PDA

View Full Version : Changed my thoughts about the Bell contract



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

pittpete
05-04-2018, 11:53 AM
Not for nothing, but after reading that Matt Ryan will be averaging $30 million per year i don't blame Bell one bit.
I hate that it's the Steelers that he's doing it to, but Ryans contract is ridiculous.
Things are getting way out of hand with QB salaries


https://www.thefalcoholic.com/2018/5/4/17318822/details-of-matt-ryans-contract-and-how-it-impacts-the-falcons-cap-get-that-man-paid

Eich
05-04-2018, 11:59 AM
Yeah - $30M/year with $100M guaranteed!! That just seems insane. Every new big name contract has to set a record and there seems to be no end in sight. Is this not going to hurt the Falcons' ability to keep a good team around him?

SteelerOfDeVille
05-04-2018, 12:19 PM
Not for nothing, but after reading that Matt Ryan will be averaging $30 million per year i don't blame Bell one bit.
I hate that it's the Steelers that he's doing it to, but Ryans contract is ridiculous.
Things are getting way out of hand with QB salaries


https://www.thefalcoholic.com/2018/5/4/17318822/details-of-matt-ryans-contract-and-how-it-impacts-the-falcons-cap-get-that-man-paid
I am in the minority - I've been a Bell backer the whole time. Like you said, I hate that it's the Steelers, BUT... If I'm him, I'm asking for what AB gets... if we're the triplets, pay me as such. PARTICULARLY since I touch the ball 3-4 times more than AB per game..

Edit: that's not 3-4 more TOUCHES... that is a MULTIPLE... 25 touches vs 7, for example

NorthCoast
05-04-2018, 12:52 PM
The Steelers are their own worst enemies with regard to Bell.
Reduce his emphasis in the offense, stats go down, contract value goes with it. Spread the ball to others. This is EXACTLY what Belichick does.

squidkid
05-04-2018, 01:03 PM
The Steelers are their own worst enemies with regard to Bell.
Reduce his emphasis in the offense, stats go down, contract value goes with it. Spread the ball to others. This is EXACTLY what Belichick does.


only if they cave to his demands.
run the hell out of him and let him walk next year.
players dont care about winning, they want the money
fans that want to give those guys the money, dont care about winning. they care about their favorite player and his fantasy stats
franchise qbs are a different breed. you have to have a great one(most of the time) if you really want to stay relevant and win a super bowl

SteelerOfDeVille
05-04-2018, 01:29 PM
only if they cave to his demands.
run the hell out of him and let him walk next year.
players dont care about winning, they want the money
fans that want to give those guys the money, dont care about winning. they care about their favorite player and his fantasy stats
franchise qbs are a different breed. you have to have a great one(most of the time) if you really want to stay relevant and win a super bowl
Do you believe that it isn't possible for a guy to both want to win AND be showed the love?
Bell is the top guy "from scrimmage" in the entire league for the last few years. And his per game yardage average is the best EVER... like EVER...

(this a year ago, but, IIRC, didn't he finish the season as the fastest to 8000 yards from scrimmage EVER?)


In his 45 career games, Bell has 3,830 rushing yards and 1,952 receiving yards, for a total of 5,782 yards from scrimmage. That works out to an average of 128.5 scrimmage yards per game. That’s the best average in NFL history.
Jim Brown averaged 125.5 scrimmage yards a game. Barry Sanders averaged 118.9. Terrell Davis averaged 113.9. Walter Payton averaged 111.9. Marshall Faulk averaged 108.8.


I know, I know, we all knock NFL players for being selfish and asking too much. But, it's really hard to knock THIS guy for having this kind of career thus far and complaining that he's not getting paid. If ya do, YOU are the one being selfish as a fan.


Trust me, I want the team to be good. I want them to make wise financial decisions. But, I can't knock Bell for standing his ground on this one.

feltdizz
05-04-2018, 01:34 PM
I've been trying to tell folks but they don't want to hear it. NFL teams have money. The cap goes up damn near every year.

If a 33 year old QB can make $30 mill why is it insane for a 26 year old RB who touches the ball 25 times a game to make 16 per year?

Especially when he has the most yards from scrimmage per game for the last 3 years.

feltdizz
05-04-2018, 01:37 PM
The Steelers are their own worst enemies with regard to Bell.
Reduce his emphasis in the offense, stats go down, contract value goes with it. Spread the ball to others. This is EXACTLY what Belichick does.

but our wins may go down too.

why wouldn't you use the guy you drafted as much as possible to win games and help protect the QB who is known to take a ton of hits?

Bell in the passing game and as a 3rd down back who can pick up the blitz isn't common. It's rare. When you find a guy like that you don't limit his touches just because he wants compensation.

feltdizz
05-04-2018, 01:39 PM
only if they cave to his demands.
run the hell out of him and let him walk next year.
players dont care about winning, they want the money
fans that want to give those guys the money, dont care about winning. they care about their favorite player and his fantasy stats
franchise qbs are a different breed. you have to have a great one(most of the time) if you really want to stay relevant and win a super bowl

no, YOU are being selfish. You want Bell on the cheap.

I could see if Bell was trash but the guy produces and helps keep our franchise QB clean.

He helps us win games whether you want to admit it or not.

RuthlessBurgher
05-04-2018, 02:04 PM
no, YOU are being selfish. You want Bell on the cheap.

I could see if Bell was trash but the guy produces and helps keep our franchise QB clean.

He helps us win games whether you want to admit it or not.

He doesn't want Bell cheap. He wants Bell gone.

Getting rid of a top offensive weapon means that it's more likely that this team loses.

Which makes it more likely that Tomlin gets fired. Isn't that the desired end game?

feltdizz
05-04-2018, 02:09 PM
He doesn't want Bell cheap. He wants Bell gone.

Getting rid of a top offensive weapon means that it's more likely that this team loses.

Which makes it more likely that Tomlin gets fired. Isn't that the desired end game?

sometimes when you lose, you win

and sometime when you win, you lose

and sometimes you tie

-Rosie Perez

Buzz
05-04-2018, 05:40 PM
no, YOU are being selfish. You want Bell on the cheap.

I could see if Bell was trash but the guy produces and helps keep our franchise QB clean.

He helps us win games whether you want to admit it or not.

Well, I would like to see Bell stay, but I would like to see him accept a deal much closer to market value for RBs. Yes, he has high production, and yes, he's important to our offense, but what is he looking to get paid for his production relative to what other RBs are getting paid for their production? From a team-building standpoint, does it make sense to give him nearly twice as much money as the next-highest paid RB gets? How would we feel about keeping Ben if he insisted on getting paid nearly twice what the next-highest paid QB was making?

Slapstick
05-04-2018, 06:43 PM
I think the market definitely needs corrected for elite RBs...

But, I just don’t want the Steelers to be the team that resets to market to Le’Veon Bell’s liking...

feltdizz
05-04-2018, 06:45 PM
Well, I would like to see Bell stay, but I would like to see him accept a deal much closer to market value for RBs. Yes, he has high production, and yes, he's important to our offense, but what is he looking to get paid for his production relative to what other RBs are getting paid for their production? From a team-building standpoint, does it make sense to give him nearly twice as much money as the next-highest paid RB gets? How would we feel about keeping Ben if he insisted on getting paid nearly twice what the next-highest paid QB was making?

This isn’t about QB’s. That’s a totally different discussion and we can address that if Ben signs another deal now that Matt Ryan signed a 150 mill contract.

As far as Bell is concerned? Yes, it makes sense and that’s why we are paying him 27 mill these last 2 years.

You cant depend on a guy for 40% of your offense and pay him chump change when it’s time to resign him.

Buzz
05-04-2018, 10:00 PM
This isn’t about QB’s. That’s a totally different discussion and we can address that if Ben signs another deal now that Matt Ryan signed a 150 mill contract.

As far as Bell is concerned? Yes, it makes sense and that’s why we are paying him 27 mill these last 2 years.

You cant depend on a guy for 40% of your offense and pay him chump change when it’s time to resign him.
What the Steelers offered him was hardly "chump change." It was extremely generous relative to what the rest of the league is paying RBs.

Captain Lemming
05-05-2018, 12:58 AM
I've been trying to tell folks but they don't want to hear it. NFL teams have money. The cap goes up damn near every year.

Doesnt matter. If we paid a single player far in excess of the league norm it puts us at a competitive disadvantage elsewhere.
The cap could double. But if everyone else is paying a position significantly less than us it hurts us.


If a 33 year old QB can make $30 mill why is it insane for a 26 year old RB who touches the ball 25 times a game to make 16 per year?

Is paying that QB that much "smart"? Same deal, they will suffer everywhere else as a result. Just because the Falcons overpaid, doesnt mean we should.
Secondly, elite QB play is the most common factor on champonship teams. Elite runningbacks are not a key "reason" teams win chapionships in todays NFL.


Especially when he has the most yards from scrimmage per game for the last 3 years.

If having one back with "the most yards from scrimmage" is your goal. Pay the man. If you want to win SBs, the script is writen. Teams that overpay backs dont win championships.

Steel Maniac
05-05-2018, 01:01 AM
Doesnt matter. If we paid a single player far in excess of the league norm it puts us at a competitive disadvantage elsewhere.
The cap could double. But if everyone else is paying a position significantly less than us it hurts us.


Is paying that QB that much "smart"? Same deal, they will suffer everywhere else as a result. Just because the Falcons overpaid, doesnt mean we should.
Secondly, elite QB play is the most common factor on champonship teams. Elite runningbacks are not a key "reason" teams win chapionships in todays NFL.



If having one back with "the most yards from scrimmage" is your goal. Pay the man. If you want to win SBs, the script is writen. Teams that overpay backs dont win championships.

Preach......

Captain Lemming
05-05-2018, 01:21 AM
I think the market definitely needs corrected for elite RBs...

But, I just don’t want the Steelers to be the team that resets to market to Le’Veon Bell’s liking...

In case you did not see it Maniac, As I said before, Slappy IS on our side on this argument.

Shawn
05-05-2018, 07:29 AM
Do you believe that it isn't possible for a guy to both want to win AND be showed the love?
Bell is the top guy "from scrimmage" in the entire league for the last few years. And his per game yardage average is the best EVER... like EVER...

(this a year ago, but, IIRC, didn't he finish the season as the fastest to 8000 yards from scrimmage EVER?)



I know, I know, we all knock NFL players for being selfish and asking too much. But, it's really hard to knock THIS guy for having this kind of career thus far and complaining that he's not getting paid. If ya do, YOU are the one being selfish as a fan.


Trust me, I want the team to be good. I want them to make wise financial decisions. But, I can't knock Bell for standing his ground on this one.




I truly believe Bell is the best that's ever played the game. I don't blame him for trying to squeeze out every penny he can...and I don't blame the Steelers for not wanting to sell the farm for a position notorious for short life spans. A big contract and an injury could handcuff the Steelers financially for years to come.

Ernie
05-05-2018, 07:41 AM
The Steelers are their own worst enemies with regard to Bell.
Reduce his emphasis in the offense, stats go down, contract value goes with it. Spread the ball to others. This is EXACTLY what Belichick does.

