his demands somewhat.

Its up to Bell.

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 06:59 AM
One more playoff win than THIS season. :)


No, a bye week is technically winning a playoff game without even playing.

phillyesq
03-30-2018, 08:45 AM
Yeah, that was the response I expected.

But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

$11.5M cap hit in 2018 at age 26
$12.5M cap hit in 2019 at age 27
$13.5M cap hit in 2020 at age 28
$14.5M cap hit in 2021 at age 29
Cut Bell after 4 seasons before he turns 30 with post June 1 designation.
$4M dead money cap hit in 2022
$4M dead money cap hit in 2023

And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).

I would be ok with that. The only caveat is that if the Steelers go down this road, they can't restructure Bell because he will be more of a drain on the cap when he is released. Crazy as it sounds, I'm not sure Bell would go for this deal.

This deal lower Bell's cap hit a bit for this year - and for the next few years - and allows us to focus our draft efforts on defense.

Captain Lemming
03-30-2018, 09:55 AM
Crazy as it sounds, I'm not sure Bell would go for this deal.

That is certainly my HOPE.


This deal lower Bell's cap hit a bit for this year - and for the next few years - and allows us to focus our draft efforts on defense.

You miss entirely the benefit of letting him go. Money available to sign a good back, sign another defender AND draft defense.

Or sign a "top" defender and draft a back high (my preference).

Bottom line you have MORE resources to address defense not less by letting Bell go.

Only problem is we have already missed out on possible options.

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 10:06 AM
That is certainly my HOPE.



You miss entirely the benefit of letting him go. Money available to sign a good back, sign another defender AND draft defense.

Or sign a "top" defender and draft a back high (my preference).

Bottom line you have MORE resources to address defense not less by letting Bell go.

Only problem is we have already missed out on possible options.

wait, I don't get this logic.

Unless you want to make another splash signing in FA next year or 2 I really fail to see how we can't just draft defense, defense and more defense. They won't be expensive on their first contract.

You want to draft ANOTHER RB instead of a player on defense?

I think we will be able to retain all the play makers on D next year AND upgrade the D while trimming the fat on D with guys who aren't really cutting it.

You make it sound like a big FA signing is our key to success on D and that's not how we usually operate.

Who do you want to sign in FA this year? More than likely we can draft D this year and then cut a few players and get another defender on D. Their first year cap hit wouldn't be that high and we could structure it where we could release them if they didn't pan out this year.

Steel Maniac
03-30-2018, 10:34 AM
I"m hopeful that after the draft, after some vets get unexpectedly let go, we can do one more move or two. Nothing extravagant of course. Just some depth stuff.

Captain Lemming
03-30-2018, 10:39 AM
Dizz, your point is why I said:


Only problem is we have already missed out on possible options.

At this point having missed top defensive free agents and committed to lesser ones it may be too late. We acted in a way that presupposes Bell will be on the team this year.

Nevertheless, my comments remain a valid reason to not make that commitment long term.

We sign Bell for a season, see how any additions as well as our young players are doing, and go all in come next year's free agency.

williar
03-30-2018, 10:42 AM
interesting idea.

I really think we want to keep Bell and I think tweaking numbers on paper makes sense.

IMO the whole ďtwice as muchĒ as the next RB is a terrible argument when you look at what Bell brings to our offense.

I think the NFL has gotten away with robbery when it comes to the RB position.

Run the ball 20 times a game, catch it another 5 times.. oh, and split out wide a few times... by the way, remember to block these huge LB and DLís running free too.

But it lets pay you 8 mill a year while giving WRís 17 mill a year to catch it 7 to 9 balls a game. I totally agree with this without saying much more!

Steel Maniac
03-30-2018, 10:44 AM
Dizz, your point is why I said:

At this point having missed top defensive free agents and committed to lesser ones it may be too late. We acted in a way that presupposes Bell will be on the team this year.

Nevertheless, my comments remain a valid reason to not make that commitment long term.

We sign Bell for a season, see how any additions as well as our young players are doing, and go all in come next year's free agency.

Your right about what the moves insinuate. But things can change drastically. Case in point..