I've been saying this for a few years. Weapons in this offense have been marginalized due to the Steeler philosophy.

Sword
05-05-2018, 08:35 AM
Bell is no QB.... Please let Bell go...he is over rated...use the money on ILB...

RuthlessBurgher
05-07-2018, 10:15 AM
Bell is no QB.... Please let Bell go...he is over rated...use the money on ILB...

What ILB? If a team has a truly elite level do-it-all 3-down ILB, they will extend him before he reaches free agency. Bell is a way better RB than any ILB who hits the open market.

SteelerOfDeVille
05-07-2018, 11:38 AM
I truly believe Bell is the best that's ever played the game. I don't blame him for trying to squeeze out every penny he can...and I don't blame the Steelers for not wanting to sell the farm for a position notorious for short life spans. A big contract and an injury could handcuff the Steelers financially for years to come.
Right - its a rare case where i don't blame either side. Bell being 26, he's got what 4 more elite years, tops. And the team is churning through those on franchise deals...

AB got 4 years, $68 mil last year. Give Bell a similar contract and move on. And hurry before David Johnson or Ezekiel Elliot get to set the market, instead...

Steel Maniac
05-07-2018, 11:43 AM
Right - its a rare case where i don't blame either side. Bell being 26, he's got what 4 more elite years, tops. And the team is churning through those on franchise deals...

AB got 4 years, $68 mil last year. Give Bell a similar contract and move on. And hurry before David Johnson or Ezekiel Elliot get to set the market, instead...

Obviously you guys are not aware of this thing called a salary cap. Lol

And of Bell only finishing one season out of five healthy.

RuthlessBurgher
05-07-2018, 11:47 AM
Obviously you guys are not aware of this thing called a salary cap. Lol


Bell's current cap number is $14.5M, and even with that, we are currently $6M under the cap. More than enough to sign our rookie class. Our front office knows what it is doing.

Northern_Blitz
05-07-2018, 11:52 AM
Agree with the OP.

This is a business decision. There are no moral failings on either side of the table.

Bell wants to receive his free market value on a long term deal. But, to do so he'll need to take the risk of playing another season without the safety net of a long term deal and whatever guaranteed money goes with it (probably less guaranteed money than he got over two tags).

The Steelers want Bell's talent on the field. But they don't want to be saddled with the risk being left holding the bag when / if he declines over the term of the deal (which he probably will given his usage and historical production of RBs). And, since he wants more than the tag value / year, it's actually cheaper in the short term to keep tagging him. It makes no sense to pay more AND take on more risk.

They are both acting logically. In a salary cap world, teams have to be willing to let guys walk when other teams will pay them more than they are worth and players have to be content to make a lot of money even though it means that they aren't making the most money they could in an open market.

Edit: I think it's also complicated by the fact that contracts aren't guaranteed so players get the ego boost of signing the "biggest contract ever", but get cut before earning the salaries in the end of the lucrative contracts. There's also a perverse incentive here because agents get paid on the total contract amount (instead of annually based on money players actually earn). I think that is something that all pro leagues (actually probably PAs) should change...especially since the imbalance of education / understanding of contracts between agents and players is probably pretty high.

feltdizz
05-07-2018, 12:29 PM
Bell's current cap number is $14.5M, and even with that, we are currently $6M under the cap. More than enough to sign our rookie class. Our front office knows what it is doing.

I don't understand the cap hit argument.

Bell plays for 14.5 Mill or so.. but he is responsible for 40% of our offense.

I'm fine with that.

The real issue is the defenders who are getting paid 7 mill or more and not carrying their load.

Slapstick
05-07-2018, 12:41 PM
That is why Mitchell went bye-bye...

Buzz
05-07-2018, 01:37 PM
I don't understand the cap hit argument.

Bell plays for 14.5 Mill or so.. but he is responsible for 40% of our offense.

I'm fine with that.

The real issue is the defenders who are getting paid 7 mill or more and not carrying their load.
Which defenders are making 7 mill or more and not carrying their load? Mitchell is gone. The only other defenders who are making that kind of money are Heyward and Hayden (both around 9 mill per). Are they not carrying their load? I don't know who else you could be talking about, unless it's Shazier, who is getting paid for this season but is on IR due to injury.

feltdizz
05-07-2018, 02:14 PM
Which defenders are making 7 mill or more and not carrying their load? Mitchell is gone. The only other defenders who are making that kind of money are Heyward and Hayden (both around 9 mill per). Are they not carrying their load? I don't know who else you could be talking about, unless it's Shazier, who is getting paid for this season but is on IR due to injury.

Tuitt is going to have a cap hit of about 13 mill these next few seasons.

He just signed a 5 year $60M deal.

Is he going to play like it? Did we mortgage our teams future away on Tuitt?

I think the bashing of Bell is ridiculous when you look at what he brings every week.

Buzz
05-07-2018, 03:01 PM
Tuitt is going to have a cap hit of about 13 mill these next few seasons.

He just signed a 5 year $60M deal.

Is he going to play like it? Did we mortgage our teams future away on Tuitt?

I think the bashing of Bell is ridiculous when you look at what he brings every week.Sportrac shows Tuitt with a cap hit of about 5.4 million for 2018.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/

RuthlessBurgher
05-07-2018, 03:28 PM
Sportrac shows Tuitt with a cap hit of about 5.4 million for 2018.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/

Tuitt would have had a $13.6M cap hit in 2018, but restructured his deal to clear $8,167,500 off our cap this coming season (and thereby adding just over $2.04 million to each of his remaining seasons).

Tuitt's upcoming yearly cap hits after this most recent restructuring:
2019 $13,642,000
2020 $13,642,000
2021 $13,642,000
2022 $11,090,560

feltdizz
05-07-2018, 03:34 PM
Sportrac shows Tuitt with a cap hit of about 5.4 million for 2018.
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/
I know... but let’s be real about this. Regardless of Bell’s cap hit his first year (if he signed a new deal) folks are going to use his contract numbers to say he is crippling our cap.

plus Tuitt restructured this year and would’ve had a 13 mill cap hit if we didn’t convert some of his money.

and I’m a fan of Tuitt but I think folks are mad at the wrong person when it comes to hurting our cap number.

Steel Maniac
05-07-2018, 06:23 PM
Bell's current cap number is $14.5M, and even with that, we are currently $6M under the cap. More than enough to sign our rookie class. Our front office knows what it is doing.

Oh I know that but I’m referring to making any other major additions

Steel Maniac
05-07-2018, 06:26 PM
Tuitt would have had a $13.6M cap hit in 2018, but restructured his deal to clear $8,167,500 off our cap this coming season (and thereby adding just over $2.04 million to each of his remaining seasons).

Tuitt's upcoming yearly cap hits after this most recent restructuring:
2019 $13,642,000
2020 $13,642,000
2021 $13,642,000
2022 $11,090,560

And they’ll restructure in 2019 too.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 09:42 AM
I doubt we restructure Tuitt again. Is that even possible?

Slapstick
05-08-2018, 09:52 AM
I doubt we restructure Tuitt again. Is that even possible?

It’s possible, but not advisable.

RuthlessBurgher
05-08-2018, 10:15 AM
Oh I know that but I’m referring to making any other major additions

What other major additions? If we did not franchise Bell again this year and therefore had an extra $14.5M to spend this offseason, who exactly would you have used that money to sign that would make a bigger difference on our team in 2018 than Le'Veon Bell (and, remember, after that big splash signing on D, you'd still need enough left over to sign a starting RB to replace Bell as well).

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 10:21 AM
What other major additions? If we did not franchise Bell again this year and therefore had an extra $14.5M to spend this offseason, who exactly would you have used that money to sign that would make a bigger difference on our team in 2018 than Le'Veon Bell (and, remember, after that big splash signing on D, you'd still need enough left over to sign a starting RB to replace Bell as well).

exactly, folks think you can just plug in another RB and get similar production. It's not that easy.

and who is that ILB who takes us over the top?

Steel Maniac
05-08-2018, 10:32 AM
What other major additions? If we did not franchise Bell again this year and therefore had an extra $14.5M to spend this offseason, who exactly would you have used that money to sign that would make a bigger difference on our team in 2018 than Le'Veon Bell (and, remember, after that big splash signing on D, you'd still need enough left over to sign a starting RB to replace Bell as well).

Well, there would be no splash signing at the runningback position. That position would have to be manned by Coner and Smith. And as far as on defense, I already told you I"m not satisfied with Bostic; and Edmunds in all likelihood won't be a factor by season's end. Plus...if Bostic got hurt then where'd we be? I'd like a real linebacker starting ahead of Bostic in Navarro Bowman.

Where we are at right now, one injury..one injury and we are exactly where we were at when Shazier went down. We need quality depth.

***Hypothetically speaking, where we are at right now, if Bostic goes down.....then what? Exactly.

And please don't give me the argument about ," all teams have depth problems , yati, yati, yati," Because I just saw a team win a Super Bowl who had a ton of injuries but they had depth. We don't.

And Bell won't even be in shape or in sync with the offense for at least the first three games; just like last year. And.......who's to say Mr. fragile( Bell) will even make it thru the season without injury? 4 out of 5 season's, he's gone down. Last year being the exception year.

My focus is on defense because :

1. Can't count on Bell to be around at the end
2. Defense is what we will need if the offense isn't as proficient

I'd happily give us some offense for a marked improvement on defense. Specifically in the belly of the defense were we are soooooo soft right now. I'm happy with Morgan Burnett by the way.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
05-08-2018, 11:18 AM
I think the market definitely needs corrected for elite RBs...

But, I just don’t want the Steelers to be the team that resets to market to Le’Veon Bell’s liking...

Exactly. The Steelers offered to reset the market last off-season with the contract they presented. Bell's agent supposedly agreed with it, family members agreed with it. LB did not. That is his prerogative as an NFL football player who is negotiating a contract, but it is also the team's option to not give him what he asks for.

RuthlessBurgher
05-08-2018, 11:23 AM
Well, there would be no splash signing at the runningback position. That position would have to be manned by Coner and Smith. And as far as on defense, I already told you I"m not satisfied with Bostic; and Edmunds in all likelihood won't be a factor by season's end. Plus...if Bostic got hurt then where'd we be? I'd like a real linebacker starting ahead of Bostic in Navarro Bowman.

Where we are at right now, one injury..one injury and we are exactly where we were at when Shazier went down. We need quality depth.

***Hypothetically speaking, where we are at right now, if Bostic goes down.....then what? Exactly.

And please don't give me the argument about ," all teams have depth problems , yati, yati, yati," Because I just saw a team win a Super Bowl who had a ton of injuries but they had depth. We don't.

And Bell won't even be in shape or in sync with the offense for at least the first three games; just like last year. And.......who's to say Mr. fragile( Bell) will even make it thru the season without injury? 4 out of 5 season's, he's gone down. Last year being the exception year.

My focus is on defense because :

1. Can't count on Bell to be around at the end
2. Defense is what we will need if the offense isn't as proficient

I'd happily give us some offense for a marked improvement on defense. Specifically in the belly of the defense were we are soooooo soft right now. I'm happy with Morgan Burnett by the way.

The RB position would have to be manned by Coner and Smith, eh? Well, James Conner is coming off late season knee surgery, and I don't know who the hell Smith is. The only Smith we have on the roster right now is named Juju. So, yeah...huge downgrade there.

And the only addition that you suggest is Navorro Bowman? A 9 year veteran who turns 30 later this month? He's still available right now! You don't need Le'Veon's $14.5M to sign that guy. He played for Oakland last year, but they just replaced him with the 35 year old Derrick Johnson earlier this week. And his former team before that, the Niners, may have to cut last year's 1st round pick, ILB Reuben Foster, after domestic violence charges, but they haven't covered their behinds by bringing Bowman back either.

With it being so late in the process, we could sign Bowman today on a relatively inexpensively one-year "prove it" type of deal (that wouldn't require rescinding Bell's franchise tag)...his former college defensive coordinator at Penn State Tom Bradley is now our DB coach.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 11:27 AM
Mr. fragile? Pretty sure someone on here guaranteed that Bell would pull a hammy. We have no idea who will get hurt next year but its hysterical seeing folks call Bell injury prone and say Conner can make some noise this year. The same Conner who was injured his first year?

Oviedo
05-08-2018, 11:45 AM
Well, there would be no splash signing at the runningback position. That position would have to be manned by Coner and Smith. And as far as on defense, I already told you I"m not satisfied with Bostic; and Edmunds in all likelihood won't be a factor by season's end. Plus...if Bostic got hurt then where'd we be? I'd like a real linebacker starting ahead of Bostic in Navarro Bowman.

Where we are at right now, one injury..one injury and we are exactly where we were at when Shazier went down. We need quality depth.

***Hypothetically speaking, where we are at right now, if Bostic goes down.....then what? Exactly.

And please don't give me the argument about ," all teams have depth problems , yati, yati, yati," Because I just saw a team win a Super Bowl who had a ton of injuries but they had depth. We don't.

And Bell won't even be in shape or in sync with the offense for at least the first three games; just like last year. And.......who's to say Mr. fragile( Bell) will even make it thru the season without injury? 4 out of 5 season's, he's gone down. Last year being the exception year.

My focus is on defense because :

1. Can't count on Bell to be around at the end
2. Defense is what we will need if the offense isn't as proficient

I'd happily give us some offense for a marked improvement on defense. Specifically in the belly of the defense were we are soooooo soft right now. I'm happy with Morgan Burnett by the way.

So Navarro Bowman is the splash signing you want Bell's money for to solidify the defense?????? Wow!!!! I'm glad you aren't evaluating talent for the team

You realize that Bowman has been let go by his last two teams don't you?

The reality that all the complainers don't want to recognize is that there was not a free agent signing that could replace the loss of Shazier or even come close and we never got the opportunity to draft a young potential replacement in the draft...who may not have panned out anyway There was nothing the team could do about either situation and neither had anything to do with Bell's tag. The Bostic signing was a solid move.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 12:00 PM
So Navarro Bowman is the splash signing you want Bell's money for to solidify the defense?????? Wow!!!! I'm glad you aren't evaluating talent for the team

You realize that Bowman has been let go by his last two teams don't you?

The reality that all the complainers don't want to recognize is that there was not a free agent signing that could replace the loss of Shazier or even come close and we never got the opportunity to draft a young potential replacement in the draft...who may not have panned out anyway There was nothing the team could do about either situation and neither had anything to do with Bell's tag. The Bostic signing was a solid move.


But the future Ovi. We can’t do anything if we sign Bell long term. We can’t cut players or restructure contracts or draft more talent.

Steel Maniac
05-08-2018, 12:45 PM
So Navarro Bowman is the splash signing you want Bell's money for to solidify the defense?????? Wow!!!! I'm glad you aren't evaluating talent for the team

You realize that Bowman has been let go by his last two teams don't you?

The reality that all the complainers don't want to recognize is that there was not a free agent signing that could replace the loss of Shazier or even come close and we never got the opportunity to draft a young potential replacement in the draft...who may not have panned out anyway There was nothing the team could do about either situation and neither had anything to do with Bell's tag. The Bostic signing was a solid move.

Wow. You really don't read do you?

Bowman can still play. If you'd pay attention to football around the NFL and not just the Steelers, then you'd know that. And considering what we currently have in the middle of the defense, he'd be a welcomed addition.

The reality is that there are a few rose colored glasses wearers who think all we have to do is put the same team out and we are going to get a different playoff result. Unless we upgrade this team in the areas of weakness on defense, we will flop again.

Let me enlighten the rose colored glasses wearers: We regressed last year from the previous year...we played one playoff game and we were done..the previous year we made the AFC championship game..that's called regression.

Screw the 13-3 regular season record; we regressed.

Steel Maniac
05-08-2018, 12:47 PM
The RB position would have to be manned by Coner and Smith, eh? Well, James Conner is coming off late season knee surgery, and I don't know who the hell Smith is. The only Smith we have on the roster right now is named Juju. So, yeah...huge downgrade there.

And the only addition that you suggest is Navorro Bowman? A 9 year veteran who turns 30 later this month? He's still available right now! You don't need Le'Veon's $14.5M to sign that guy. He played for Oakland last year, but they just replaced him with the 35 year old Derrick Johnson earlier this week. And his former team before that, the Niners, may have to cut last year's 1st round pick, ILB Reuben Foster, after domestic violence charges, but they haven't covered their behinds by bringing Bowman back either.

With it being so late in the process, we could sign Bowman today on a relatively inexpensively one-year "prove it" type of deal (that wouldn't require rescinding Bell's franchise tag)...his former college defensive coordinator at Penn State Tom Bradley is now our DB coach.

I meant Samuels, not Smith.

Listen, at this point, your right about what cant be done as far as the runningback position. And now, of course Bell is the primary option at runningback. No dispute there. So he'll get his money in his final season here.

But again, my focus is the defense and the scary, alarming lack of decent play from our linebacker corps now. And lack of depth that can play behind the starters too. That's what I see now as the primary thing that will hold us back from where we want to go.

Again...if Bostic is the answer, (hypothetically..I don't think he is thou) and he goes down, we are exactly where we were at last year when Shazier went down. We need to sign at least another legit linebacker we know who can play.

Slapstick
05-08-2018, 01:06 PM
Last year, we lost Shazier and his top backup in the same game...after the trade deadline, no less...

If something cataclysmic like that happens, then, yes, you will “regress”...

Hopefully, the odds against that happening again are in our favor...

Buzz
05-08-2018, 01:40 PM
Last season, our defense had the good fortune -- even before losing Shazier -- of getting to play against a lot of sub-par QBs. In all likelihood, we'll face a tougher slate this season.

Steel Maniac
05-08-2018, 02:23 PM
Last season, our defense had the good fortune -- even before losing Shazier -- of getting to play against a lot of sub-par QBs. In all likelihood, we'll face a tougher slate this season.

Thank you Buzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've been saying for months now last year's defensive numbers mean nothing because we played the weakest schedule of QB's in the NFL last year.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 02:40 PM
Last year, we lost Shazier and his top backup in the same game...after the trade deadline, no less...

If something cataclysmic like that happens, then, yes, you will “regress”...

Hopefully, the odds against that happening again are in our favor...

yes

and we got rid of Mitchell AND Spence while picking up Bostic and Burnett. We also drafted Edmunds AND the safety from PSU.

but we did nothing because we didn't pick up Bowman? LMAO... isn't he still available? We could still pick up another ILB in FA on the cheap.

It's funny because in another thread he says the secondary has been upgraded with the recent additions. Yet now he implies we aren't doing anything to help the defense.

Ernie
05-08-2018, 02:56 PM
We did quite a bit between FA and the draft to upgrade the Defense. With that being said, we are still one quality FA ILB away from being really solid.

RuthlessBurgher
05-08-2018, 02:58 PM
Maybe we were interested in Bowman all along but could not pay the big bucks he was looking for in the early stages of free agency.

Maybe now, with the Raiders having moved on to Derrick Johnson instead, and no one else apparently knocking down his door with a blockbuster contract, he'd be willing to come back to PA where he played his college ball at Penn State, once again working with his college defensive coordinator who is now the Steelers DB coach.

Perhaps waiting until after the draft to get him on the cheap could work out. We'll see. Or maybe we bring back Timmons on the cheap instead.

Normally, you don't have an ILB rotation, because one of your ILB's typically wears the green dot on his helmet to communicate with the sidelines, so that guy rarely (if ever) comes off the field (Shazier was that guy for us. Before that, it was Timmons). But in Green Bay, Morgan Burnett wore the green dot, and maybe he'd do the same in Pittsburgh, and we could have a Bowman/Bostic/Williams rotation on the inside of our defense.

Northern_Blitz
05-08-2018, 03:17 PM
Mr. fragile? Pretty sure someone on here guaranteed that Bell would pull a hammy. We have no idea who will get hurt next year but its hysterical seeing folks call Bell injury prone and say Conner can make some noise this year. The same Conner who was injured his first year?

This. Bell is not fragile. He's been hurt at the end of seasons because he's massively over worked. They need to manage his carries better if they want him to be healthy at the end of the year.

squidkid
05-08-2018, 05:20 PM
no, YOU are being selfish. You want Bell on the cheap.

I could see if Bell was trash but the guy produces and helps keep our franchise QB clean.

He helps us win games whether you want to admit it or not.

there you go lying and making stuff up again. but you say others do that:rolleyes:
please show me where i said i want bell on the cheap..............ok, seeing that you cant, i will just move on.
i am ok paying bell number 1 money, but number 1 money shouldnt be twice as much as number 2 money. he isnt putting up twice the stats
he is also injury prone, a doper and a malcontent in the locker rom and on social media

squidkid
05-08-2018, 05:21 PM
This. Bell is not fragile. He's been hurt at the end of seasons because he's massively over worked. They need to manage his carries better if they want him to be healthy at the end of the year.


absolutely not true.
what injury was directly related to too many touches?

pittpete
05-08-2018, 06:32 PM
For one, the groin pull 2 years ago.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 07:26 PM
For one, the groin pull 2 years ago.
Not sure if that was due to touches. Bell said he hurt it earlier in the year and played thru it instead of missing a few games. I also think he got a pain killing shot to numb it before the game and the needle missed the spot.

Something similar happened to Bettis before a playoff game. Might have been against the Ravens now that I think of it. It missed the spot and hit a nerve and his leg went numb.

I really dont think its the amount of touches. Players get hurt every game due to bodies colliding.

RuthlessBurgher
05-08-2018, 07:54 PM
Not sure if that was due to touches. Bell said he hurt it earlier in the year and played thru it instead of missing a few games. I also think he got a pain killing shot to numb it before the game and the needle missed the spot.

Something similar happened to Bettis before a playoff game. Might have been against the Ravens now that I think of it. It missed the spot and hit a nerve and his leg went numb.