1. We draft Guice; Bell misses camp while Guice is there and gets in work.
2. Guice gets the start game 1 while Bell is still getting in shape because of coming late to camp.
3. Guice lights it up the first two games (we win both games; 2-0) and Tomlin/Colbert are reluctant to take him out of the starting lineup.
4. Bell is traded to some team (most likely a bottom feeder team with tons of cap space) and we get a 2019 first round pick and a player we can use defensively.

Things can change but your right; right now it looks like we are planing for Bell to be here the entire season.

SteelerOfDeVille
03-30-2018, 10:56 AM
Yeah, that was the response I expected.

But are these cap hits totally unreasonable considering that we were willing to pay him $12M in 2017 and $14.5M in 2018?

$11.5M cap hit in 2018 at age 26
$12.5M cap hit in 2019 at age 27
$13.5M cap hit in 2020 at age 28
$14.5M cap hit in 2021 at age 29
Cut Bell after 4 seasons before he turns 30 with post June 1 designation.
$4M dead money cap hit in 2022
$4M dead money cap hit in 2023

And he gets to brag about resetting the RB market with a huge $102M deal that averages $17M season, while pocketing $60M in real money over the next 4 seasons (the $15M per year he rapped about) while finishing his 9 year career as a Steeler having earned $76 million total (his rookie deal plus last year's $12M and this new $60M).
Personally like it...

Northern_Blitz
03-30-2018, 11:10 AM
Dizz, your point is why I said:

At this point having missed top defensive free agents and committed to lesser ones it may be too late. We acted in a way that presupposes Bell will be on the team this year.

Nevertheless, my comments remain a valid reason to not make that commitment long term.

We sign Bell for a season, see how any additions as well as our young players are doing, and go all in come next year's free agency.

This. I think we missed the window this year. I think that the best way forward (and also what I expect to happen) is to have Bell tagged and let him walk next year.

Then, we should have a bunch of flexibility next year with Bell and Shazier coming off the books. That money could be used to sign a legit big name UFA (maybe at Kevin Greene like OLB signing if Bud doesn't have a good year and we don't draft an edge early this year) + an above avg RB.

Or, it just gives us a year where we don't kick salary down the road. That might make the turnaround easier after Ben leaves. I'd personally rather load up in the next few years and tank for a few years after Ben goes (to try to get another franchise QB), but I don't think that's in the Steelers DNA.

Oviedo
03-30-2018, 11:14 AM
Personally like it...Like I said in my post, its a "win win"

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 11:14 AM
Dizz, your point is why I said:

At this point having missed top defensive free agents and committed to lesser ones it may be too late. We acted in a way that presupposes Bell will be on the team this year.

Nevertheless, my comments remain a valid reason to not make that commitment long term.

We sign Bell for a season, see how any additions as well as our young players are doing, and go all in come next year's free agency.

but look around the league. No one is signing these safeties like Vaccaro or Boston. Why is that?

IMO it's not how we do business in FA. Sure, if a gem gets released AFTER the draft, maybe we make a move but we aren't first day players AND even with Bell on the roster we can structure a contract to get anyone within reason that we really want.

I just don't buy this hand tying some are suggesting if we pay Bell long term.

I'm also not a big fan of going all in on FA to build your team. What are we the Redskins now? No, draft players and keep drafting players and add depth or 1 key FA if it makes sense.

You guys act like all of our FA signings work out and that's not the case.

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 11:18 AM
This. I think we missed the window this year. I think that the best way forward (and also what I expect to happen) is to have Bell tagged and let him walk next year.

Then, we should have a bunch of flexibility next year with Bell and Shazier coming off the books. That money could be used to sign a legit big name UFA (maybe at Kevin Greene like OLB signing if Bud doesn't have a good year and we don't draft an edge early this year) + an above avg RB.

Or, it just gives us a year where we don't kick salary down the road. That might make the turnaround easier after Ben leaves. I'd personally rather load up in the next few years and tank for a few years after Ben goes (to try to get another franchise QB), but I don't think that's in the Steelers DNA.

yeah, we aren't the tanking type of team and thank goodness for that.