I really dont think its the amount of touches. Players get hurt every game due to bodies colliding.

Well, more touches equals more collisions, thus more overall opportunities to be injured.

feltdizz
05-08-2018, 08:19 PM
Well, more touches equals more collisions, thus more overall opportunities to be injured.
Anyone can get injured on every play.

Its all random and you can’t prevent it.

Was AB injured because of his touches last year vs the Pats? What about vs the Bungles 2 years earlier?

Bell had 300+ touches and no injuries last year? How is it possible?

Conner had 15 or 20 touches and look what happened?

Pouncey?

Gilbert?

AV?

DeCastro?

What makes one player more prone than another?

It just depends where you are in the pile or how far your cleat is in the turf when hit or rolled on.

Northern_Blitz
05-09-2018, 11:31 AM
Anyone can get injured on every play.

Its all random and you can’t prevent it.

Was AB injured because of his touches last year vs the Pats? What about vs the Bungles 2 years earlier?

Bell had 300+ touches and no injuries last year? How is it possible?

Conner had 15 or 20 touches and look what happened?

Pouncey?

Gilbert?

AV?

DeCastro?

What makes one player more prone than another?

It just depends where you are in the pile or how far your cleat is in the turf when hit or rolled on.

There is some probability that a running back gets hurt when he carries the ball and when he catches the ball. For the sake of argument, let's say that all touches have the same risk of injury and it's 0.1%.

If a back gets 200 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 82% chance of not getting hurt over the year and ~ 18% chance of getting hurt.

If that same back gets 300 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 74% chance of not getting hurt and ~ 26% chance of getting hurt.

This doesn't mean that he's injury prone (i.e. the chance of getting injured per touch didn't change). But, his chances of getting hurt over a season went up because he's in a danger of getting hurt more often. I feel like I looked at this before and Bell's touches has him playing something like 1.5 games more than other highly used backs in the league. So, if every back had the same chance of getting injured every play you'd expect Bell's risk of injury to be almost 10% higher than other highly used backs.

That's a pretty simple analysis that assumes that getting hurt is random and occurs at a constant rate. My guess is that RBs get a little bit hurt every time they carry the ball. I think that's not unreasonable given the violence that can take place with every hit.

I think that those minor aches and pains probably add up over a season and make the chance of injury increase over time. I think that this is why most teams don't give their backs as many touches as they did in the past (kind of like how basketball stars get rested periodically and goalies in hockey don't play in back to back games).

I'm not the only one that thinks this. The NFLPA is very much against adding games to the season because they believe that it increases injury risk.

Because of that, I think he has a higher chance of being injured in a season even if his chance of being injured on a particular play is the same as every other back in the league.

squidkid
05-09-2018, 01:37 PM
the center gets hit every play. i dont see every center in the league getting hurt all the time

feltdizz
05-09-2018, 01:50 PM
There is some probability that a running back gets hurt when he carries the ball and when he catches the ball. For the sake of argument, let's say that all touches have the same risk of injury and it's 0.1%.

If a back gets 200 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 82% chance of not getting hurt over the year and ~ 18% chance of getting hurt.

If that same back gets 300 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 74% chance of not getting hurt and ~ 26% chance of getting hurt.

This doesn't mean that he's injury prone (i.e. the chance of getting injured per touch didn't change). But, his chances of getting hurt over a season went up because he's in a danger of getting hurt more often. I feel like I looked at this before and Bell's touches has him playing something like 1.5 games more than other highly used backs in the league. So, if every back had the same chance of getting injured every play you'd expect Bell's risk of injury to be almost 10% higher than other highly used backs.

That's a pretty simple analysis that assumes that getting hurt is random and occurs at a constant rate. My guess is that RBs get a little bit hurt every time they carry the ball. I think that's not unreasonable given the violence that can take place with every hit.

I think that those minor aches and pains probably add up over a season and make the chance of injury increase over time. I think that this is why most teams don't give their backs as many touches as they did in the past (kind of like how basketball stars get rested periodically and goalies in hockey don't play in back to back games).

I'm not the only one that thinks this. The NFLPA is very much against adding games to the season because they believe that it increases injury risk.

Because of that, I think he has a higher chance of being injured in a season even if his chance of being injured on a particular play is the same as every other back in the league.

while I get what you are saying I still think it's random when it comes to injuries.

We lost Bell in the 6th game to a season ending injury. That wasn't due to a high touch rate, just due getting his leg twisted while being tackled. Interior OL and DL bang on every play... it's just luck IMO for some players to avoid injury.

SanAntonioSteelerFan
05-09-2018, 02:11 PM
the center gets hit every play. i dont see every center in the league getting hurt all the time

I think they're showing they get an awful lot of tramautic encephalopathy from those repeated hits.

Slapstick
05-09-2018, 03:07 PM
I think they're showing they get an awful lot of tramautic encephalopathy from those repeated hits.

Mike Webster (RIP)

squidkid
05-09-2018, 04:20 PM
I think they're showing they get an awful lot of tramautic encephalopathy from those repeated hits.


agreed. point was using bells carries as a injury excuse were he misses games compared to a lineman that gets hits every single play.........

Northern_Blitz
05-10-2018, 12:06 PM
while I get what you are saying I still think it's random when it comes to injuries.

We lost Bell in the 6th game to a season ending injury. That wasn't due to a high touch rate, just due getting his leg twisted while being tackled. Interior OL and DL bang on every play... it's just luck IMO for some players to avoid injury.

I agree with what you are saying, but those are two different arguments.

I think you are saying: Every play is dangerous and a player can get hurt on any play.

This is certainly true. You can lose guys for the season on the first play of the year.

I am saying: Being in a dangerous situation more often means that there is a higher chance that you get hurt than if you were in a dangerous situation less often.

I think it's pretty clear that this is true too. I also think that for RBs, every nagging injury they get slows them down a fraction. I think that would increase their chances of getting hurt because some guys (think Barry Sanders) don't get hurt as much because they are elusive enough to avoid getting hit "full on". I feel like any small loss of mobility at that level could reduce that elusiveness enough to increase the chances of injury (even slightly).

Northern_Blitz
05-10-2018, 12:12 PM
agreed. point was using bells carries as a injury excuse were he misses games compared to a lineman that gets hits every single play.........

I think it's a different kind of violence for linemen. I think it's more insidious in a lot of ways because it's probably a lower magnitude per hit but the frequency is higher. I think that makes it easier for damage (particularly to the brain) to go unnoticed. It's way easier to see that a WR gets concussed when he gets knocked upt by heat shot across the middle on a crossing pattern.

Steel Maniac
05-10-2018, 12:56 PM
I think it's a different kind of violence for linemen. I think it's more insidious in a lot of ways because it's probably a lower magnitude per hit but the frequency is higher. I think that makes it easier for damage (particularly to the brain) to go unnoticed. It's way easier to see that a WR gets concussed when he gets knocked upt by heat shot across the middle on a crossing pattern.

Man..if you ever really just focus in on line play......it is tremendous amount of force and strength put on down in that pit.

NorthCoast
05-13-2018, 11:55 AM
Man..if you ever really just focus in on line play......it is tremendous amount of force and strength put on down in that pit.To NB's point, it's F=M x A. The linemen got the mass, but I don't think they have the acceleration of a 225 lb Shazier running at a RB. And the repeated exposure to lower level hits I think is also a concern. But it's not the kind of injury that puts a player out of a game, but the accumulated damage is real.

Captain Lemming
05-13-2018, 12:08 PM
There is some probability that a running back gets hurt when he carries the ball and when he catches the ball. For the sake of argument, let's say that all touches have the same risk of injury and it's 0.1%.

If a back gets 200 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 82% chance of not getting hurt over the year and ~ 18% chance of getting hurt.

If that same back gets 300 carries, we'd expect that he'd have ~ 74% chance of not getting hurt and ~ 26% chance of getting hurt.

This doesn't mean that he's injury prone (i.e. the chance of getting injured per touch didn't change). But, his chances of getting hurt over a season went up because he's in a danger of getting hurt more often. I feel like I looked at this before and Bell's touches has him playing something like 1.5 games more than other highly used backs in the league. So, if every back had the same chance of getting injured every play you'd expect Bell's risk of injury to be almost 10% higher than other highly used backs.

That's a pretty simple analysis that assumes that getting hurt is random and occurs at a constant rate. My guess is that RBs get a little bit hurt every time they carry the ball. I think that's not unreasonable given the violence that can take place with every hit.

I think that those minor aches and pains probably add up over a season and make the chance of injury increase over time. I think that this is why most teams don't give their backs as many touches as they did in the past (kind of like how basketball stars get rested periodically and goalies in hockey don't play in back to back games).

I'm not the only one that thinks this. The NFLPA is very much against adding games to the season because they believe that it increases injury risk.

Because of that, I think he has a higher chance of being injured in a season even if his chance of being injured on a particular play is the same as every other back in the league.

This is why a team like the Saints are in a MUCH better situation than us regarding the RB position as neither starter caliber back has huge carries AND either can miss games when injured (or suspended as is happening right now) and the position remains a strength.

It is what WE had before Bell started getting paid more than what some entire RB rosters make

feltdizz
05-13-2018, 12:24 PM
This is why a team like the Saints are in a MUCH better situation than us regarding the RB position as neither starter caliber back has huge carries AND either can miss games when injured (or suspended as is happening right now) and the position remains a strength.

It is what WE had before Bell started getting paid more than what some entire RB rosters make

Without Alvin Kamara for most of the game, the Saints had season lows in points (17), total yards (306) and rushing yards (50) on #TNF (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TNF?src=hash) vs the Falcons

OMG LOOK HOW STRONG THE SAINTS WERE WITHOUT KAMARA!!! LMAO

Second... we have James Conner AND Stevan Ridley on our roster while paying Bell.

Once again you are making up straw man arguments....

Steel Maniac
05-13-2018, 09:19 PM
This is why a team like the Saints are in a MUCH better situation than us regarding the RB position as neither starter caliber back has huge carries AND either can miss games when injured (or suspended as is happening right now) and the position remains a strength.

It is what WE had before Bell started getting paid more than what some entire RB rosters make

Like the two super bowl teams.

RuthlessBurgher
05-15-2018, 10:54 AM
9-9-18...I can’t wait! #JustBePatient pic.twitter.com/p2vpWQnCVy

— Le'Veon Bell (@LeVeonBell) May 14, 2018

SanAntonioSteelerFan
05-15-2018, 11:19 AM
9-9-18...I can’t wait! #JustBePatient pic.twitter.com/p2vpWQnCVy

— Le'Veon Bell (@LeVeonBell) May 14, 2018

I guess that should make me happy, but it reminds me of Bart Scott instead (though thinking of that Jets game makes me happy, so I guess it's ok!).