I also think Watt turns the corner, Dupree has a year to show if he is worth keeping AND we will also draft another OLB because it's what we do.

However, I think you guys are getting a little FA happy because of Haden. That's not the norm. Burnett and Bostic may very well be our Greene and Farrior type of FA's that sure up the D.

I'm all about the draft. We tend to do really well when drafting (except for Jones). Not sure why everyone is FA happy all of a sudden. That's a great way to eat up cap space. Definitely not a fan of this big name FA movement.

Northern_Blitz
03-30-2018, 11:53 AM
yeah, we aren't the tanking type of team and thank goodness for that.


Felt, I thought that you were on team tank with me. I thought that I read that part of the reason you were on board with giving Bell the huge contract was to load up while Ben is here. I think that the other side of those types of decisions is usually that we'd be bad (and with a bunch of dead money) after the window closes.

SteelerOfDeVille
03-30-2018, 12:03 PM
Like I said in my post, its a "win win"
agree completely. it gets him through the rest of Ben's career, and gives the team a chance to restock the cupboard around the time where the triplets are all on the downside (if not retiring).

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 12:17 PM
Felt, I thought that you were on team tank with me. I thought that I read that part of the reason you were on board with giving Bell the huge contract was to load up while Ben is here. I think that the other side of those types of decisions is usually that we'd be bad (and with a bunch of dead money) after the window closes.

I'm on board with the first part..

and wouldn't mind the second part if it happens naturally but I wouldn't want us to try and tank on purpose.

I still think our definition of tanking is 6-10.. lol

but I would never want to see a team that is totally trash like Cleveland playing at Heinz field.

I could see us being strong on D and pretty average on offense once Ben retires. However, i could just as well see us 9-7 due to the way our FO operates. I think we can go all in and still be respectable once Ben is done.

Shawn
03-30-2018, 12:52 PM
After Ben retires, I'm all for an 0-16 season...unless we grab Action Jackson in this years draft.

Steel Maniac
03-30-2018, 12:54 PM
After Ben retires, I'm all for an 0-16 season...unless we grab Action Jackson in this years draft.

More like inaccurate Jackson. LOL

feltdizz
03-30-2018, 01:12 PM
After Ben retires, I'm all for an 0-16 season...unless we grab Action Jackson in this years draft.

yuck, nah.. that means we will need like 3 years to get back to form.

The more I think about it I hope we have some Kordell Stewart years where we are still fun to watch.

RuthlessBurgher
03-30-2018, 02:04 PM
After Ben retires, I'm all for an 0-16 season...unless we grab Action Jackson in this years draft.

I dunno, man...Carl Weathers is getting pretty old. Maybe we can get Michael B. Jordan to play Action Jackson Jr. like he did in "Creed." ;)

squidkid
03-30-2018, 03:41 PM
as long as we have tomlin we will never have any down years

Northern_Blitz
03-30-2018, 04:30 PM
I could see us being strong on D and pretty average on offense once Ben retires. However, i could just as well see us 9-7 due to the way our FO operates. I think we can go all in and still be respectable once Ben is done.

I think that this is what they will do. I think that the Rooney's have always tried to field a competitive team over my lifetime (I wasn't around until 1979, so I missed the worst years of this team). I think it's reasonable to fear that going full tank will turn you into Cleveland.

I think that the Sabers are the best example of this in sports (or maybe the Oilers). I think that you can tank too hard and screw up your long term future.

Steel Maniac
03-30-2018, 05:10 PM
as long as we have tomlin we will never have any down years

See????????????????????????????? And you guys said that Squid couldn't say anything good about Tomlin. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

squidkid
03-30-2018, 05:16 PM
See????????????????????????????? And you guys said that Squid couldn't say anything good about Tomlin. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


im a real fan now................(dont want another 2 day rant discussing the squid and his fandom.......lol)_

pittpete
03-30-2018, 05:31 PM
BREAKING NEWS......Bell wants QB $$$$ now

SanAntonioSteelerFan
03-30-2018, 05:48 PM
BREAKING NEWS......Bell wants QB $$$$ now


Haha!