Buzz
05-15-2018, 11:51 AM
9-9-18...I can’t wait! #JustBePatient pic.twitter.com/p2vpWQnCVy

— Le'Veon Bell (@LeVeonBell) May 14, 2018

That's the date he'll start getting into game shape.:(

Northern_Blitz
05-15-2018, 12:05 PM
Without Alvin Kamara for most of the game, the Saints had season lows in points (17), total yards (306) and rushing yards (50) on #TNF (https://twitter.com/hashtag/TNF?src=hash) vs the Falcons

OMG LOOK HOW STRONG THE SAINTS WERE WITHOUT KAMARA!!! LMAO

Second... we have James Conner AND Stevan Ridley on our roster while paying Bell.

Once again you are making up straw man arguments....

It's not a straw man argument. It's what has actually happened to the Steelers in the playoffs.

Bell has been frequently injured in the playoffs. I think that this is because he gets way more touches than everyone else in the league, but the reason doesn't matter.

When Bell has been hurt in the playoffs, we have "replaced" him in the lineup with guys who aren't NFL caliber starters.

We could use the money we pay Bell to get two above average NFL backs. Neither would be as good as Bell. But if one got hurt in the playoffs, it wouldn't essentially end our chances of advancing. We are too reliant on Bell because he is so good at so many things.

It's the same thing that happened this year with Shazier. He's so good and we built our D around him. But, we literally had no one behind him and picked up a guy off the street. It's unrealistic to expect the D to succeed that way.

Northern_Blitz
05-15-2018, 12:12 PM
To NB's point, it's F=M x A. The linemen got the mass, but I don't think they have the acceleration of a 225 lb Shazier running at a RB. And the repeated exposure to lower level hits I think is also a concern. But it's not the kind of injury that puts a player out of a game, but the accumulated damage is real.

I think it's probably a momentum argument (mass x velocity) because I would guess that the linemen do explode (i.e. accelerate) into each other pretty good. But, despite the massive collisions, it's in close quarters so they don't have the ability to build up as much speed.

I would also think that how the force gets distributed matters. Linemen probably use their hands / arms to absorb at least a good portion of the force. The crazy kill shots that the league is trying to eliminate usually have all the force being transmitted from the D players helmet into the the helmet of the player on O. Those kind of hits are predatory and done specifically to try to knock a guy out.

I played Rugby as a kid and I always wonder if football would be safer without helmets and face masks. I think that players might get more broken noses / lost teeth, but they'd have fewer concussions. You don't torpedo your head into a guy who's running full steam at you if you aren't wearing a suit of armor. But, who knows. I think it also helps that rugby players don't get to rest for a minute between each play.

Slapstick
05-15-2018, 12:28 PM
Tackling is more of an emphasis in Rugby...as you stated, you don't torpedo other players or use a shoulder pad as a weapon...instead of the big hit, you are more concerned with getting the ball carrier to the ground...

feltdizz
05-15-2018, 01:37 PM
It's not a straw man argument. It's what has actually happened to the Steelers in the playoffs.

Bell has been frequently injured in the playoffs. I think that this is because he gets way more touches than everyone else in the league, but the reason doesn't matter.

When Bell has been hurt in the playoffs, we have "replaced" him in the lineup with guys who aren't NFL caliber starters.

We could use the money we pay Bell to get two above average NFL backs. Neither would be as good as Bell. But if one got hurt in the playoffs, it wouldn't essentially end our chances of advancing. We are too reliant on Bell because he is so good at so many things.

It's the same thing that happened this year with Shazier. He's so good and we built our D around him. But, we literally had no one behind him and picked up a guy off the street. It's unrealistic to expect the D to succeed that way.

Yes it's a straw man argument.

and Bell was injured in the playoffs one year I believe. Just once. The other 2 times it was the regular season. Once it was the 8th game, not due to high touches just Burfict twisting a leg while falling on it. DeAngelo had 170 yards on the ground the next game vs Oakland.

But here is why it's a straw man argument.

How much was Bell paid when he was injured those years? Who was his back up those years and why?

The way we use Bell has nothing do with money, it's strictly philosophy. We had Blount on the one year and he was upset from the lack of touches. It's not that we couldn't get above average backs, we just didn't give them touches. Blount and D'Angelo were great change of pace RB's. Money wasn't the reason they left.

In 2013 Bell was injured in the 13th game. He had 244 rushing attempts before he was injured. That isn't a high number IMO

Now that we paid Bell under the franchise tag we also drafted Conner AND added Ridley. It's not money, just philosophy.

As far as Shazier is concerned. Most teams don't have a Shazier quality back up on their roster. It happened so late in the year we were stuck and other LB's were injured. It happens.

But even with Shazier we couldn't stop the Jags because it's not a LB issue. It's a front 7, hunger issue. They wanted it more and pushed our OL and DL around. Doesn't matter how good your ILB's are if your DL/NT are getting blown back 5 yards.

I definitely think when we are salting away games Bell shouldn't be in the game. I have no problem giving him a few less touches as well. Problem is Conner wasn't ready as a pass protector. I think moving forward we may see a slight change in philosophy now that Haley is gone. Then again, if you are paying him 14 mill, you have to use him. Dude is a 3 down back and a nightmare for opponents. You don't split carries with a guy like that. 70/30 should work.

Northern_Blitz
05-15-2018, 03:19 PM
Bell was injured in the playoffs one year I believe. Just once. The other 2 times it was the regular season. Once it was the 8th game, not due to high touches just Burfict twisting a leg while falling on it. DeAngelo had 170 yards on the ground the next game vs Oakland.

I think I've done this breakdown before, but I can't find the post. Bell was drafted in 2013. Here are the playoff games we've played since then.

2013: Missed playoffs

2014:
- Lost WC game (Ravens). Bell had zero caries. Leading rusher was Josh Haris with 9 carries.

2015:
- Won WC game (Cincy). Bell had zero carries. Leading rusher was Fitz Toussant with 17 carries.
- Lost Division game (Denver). Bell had zero carries. Fitz again had the most carries with 12.

2016:
- Won WC game (Mia). Bell was unstoppable in this game (because he's a great RB). 29 carries almost 170 yards.
- Won Division game (KC). Bell again unstoppable and he always owns KC. 30 carries almost 170 yards.
- Lost AFCC (NE). Bell goes down after 6 carries, does not return. DeAngelo has 14 carries for a dismal 34 yards. I'm pretty sure that's his last game in the NFL.

2017:
- Lost Divisional (Jags). Bell plays the whole game and is great. Average on the ground, but because he's probably the best all around back in the game puts up almost 90 yards receiving.

So. We've had 7 playoff games in Bell career. He's missed 3 due to injury. Played 3 complete games. And was injured in the 7th.

He's missed half of the playoff games during his tenure with the team. But, I don't think it's because he's "injury prone" (i.e. more likely to get hurt during a given touch). Instead, I think he often ends the season unable to play because he gets more touches than everyone else in the league. This increases his chances of getting hurt.

Re: division of labor. I've said multiple times that I think that in the best alternate timeline for the Steelers, they actually used Blount. Then, they wouldn't have been screwed when Bell was hurt in the playoffs because they'd have another NFL caliber back on the team. This worked well when Bell was suspended because Williams hadn't regressed off a cliff yet. I also think it would also have deflated Bell's value to the point where his price tag would be more reasonable relative to other backs in the league.

I don't think that we play Bell too much because he gets paid too much. I think that we play him too much because he's so well rounded. As I said above, I think we would have been better off by managing his touches by splitting him with Blount (or someone else). That would make us slightly less good in the regular season, but way better in the playoffs because we'd be playing Bell then instead of watching him on the sidelines while Toussant, Todman, and old man Williams carry the rock.



As far as Shazier is concerned. Most teams don't have a Shazier quality back up on their roster. It happened so late in the year we were stuck and other LB's were injured. It happens.

My issue isn't that the backup wasn't Shazier's quality (obviously that's impossible because he wouldn't be a backup then). My issue is that we didn't seem to have a backup at the position. I don't think Big Red was a good option at the position (and the team didn't play him there, but it could be due to injury as they say). If Spence without practicing is better than Fort, then why the heck didn't we cut Fort and keep Spence in the first place? I think it's pretty clear that we didn't have any contingency for Shazier getting hurt. It's why I hope that the undrafted ILB with off-field issues pans out.


I definitely think when we are salting away games Bell shouldn't be in the game. I have no problem giving him a few less touches as well. Problem is Conner wasn't ready as a pass protector. I think moving forward we may see a slight change in philosophy now that Haley is gone. Then again, if you are paying him 14 mill, you have to use him. Dude is a 3 down back and a nightmare for opponents. You don't split carries with a guy like that. 70/30 should work.

I totally agree with the first part here. You deal with putting in a guy who isn't as good as Bell during the regular season because it should keep him fresher for the end of the season. This is how other sports are evolving. I wish that the Steelers were on board with what seems to be the sports science here. But, I think one of the few issues that Tomlin has is that he doesn't seem to believe in splitting carries for RBs (from Fast Willie to Bell). I think it's a mistake that has shortened playoff runs. This isn't a call for Tomlin's job (unless we're replacing him with Bill B)

feltdizz
05-15-2018, 05:05 PM
Yeah, I hear you and from my disagree with some of your points.

However Cap keeps implying we can’t have 2 above average RB’s because of Bells salary. Pretty sure we could’ve drafted Kamara last year. We went with Conner because he is a change of pace and a home town hero. He looked pretty good besides his pass protections and hopefully he will improve once healthy.

Also think Bell may have been injured due to a ton of carries when we went to the AFCCG. The other 2 injuries tho? That’s just 2 bad hits on his knees.

RuthlessBurgher
05-16-2018, 09:36 AM
Pretty sure we could’ve drafted Kamara last year.

In order to get Kamara, we would have not been able to get Juju.

feltdizz
05-16-2018, 11:41 AM
In order to get Kamara, we would have not been able to get Juju.

Thanks. For some reason I thought he went in the 4th round.

I prefer JuJu but my point still stands. We could’ve drafted another RB if we really wanted to but we had more pressing needs.

Its not because of money, it’s because we drafted a few suspect WR’s.

I think its dishonest to say Bell is handicapping our team. Injuries, bad draft picks, etc are much more impactful than a player who produces.

squidkid
05-16-2018, 02:19 PM
Thanks. For some reason I thought he went in the 4th round.

I prefer JuJu but my point still stands. We could’ve drafted another RB if we really wanted to but we had more pressing needs.

Its not because of money, it’s because we drafted a few suspect WR’s.

I think its dishonest to say Bell is handicapping our team. Injuries, bad draft picks, etc are much more impactful than a player who produces.

a player that is making 1.5 times more than the next highest rb last year and demanding to make 2 times as much this year is handicapping the team
we have been relatively major injury free the last several seasons and i dont recall you(or just about anyone else on here) say that we drafted any bad players
all fans have their favorite player (that they see no wrong in) yours just happens to be bell.

Steel Maniac
05-16-2018, 07:10 PM
a player that is making 1.5 times more than the next highest rb last year and demanding to make 2 times as much this year is handicapping the team
we have been relatively major injury free the last several seasons and i dont recall you(or just about anyone else on here) say that we drafted any bad players
all fans have their favorite player (that they see no wrong in) yours just happens to be bell.

Boom....

He’s trying to handicap us but this is Bell’s last year wearing a Steeler uniform. He can go punk the Jets ,49ers or some other sucker. We won’t be played.

http://www.espn.com/blog/pittsburgh-steelers/post/_/id/27910/as-leveon-sits-jaylen-samuels-hopes-to-answer-the-bell-for-steelers

feltdizz
05-16-2018, 07:59 PM
a player that is making 1.5 times more than the next highest rb last year and demanding to make 2 times as much this year is handicapping the team
we have been relatively major injury free the last several seasons and i dont recall you(or just about anyone else on here) say that we drafted any bad players
all fans have their favorite player (that they see no wrong in) yours just happens to be bell.

I’m not one to call a draft pick bad until I see him on the field.

Coates was a bad pick. Dude gets separation but couldn’t catch once he hurt his hand.

Bryant was a good pick initially but he smoked himself into a bad pick.

I think its weird how you keep lying on everyone.

Anytime a pick doesn’t pan out it can be labeled a bad pick. I know you pride yourself in being the only guy in here to make all the right predictions but most folks are patient and actually like this team so they want to see all the picks pan out.

and no, Bell isn’t handicapping the team because his production is insane.

Northern_Blitz
05-17-2018, 07:23 AM
Boom....

He’s trying to handicap us but this is Bell’s last year wearing a Steeler uniform. He can go punk the Jets ,49ers or some other sucker. We won’t be played.

http://www.espn.com/blog/pittsburgh-steelers/post/_/id/27910/as-leveon-sits-jaylen-samuels-hopes-to-answer-the-bell-for-steelers

I don't get the "boom" thing...maybe I'm too old. First, what Squid said wasn't really all that new. I think that it's factually incorrect (the loss of Shazier was kind of a big deal). Second, I think that sites like this work way better if we're trying to learn from what other people thing instead of trying to "beat" or "destroy" or "eviscerate" someone else.

My read on Felt's position is that Bell is a great player and that it's not unreasonable for him to ask to be paid what he'd earn if he wasn't on a tag. I think that he's right on both counts. I think that letting Bell walk after this year will make the team worse in the short term and signing him to fair market value would make the team worse in the medium to long term.

I don't think either option is unreasonable depending on whether you want to maximize the short term or not.

feltdizz
05-17-2018, 08:50 AM
I don't get the "boom" thing...maybe I'm too old. First, what Squid said wasn't really all that new. I think that it's factually incorrect (the loss of Shazier was kind of a big deal). Second, I think that sites like this work way better if we're trying to learn from what other people thing instead of trying to "beat" or "destroy" or "eviscerate" someone else.


My read on Felt's position is that Bell is a great player and that it's not unreasonable for him to ask to be paid what he'd earn if he wasn't on a tag. I think that he's right on both counts. I think that letting Bell walk after this year will make the team worse in the short term and signing him to fair market value would make the team worse in the medium to long term.

I don't think either option is unreasonable depending on whether you want to maximize the short term or not.


Batman sound effects dude.... Boom, Biff, Splat!

Squids main contribution to the board is trolling fans for liking the Steelers

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 09:37 AM
and no, Bell isn’t handicapping the team because his production is insane.

Dizz, my beef with your position is that there IS a point at which Bells demands outpaces his value.
When his demands exceeed the entire league by such a wide magin, paying him puts us at a disadvantage because we have less to pay everyone else.
Bells production IS insane because as you yourself implied, the OC relied too heavily on him to begin with.

For example Bell was third in the league in rushing NOT because he was a superior runner. It is because he LED THE LEAGUE in carries by a wide margin. He led the league in attempts DESPITE missing a game.
If Bell had the same carries as the league leading rusher he would have had 1088 rushing yards Dizz.

Bell is a great receiver as a back true. But when he was out for that long stretch in 2015 our actual "passing game" was better despite Deangelo being a far inferior receiver than Bell.
Fact is the QBs (including Mike Vick and Landry that year) simply threw more to other targets, and Deangelo contibuted as a receiver like a more typical back.

How did we suffer? More points as a team, more rush yards as a team, more pass yards as a team, more rush touchdowns as a team, more pass touchdowns as a team.

My point Dizz is that Bells ridiculous numbers are largely a measure of over reliance on ONE player on a team full of weapons.

You rightly spoke of how OC "chose" not the use Blount and Deangelo much when Bell was healthy.

It only adds to my argument that we would be fine without Bell as long as we have a couple of "good" backs.

That savings could be used to beef up other positions.

See the SB champs of recent years as proof of that my friend.
Teams with a "good" roster of backs go to and win SBs, while the Steeler and our future HOFer "best back in the league" watched the game on TV.

Steel Maniac
05-17-2018, 09:38 AM
I don't get the "boom" thing...maybe I'm too old. First, what Squid said wasn't really all that new. I think that it's factually incorrect (the loss of Shazier was kind of a big deal). Second, I think that sites like this work way better if we're trying to learn from what other people thing instead of trying to "beat" or "destroy" or "eviscerate" someone else.

My read on Felt's position is that Bell is a great player and that it's not unreasonable for him to ask to be paid what he'd earn if he wasn't on a tag. I think that he's right on both counts. I think that letting Bell walk after this year will make the team worse in the short term and signing him to fair market value would make the team worse in the medium to long term.

I don't think either option is unreasonable depending on whether you want to maximize the short term or not.

I understand where your coming from but because of the devaluation of the position over the last 8-10 years, I disagree. Look at who’s winning and going to Super Bowls at the running back position as another counter point to what your saying.

All factual football evidence doesn’t support us holding on to Bell. Irrational man crush is the root of any and all Bell support.

Steel Maniac
05-17-2018, 09:41 AM
Dizz, my beef with your position is that there IS a point at which Bells demands outpaces his value.
When his demands exceeed the entire league by such a wide magin, paying him puts us at a disadvantage because we have less to pay everyone else.
Bells production IS insane because as you yourself implied, the OC relied too heavily on him to begin with.

For example Bell was third in the league in rushing NOT because he was a superior runner. It is because he LED THE LEAGUE in carries by a wide margin. He led the league in attempts DESPITE missing a game.
If Bell had the same carries as the league leading rusher he would have had 1088 rushing yards Dizz.

Bell is a great receiver as a back true. But when he was out for that long stretch in 2015 our actual "passing game" was better despite Deangelo being a far inferior receiver than Bell.
Fact is the QBs (including Mike Vick and Landry that year) simply threw more to other targets, and Deangelo contibuted as a receiver like a more typical back.

How did we suffer? More points as a team, more rush yards as a team, more pass yards as a team, more rush touchdowns as a team, more pass touchdowns as a team.

My point Dizz is that Bells ridiculous numbers are largely a measure of over reliance on ONE player on a team full of weapons.

You rightly spoke of how OC "chose" not the use Blount and Deangelo much when Bell was healthy.

It only adds to my argument that we would be fine without Bell as long as we have a couple of "good" backs.

See the SB champs of recent years as proof of that my friend.

Is

These are facts ; not hopes or dreams but facts.

When Bell is let go next year, then this thing can be put to bed.

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 10:07 AM
I understand where your coming from but because of the devaluation of the position over the last 8-10 years, I disagree. Look at who’s winning and going to Super Bowls at the running back position as another counter point to what your saying.

All factual football evidence doesn’t support us holding on to Bell. Irrational man crush is the root of any and all Bell support.

It has been nearly 40 years since WE went a SB with Franco.

Since then our SB starters were:
1. Eric Pegram
2. Willie Parker
3. Willie Parker
4. "Spindarella" Mendenhall

Since Franco, we have had 2 HOF caliber starters who cumulatively started for over a decade and a half. We had the brief "one year wonder" elite play of Barry Foster who STILL holds the team rushing record.
Nada ONE SB appearance among the lot.

Why do we need to pay this guy big bucks again?

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 10:09 AM
These are facts ; not hopes or dreams but facts.

When Bell is let go next year, then this thing can be put to bed.

And do take notice of WHO pays him the big bucks.
Sho aint gonna be the Pats!!!!

I GUARANTY YOU it is a perennial loser that knows not how to win championships. Belee dat.

I just hope it is not us, as it would be a departure from the winning strategy that got us rings in the past.

Northern_Blitz
05-17-2018, 10:47 AM
I understand where your coming from but because of the devaluation of the position over the last 8-10 years, I disagree. Look at who’s winning and going to Super Bowls at the running back position as another counter point to what your saying.

All factual football evidence doesn’t support us holding on to Bell. Irrational man crush is the root of any and all Bell support.

I completely agree that the best decision for the Steelers will be to let Bell play out the tag. But, I think that because of that we'll probably lose some production at RB (whether that's rushing yards, receiving yards, consistent pass blocking, versatility, etc).

I don't think the loss of Bell would be insurmountable. In fact, it's not impossible that the money could be used to improve somewhere else in a way that off-sets the loss of Bell. I personally would have been OK if we let him walk this year and used the money on D. But if we tried to fix the D with a big name UFA, we'd be switching paying Bell too much (but still below market value) with paying someone else too much (at market value). I don't believe that UFA is a good way to build a team and I wouldn't have advocated for it if we didn't lose the most important player on our D in Shazier.

But, I also think that the other side of the argument is reasonable. Bell has been great player in our system. I think he's the most complete back in the league (maybe most complete since Faulk, maybe most complete ever). I think that building a team through UFA acquisition is a bad plan because (1) UFAs often fail because you don't know how they're going to work in your system and (2) UFAs are older and will likely decline before the end of the contract (this is the same reason I'd prefer not to sign Bell long term). I think that point (1) is worse when looking for players on D because I think that side of the ball is more dependent on systems.

So, we'd be choosing between (a) paying more than we want to for someone we know works well on this team or (b) overpaying for someone we don't know will work on this team. I think that there's risk both ways and I don't think that coming down on either side of the conversation is irrational.

Slapstick
05-17-2018, 10:57 AM
I think that part of the reason that they drafted Samuels is because they are preparing for the possibility of Bell leaving after this coming season...much like drafting Mason Rudolph after Roethlisberger talked about retirement...

We may be finding out if Fichtner can successfully implement a "RB by committee" approach as early as 2019...I hope that Conner and Samuels (or whomever they draft) are up to the task...

feltdizz
05-17-2018, 10:59 AM
Dizz, my beef with your position is that there IS a point at which Bells demands outpaces his value.
When his demands exceeed the entire league by such a wide magin, paying him puts us at a disadvantage because we have less to pay everyone else.
Bells production IS insane because as you yourself implied, the OC relied too heavily on him to begin with.

For example Bell was third in the league in rushing NOT because he was a superior runner. It is because he LED THE LEAGUE in carries by a wide margin. He led the league in attempts DESPITE missing a game.
If Bell had the same carries as the league leading rusher he would have had 1088 rushing yards Dizz.

Bell is a great receiver as a back true. But when he was out for that long stretch in 2015 our actual "passing game" was better despite Deangelo being a far inferior receiver than Bell.
Fact is the QBs (including Mike Vick and Landry that year) simply threw more to other targets, and Deangelo contibuted as a receiver like a more typical back.