LJ $$ ... deal!

Captain Lemming
03-30-2018, 10:19 PM
IMO it's not how we do business in FA. Sure, if a gem gets released AFTER the draft, maybe we make a move but we aren't first day players

True.....doesnt mean we should never do it.


AND even with Bell on the roster we can structure a contract to get anyone within reason that we really want.

"Anyone" and "within reason" are mutually exclusive concepts in this context. Without Bell we can sign ANYONE without qualifiers.


I just don't buy this hand tying some are suggesting if we pay Bell long term.

15 million a season that is unavailable to spend elsewhere......that IS hand tying Dizz. You admit it when using the "within reason" (AKA "cheap") as a qualifier.


I'm also not a big fan of going all in on FA to build your team.

Nobody is suggesting THAT. A rare dip into the elite FA pool to patch holes is all I suggest.


What are we the Redskins now? No, draft players and keep drafting players and add depth or 1 key FA if it makes sense.

Only difference is that my suggestion means that "key free agent" need not come from the bargain bin. :)


You guys act like all of our FA signings work out and that's not the case.

Please see my last comment to see why many of our free agents are garbage.

Slapstick
03-31-2018, 08:51 AM
See????????????????????????????? And you guys said that Squid couldn't say anything good about Tomlin. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, thatís one of the only accurate things heís said in the past 11 years...bully for him...our boy is finally growing up...:rolleyes:

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
03-31-2018, 11:42 AM
This is why I don't see it happening. I'll use the example of Alan Faneca but the numbers will be off because I'm too lazy to look it up.

Back when Faneca's contract was about to expire, he and Steve Hutchinson were easily considered the best two guards in the game. The Steelers offered him a deal in the $6M per year range. Then, as FA came in his final year, the Bills and Browns signed two lesser guards to $7M per year contracts (I believe it was Steinbach and Dockery). If those two guys were worth $7M per, then Faneca determined that he was now worth much more. The Steelers had already determined what Faneca was worth to them, and it was not based on those two contracts. They would not let the Buffalo Bills and Cleveland Browns determine how much they should pay Alan Faneca. They let Faneca leave.

It has now been two off-seasons for Bell. I believe that the Steelers have determined the value that Bell has for them. I sincerely doubt that at this point they are holding back that number, Bell's side should know how high the Steelers are willing to go. Bell has determined his number at this point as well. The Steelers will not let Leveon Bell decide on his own what the Steelers should pay.

Any option like hiding dummy years etc. have certainly been brought up at this point and one of the two sides has rejected...otherwise it would have been done by now.

Steel Maniac
03-31-2018, 01:58 PM
With that said, Colbert and company are trying to determine which college rb to target to be Bell’s replacement. Whoever they choose, I’m on board with.

Ernie
04-01-2018, 06:29 AM
With that said, Colbert and company are trying to determine which college rb to target to be Bellís replacement. Whoever they choose, Iím on board with.

This is where im at right now... and besides, its not like the cupboard is empty. Conner showed us enough last year in limited play... he can be help fill the void. Let's get an early round RB and roll.

Shoe
04-01-2018, 03:07 PM
Not sure if he is more valuable but I think he makes ABís job A LOT easier when he is on the field.

The ability to split out wide and play 3 downs really creates a mismatch. Jack Ham and Bettis were very candid about how special Bell is to our offense. Ham flat out said there is nothing he could do to stop Bell in the passing game if he played against him.


https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/jack-ham-ezekiel-elliott-cant-hold-leveon-bells-jock-as-a-receiver/

Bell isnít just running wheel routes and screens.

I'm curious how accurate this actually is. I watch all the games like you all... Overwhelmingly, his passes come from dump offs and screens; I don't recall too many he catches out of the slot.

They like to say he does that, but the only highlight they show is that slant he caught on (I think) DAL two years ago as an example (of his WR skills).

Slapstick
04-01-2018, 03:49 PM
I believe for his TD reception against Jacksonville in the playoffs, he lined up at WR...