How did we suffer? More points as a team, more rush yards as a team, more pass yards as a team, more rush touchdowns as a team, more pass touchdowns as a team.

My point Dizz is that Bells ridiculous numbers are largely a measure of over reliance on ONE player on a team full of weapons.

You rightly spoke of how OC "chose" not the use Blount and Deangelo much when Bell was healthy.

It only adds to my argument that we would be fine without Bell as long as we have a couple of "good" backs.

That savings could be used to beef up other positions.

See the SB champs of recent years as proof of that my friend.
Teams with a "good" roster of backs go to and win SBs, while the Steeler and our future HOFer "best back in the league" watched the game on TV.

I don't care who went to the SB the last few years. It's like suggesting we can lose Ben for the playoffs and win a SB with a backup because the Iggles did it. No, that's not why they made the SB. They barely got by the Falcons and it wasn't because they had 2 RB's. Way too many factors and lucky bounces go into making and winning a SB to point to one position as the reason they won.

As far as the amount of touches Bell gets, it's because he is the best RB in the game and gives us the best chance to win.

Again, that's like saying Ben only had big stats because he threw a lot or AB only has big stats because he gets a bunch of targets.

So what, we drafted these players and we win a lot of games this way. Have we won a SB with them? No.. but it's not because of their paychecks. It's because injuries, turnovers, game planning and bad matchups exposed us on certain plays that decided the game.

We don't win games because we don't have Bell and play a different way. We win more games than we lose most years because we are a great franchise who has stability at HC, is really good at drafting players and pretty good at getting FA's at a reasonable rate.

Regardless of Bells production on the ground per yard, his ability to split out wide, cause mismatches, keep the D honest, protect the QB, save the QB from hits as a safety valve and pick up first downs when the blocking breaks down is why he is so valuable.

one other thing.. it's really laughable how you can play the odds and pull from 29 or so teams to say " look who won a SB or was in the SB last year?"

LMAO.. really? How about all those other teams who didn't make the playoffs with 2 backs? Who didn't have a winning record with 2 backs? Playing the field is the easiest way to try and win an argument. How about sustained success with that system? Whta happened to the falcons last year? Why didn't they make another SB with the same roster? Why didn't the Saints win a SB last year? What about Philly? How is this their first SB win when they usually split carries? What about KC?

lmao.. nice try buddy.

feltdizz
05-17-2018, 11:05 AM
And do take notice of WHO pays him the big bucks.
Sho aint gonna be the Pats!!!!

I GUARANTY YOU it is a perennial loser that knows not how to win championships. Belee dat.

I just hope it is not us, as it would be a departure from the winning strategy that got us rings in the past.

Philly just won their first championship last year...

and why would a team like the Pats play him big bucks? That doesn't make sense at all. They have Brady and Billicheat so they can win with damn near anyone.

However, they aren't the only team in town. I could see damn near anytime team with a nice amount of cap space signing Bell and getting great production.

While we value SB wins most teams want to get to the playoffs for a chance to win a SB. That's dollars well spent. I'm not gong to follow Bell and change my team if he leaves but it's silly to suggest once he leaves its going to be a nightmare for him.

That's like folks who laugh at Mike Wallace. Dude got paid, still plays in the NFL and won as many championships as we have since he left.

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 05:27 PM
I don't care who went to the SB the last few years. It's like suggesting we can lose Ben for the playoffs and win a SB with a backup because the Iggles did it. No, that's not why they made the SB. They barely got by the Falcons and it wasn't because they had 2 RB's. Way too many factors and lucky bounces go into making and winning a SB to point to one position as the reason they won.

No Dizz, you look at PATTERNS not anomalies.
MOST SB teams have very good to great QBs in recent years.
There is ZERO correlation whatsoever between top backs and championships since 2001.

You mention Ben? He has TWO rings, more than the Eagles have in their HISTORY.....THAT is why you pay the man Dizz and DONT copy the Eagles backup caliber QB.
But Ben has no rings with the best back and receiver he has ever played with arguably the best back and receiver in TEAM HISTORY that is full of HOFers at those positions. Why?

Because in todays NFL, QB and Defense are more important than overpaying "skill" players.

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 05:39 PM
I think that part of the reason that they drafted Samuels is because they are preparing for the possibility of Bell leaving after this coming season...much like drafting Mason Rudolph after Roethlisberger talked about retirement...

We may be finding out if Fichtner can successfully implement a "RB by committee" approach as early as 2019...I hope that Conner and Samuels (or whomever they draft) are up to the task...

Samuels has a very intriguing skill set.
He could well be every bit the receiver as Bell, possibly a better short yardage back too. Nice dual threat in the red zone that would be.
Platooning him with a less versatile pure runner might be a very interesting and cost effective way to replace Bell who may already began his decline as a runner (or teams are more ready for his unique "patient" run style).

The prospect of Samuels and Bell together in the red zone this season is very exciting.

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 06:19 PM
Philly just won their first championship last year...

True, which is why your comment on a backup QB to the SB is moot.


and why would a team like the Pats play him big bucks? That doesn't make sense at all.

My point exactly!!! :)


They have Brady and Billicheat so they can win with damn near anyone.

Anyone at runningback? Just the Pats? What other team in the recent past needed anywhere near a Bell caliber back to with a SB?.......again, my point! :)


However, they aren't the only team in town. I could see damn near anytime team with a nice amount of cap space signing Bell and getting great production.
1. You wanna bet it is not some "loser" team that makes a play on him? You KNOW I am right Dizz. :)
2. Why only a team with "cap space"? WE never have much cap space which is PRECISELY WHY we would be stupid to sign him.


While we value SB wins most teams want to get to the playoffs for a chance to win a SB. That's dollars well spent. I'm not gong to follow Bell and change my team if he leaves but it's silly to suggest once he leaves its going to be a nightmare for him.

That's like folks who laugh at Mike Wallace. Dude got paid, still plays in the NFL and won as many championships as we have since he left.


"I" never said it would be a "nightmare" for Bell. He likely WILL get paid which clearly is his priority and his right. My contention is that it would be stupid if WE were the team to pay him.
I agree Wallace has as many rings as we have. Just goes to show how insignificant his position is relative to other positions.

Captain Lemming
05-17-2018, 06:33 PM
one other thing.. it's really laughable how you can play the odds and pull from 29 or so teams to say " look who won a SB or was in the SB last year?"

LMAO.. really? How about all those other teams who didn't make the playoffs with 2 backs? Who didn't have a winning record with 2 backs? Playing the field is the easiest way to try and win an argument. How about sustained success with that system? Whta happened to the falcons last year? Why didn't they make another SB with the same roster? Why didn't the Saints win a SB last year? What about Philly? How is this their first SB win when they usually split carries? What about KC?



You are correct. There are PLENTY of things that are keys to championship caliber play.
My point is Dizz, elite running backs arent one of those things, therefore only stupid teams pay top dollar for running backs.

Bell wants to "correct the market".
The market IS correct, which is why RB pay has dropped, relative to other positions. You dont need elite backs to win championships. Teams know this.
THAT was the "correction".

If Bell gets paid THAT is out of whack.

Steel Maniac
05-17-2018, 07:50 PM
You are correct. There are PLENTY of things that are keys to championship caliber play.
My point is Dizz, elite running backs arent one of those things, therefore only stupid teams pay top dollar for running backs.

Bell wants to "correct the market".
The market IS correct, which is why RB pay has dropped, relative to other positions. You dont need elite backs to win championships. Teams know this.
THAT was the "correction".

If Bell gets paid THAT is out of whack.

Exactly.... you dont have to pay stupid money for a position that was devalued 8-10 years ago because paying insane money to that position doesn’t corrallate to wining Super Bowls.

Steel Maniac
05-17-2018, 07:54 PM
The runningback market is correct the way it is right now. And based on the number of runningbacks that just came out and next year’s crop, I now think if Bell were on the open market , he would not get more then Freeman in Atlanta. There is no reason for any team, not even the dumb ones to pay Bell what we are paying him. Colbert tries to be good to his guys; and that’s admirable but Bell right now is very lucky to have a chance for a 14 mil a year payday. Because next year, I don’t think he sees that ..anywhere.

RuthlessBurgher
05-17-2018, 08:49 PM
The runningback market is correct the way it is right now. And based on the number of runningbacks that just came out and next year’s crop, I now think if Bell were on the open market , he would not get more then Freeman in Atlanta. There is no reason for any team, not even the dumb ones to pay Bell what we are paying him. Colbert tries to be good to his guys; and that’s admirable but Bell right now is very lucky to have a chance for a 14 mil a year payday. Because next year, I don’t think he sees that ..anywhere.

There are multiple RB's who will surpass Freeman's contract when their rookie deals are up. Le'Veon Bell, David Johnson, Todd Gurley, Ezekiel Elliott, Alvin Kamara, Kareem Hunt, Leonard Fournette...

Northern_Blitz
05-18-2018, 05:48 AM
Samuels has a very intriguing skill set.
He could well be every bit the receiver as Bell, possibly a better short yardage back too. Nice dual threat in the red zone that would be.
Platooning him with a less versatile pure runner might be a very interesting and cost effective way to replace Bell who may already began his decline as a runner (or teams are more ready for his unique "patient" run style).

The prospect of Samuels and Bell together in the red zone this season is very exciting.

I think it depends pretty highly on whether Samuels can block. The Terrible Podcast talked about him recently and while there's a lot of tape showing him do crazy things lining up everywhere, apparently he doesn't have much tape blocking (because he's lining up everywhere).

The Steelers pretty much refused to play Connor because he couldn't protect Ben.

If Samuels can't either, it's not impossible that he doesn't even make the roster (even though it would be cool to have both him and Bell in the huddle and end up in a 5 wide set).

Northern_Blitz
05-18-2018, 06:00 AM
The runningback market is correct the way it is right now. And based on the number of runningbacks that just came out and next year’s crop, I now think if Bell were on the open market , he would not get more then Freeman in Atlanta. There is no reason for any team, not even the dumb ones to pay Bell what we are paying him. Colbert tries to be good to his guys; and that’s admirable but Bell right now is very lucky to have a chance for a 14 mil a year payday. Because next year, I don’t think he sees that ..anywhere.

I think that there is no way that Bell's market value is the same as Freeman's (~$8.25/year). At the very least we know that the Steelers don't think so.

If the Steelers believed what you believe then they would rescind the tag right now. Then, they could "overpay" him at $9M / year for 5 years (four if they could manage to get him on less term). That way, they overpay him to make sure that he resigns here and not somewhere else out of spite. Doing this would save us $6M this year. It would also give us one of the best backs in the league for the rest of Ben's career. The savings on Bell's money would also mean that we could easily sign another average to above average back to play behind him.

I tend to believe that the Steelers FO doesn't make objectively terrible decisions. If they believed that Bell's free market value was $8.25/year, then I don't think there's any way we pay him $14M this year to prevent him from testing the market. They put the tag on him because they believe that (1) he'd cost more on the market and / or (2) the term would be too long and he'd regress enough by the end that the long term deal would be a waste.

feltdizz
05-18-2018, 09:49 AM
True, which is why your comment on a backup QB to the SB is moot.