Ernie
04-01-2018, 04:10 PM
While these things may be true, the question is... does that make him worth double any current RB salary in the league?

Steel Maniac
04-01-2018, 05:45 PM
No. .................

feltdizz
04-02-2018, 08:45 AM
I'm curious how accurate this actually is. I watch all the games like you all... Overwhelmingly, his passes come from dump offs and screens; I don't recall too many he catches out of the slot.

They like to say he does that, but the only highlight they show is that slant he caught on (I think) DAL two years ago as an example (of his WR skills).

huh? Bell has split out wide and caught passes, he can run the whole route tree..

does this mean most of his passes will come from being split out wide?

nope, but he CAN do it and the threat alone causes a major mismatch for defenses when they have to put a DB or LB on Bell.

feltdizz
04-02-2018, 08:46 AM
While these things may be true, the question is... does that make him worth double any current RB salary in the league?

I think it does..

cause honestly, I think it's insane that the top RB's only make 8 mill. That's just insulting IMO.

Slapstick
04-02-2018, 09:13 AM
I think it does..

cause honestly, I think it's insane that the top RB's only make 8 mill. That's just insulting IMO.

The market for RBs in the NFL is what it is...if the NFLPA didn’t like it, they could slot the pay for different positions just like they do for draft picks. They don’t, because it is better for the majority if they don’t. That sucks for RBs, but that is how markets work...

Sword
04-02-2018, 09:20 AM
no thanks!!! no way!!!

feltdizz
04-02-2018, 09:21 AM
The market for RBs in the NFL is what it is...if the NFLPA didn’t like it, they could slot the pay for different positions just like they do for draft picks. They don’t, because it is better for the majority if they don’t. That sucks for RBs, but that is how markets work...

I know what it is...

I'm giving my opinion on it.

Northern_Blitz
04-02-2018, 09:37 AM
I think it does..

cause honestly, I think it's insane that the top RB's only make 8 mill. That's just insulting IMO.

More importantly, the Steelers think so as well.

I think that their decision to pay him on the tag says that a healthy Bell is worth paying that much right now. If the reported long term deal is legit, they also believe that it's worth paying him that much for 4 years.

Personally, I don't mind doing it for another year. But, I given Bell's work load I don't think he maintains his performance for 4 years. I'd be especially worried about that based on his YPC last year. Maybe that ticks up this season...but maybe it continues moving down quickly too.

feltdizz
04-02-2018, 09:40 AM
More importantly, the Steelers think so as well.

I think that their decision to pay him on the tag says that a healthy Bell is worth paying that much right now. If the reported long term deal is legit, they also believe that it's worth paying him that much for 4 years.

Personally, I don't mind doing it for another year. But, I given Bell's work load I don't think he maintains his performance for 4 years. I'd be especially worried about that based on his YPC last year. Maybe that ticks up this season...but maybe it continues moving down quickly too.

one year isn't a trend, now if his ypc goes down again this year then yes, cause for concern.

however, I don't think there has ever been a position where a guy has been a beast for 4 years and then production drops a bit for one year and everyone uses that as leverage.

Northern_Blitz
04-02-2018, 03:46 PM
one year isn't a trend, now if his ypc goes down again this year then yes, cause for concern.

however, I don't think there has ever been a position where a guy has been a beast for 4 years and then production drops a bit for one year and everyone uses that as leverage.

I agree that it's not a trend.

But, I think it reduces my faith in Bell's long term performance.

I believe that RBs usually decline sharply when they decline. Bell is younger than the age when I think of this happening (~30), but he has significantly more touches relative to other backs in the league (even just carries). Those things, combined with the sharp decline in YPC make me more comfortable with tagging him and letting him walk vs. paying him a large portion of the cap for the next 4 years.

NorthCoast
04-02-2018, 08:07 PM
Bell represented >30% of the Steelers offense in 2017 (total yds). I contend this imbalance would only continue or get worse if a blockbuster long term agreement is reached, since the Steelers may feel obligated to play him even more. I further contend this would be to the detriment of the Steelers offense to be so single threaded. It will be interesting to see how the new OC deals with this situation if he is given full reign for gameplanning.