My point exactly!!! :)



Anyone at runningback? Just the Pats? What other team in the recent past needed anywhere near a Bell caliber back to with a SB?.......again, my point! :)

1. You wanna bet it is not some "loser" team that makes a play on him? You KNOW I am right Dizz. :)
2. Why only a team with "cap space"? WE never have much cap space which is PRECISELY WHY we would be stupid to sign him.



"I" never said it would be a "nightmare" for Bell. He likely WILL get paid which clearly is his priority and his right. My contention is that it would be stupid if WE were the team to pay him.
I agree Wallace has as many rings as we have. Just goes to show how insignificant his position is relative to other positions.


no, no, noooooo

again, what you are doing is playing Bell against the field. It's real easy to say "but this team won without a guy like him" when you have 29 teams to choose from.

Look at the Rams, Cowboys, Jags and Cardinals.

All these teams are much better with their #1 RB in the line up and all of them are much easier to defend without their best player on offense.

and even if Bell went to a "loser" team.. they won't lose as much with him.

and WTF is a loser team (besides the Browns)? Please list all these loser teams. Parody is rampant in the NFL and a "loser team" can make the playoffs in a year or 2. Who else is a loser team?

Colts? Give them Bell and a healthy Luck and watch how quickly they turn it around.
Bucs? they have weapons but haven't put it together yet. Still competitive in losses
Lions? Stafford and Bell in a dome.. watch them go on a run
Texans? sheeit, last thing the AFC needs is Deshaun and Bell in the backfield with that WR corps and a healthy defense.
Jets? OK.. maybe this one is legit but we need to see if this QB is legit this year. If so, they won't be losers for long if they added Bell.

feltdizz
05-18-2018, 09:58 AM
I think that there is no way that Bell's market value is the same as Freeman's (~$8.25/year). At the very least we know that the Steelers don't think so.

If the Steelers believed what you believe then they would rescind the tag right now. Then, they could "overpay" him at $9M / year for 5 years (four if they could manage to get him on less term). That way, they overpay him to make sure that he resigns here and not somewhere else out of spite. Doing this would save us $6M this year. It would also give us one of the best backs in the league for the rest of Ben's career. The savings on Bell's money would also mean that we could easily sign another average to above average back to play behind him.

I tend to believe that the Steelers FO doesn't make objectively terrible decisions. If they believed that Bell's free market value was $8.25/year, then I don't think there's any way we pay him $14M this year to prevent him from testing the market. They put the tag on him because they believe that (1) he'd cost more on the market and / or (2) the term would be too long and he'd regress enough by the end that the long term deal would be a waste.

San Fran just paid 7 mill per year for a RB who has never had more than 600 yards on the ground.

Folks keep talking about splitting the RB position but guys like Freman are being paid 8.25 mill to get half Bells production and whiff on blocks that ended up costing them a SB.

Steel Maniac
05-18-2018, 11:01 AM
I think that there is no way that Bell's market value is the same as Freeman's (~$8.25/year). At the very least we know that the Steelers don't think so.

If the Steelers believed what you believe then they would rescind the tag right now. Then, they could "overpay" him at $9M / year for 5 years (four if they could manage to get him on less term). That way, they overpay him to make sure that he resigns here and not somewhere else out of spite. Doing this would save us $6M this year. It would also give us one of the best backs in the league for the rest of Ben's career. The savings on Bell's money would also mean that we could easily sign another average to above average back to play behind him.

I tend to believe that the Steelers FO doesn't make objectively terrible decisions. If they believed that Bell's free market value was $8.25/year, then I don't think there's any way we pay him $14M this year to prevent him from testing the market. They put the tag on him because they believe that (1) he'd cost more on the market and / or (2) the term would be too long and he'd regress enough by the end that the long term deal would be a waste.

It's all about supply and demand. That's the way the world works. With the way rookie runningbacks are performing, I see no reason that anyone is going to shell out too much more then what Freeman is making.

Ruth, ... you said a bunch of runningbacks are about to be paid. Paid what? Let's see how much more they get a year then Freeman; I'm guessing not by that much. I don't believe Bell gets 14 mil a year or more if he were on the open market.

And at this point, it would be crazy for us to resend the franchise tag because we have no options right now; we don't know how Samuels or Connor is going to produce (if they produce) this coming year. So holding on to Bell is the smart thing to do...for now. It's all fluid.

feltdizz
05-18-2018, 11:23 AM
If we paid Bell 14 mill these last 2 years...

guess what?

Thats the value for a RB of his caliber. The numbers are going up.

When a RB gets 7 mill per year and hasn’t ran for over 600 yards in one season THAT is a market correction.

RuthlessBurgher
05-18-2018, 11:50 AM
It's all about supply and demand. That's the way the world works. With the way rookie runningbacks are performing, I see no reason that anyone is going to shell out too much more then what Freeman is making.

Ruth, ... you said a bunch of runningbacks are about to be paid. Paid what? Let's see how much more they get a year then Freeman; I'm guessing not by that much. I don't believe Bell gets 14 mil a year or more if he were on the open market.

And at this point, it would be crazy for us to resend the franchise tag because we have no options right now; we don't know how Samuels or Connor is going to produce (if they produce) this coming year. So holding on to Bell is the smart thing to do...for now. It's all fluid.

Freeman isn't even a bellcow back...he splits time with Tevin Coleman in the Atlanta backfield, and the Falcons still determined that he was worth a contract averaging $8.5M per year.

An $8.5M contract isn't even 5% of the $177.2M salary cap for teams this season. Top quarterbacks can take up nearly 17% of the total cap, top edge rushers can take up nearly 11% of the total cap, top wideouts can take up nearly 10% of the total cap, top offensive tackles can take up nearly 9% of the total cap, and top corners can take up over 8% of the total cap. Elite players at each of these positions are worth this money because they never leave the field. Why should bellcow running backs who never leave the field have to settle for less than 5% of the total cap? It doesn't make sense anymore.

Elite level bellcow backs like Le'Veon Bell, Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Ezekiel Elliott, account for a huge percentage of their teams' total offenses because they can run, they can catch, they can block, and therefore can stay on the field in all situations. These guys should make more than $8.5M, which is what teams tend to pay interior offensive linemen such as Larry Warford, Corey Linsley, and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif these days.

Steel Maniac
05-18-2018, 12:16 PM
Freeman isn't even a bellcow back...he splits time with Tevin Coleman in the Atlanta backfield, and the Falcons still determined that he was worth a contract averaging $8.5M per year.

An $8.5M contract isn't even 5% of the $177.2M salary cap for teams this season. Top quarterbacks can take up nearly 17% of the total cap, top edge rushers can take up nearly 11% of the total cap, top wideouts can take up nearly 10% of the total cap, top offensive tackles can take up nearly 9% of the total cap, and top corners can take up over 8% of the total cap. Elite players at each of these positions are worth this money because they never leave the field. Why should bellcow running backs who never leave the field have to settle for less than 5% of the total cap? It doesn't make sense anymore.

Elite level bellcow backs like Le'Veon Bell, Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Ezekiel Elliott, account for a huge percentage of their teams' total offenses because they can run, they can catch, they can block, and therefore can stay on the field in all situations. These guys should make more than $8.5M, which is what teams tend to pay interior offensive linemen such as Larry Warford, Corey Linsley, and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif these days.

Let's start with the QB mention...

Since 1995 (Steve Young..49ers) No QB that has taken more then 13 percent of the salary cap has won a Super Bowl. So..effectively..Matt Ryan has put the Falcons out of the Super Bowl chase and as soon as Rodgers does the same to Green Bay, that will be two less teams to worry about.

Now, as far as the runningback situation, I like what you said about "Bell cow" runningbacks. But again, why should we do something like that when no Super Bowl teams are shelling out that type of money for runningbacks?? We put Deangelo behind this line and the 3-4 weeks he was in, he was the leading rusher in the league. And we did fine as an offense too.

I like Bell; But I love my Steelers more. And we'll wait til next year to get our new runningback. Their a dime a dozen. We have a good O-line and any good runningback will shine behind it.

Steel Maniac
05-18-2018, 12:17 PM
Bell can go ahead and try and adjust the market for runningbacks; He just won't do it here. And all the smart teams are not going to let what he does influence what they want to pay their runningbacks.

Northern_Blitz
05-18-2018, 01:45 PM
Bell can go ahead and try and adjust the market for runningbacks; He just won't do it here. And all the smart teams are not going to let what he does influence what they want to pay their runningbacks.

I think the argument is that Freeman has changed the market for RBs.

He's a good back, but last season Bell had 426 more yards on the ground and 338 more through the air. The difference between their total yards (764 yards) is pretty close to Freeman's rushing yards (865 yards).

There is no reasonable argument to say that Freeman is of equal value to Bell. And as you get better as a player, the salary should probably increase exponentially because there is less supply of elite players.

Freeman isn't a substitute for Bell. He's an example of a guy we could use in a committee to to "replace" Bell's production.

feltdizz
05-18-2018, 02:10 PM
Freeman isn't even a bellcow back...he splits time with Tevin Coleman in the Atlanta backfield, and the Falcons still determined that he was worth a contract averaging $8.5M per year.

An $8.5M contract isn't even 5% of the $177.2M salary cap for teams this season. Top quarterbacks can take up nearly 17% of the total cap, top edge rushers can take up nearly 11% of the total cap, top wideouts can take up nearly 10% of the total cap, top offensive tackles can take up nearly 9% of the total cap, and top corners can take up over 8% of the total cap. Elite players at each of these positions are worth this money because they never leave the field. Why should bellcow running backs who never leave the field have to settle for less than 5% of the total cap? It doesn't make sense anymore.

Elite level bellcow backs like Le'Veon Bell, Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Ezekiel Elliott, account for a huge percentage of their teams' total offenses because they can run, they can catch, they can block, and therefore can stay on the field in all situations. These guys should make more than $8.5M, which is what teams tend to pay interior offensive linemen such as Larry Warford, Corey Linsley, and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif these days.

exactly.

Freeman splits carries, has a little more than half Bells production and gets 8.5 mill per year.

He also isn't the best at recognizing blitzes and picking up blockers.

It's crazy to demand 40% of the production on offense yet only want to give the man 5% of the cap.

and how does Matt Ryan put ATL out of the SB hunt? It's laughable to use a team as an example of how to get to a SB and a year later say its no longer possible due to a new contract. So many other factors are at play in order to make it to a SB.

If we make the SB this year will these same folks say it's now OK to pay Bell 14 mill a year? You don't have to make a SB to justify your paycheck. If that's the case then Ben and AB have been stealing for the last 6 years.

Steel Maniac
05-18-2018, 09:20 PM
I think the argument is that Freeman has changed the market for RBs.

He's a good back, but last season Bell had 426 more yards on the ground and 338 more through the air. The difference between their total yards (764 yards) is pretty close to Freeman's rushing yards (865 yards).

There is no reasonable argument to say that Freeman is of equal value to Bell. And as you get better as a player, the salary should probably increase exponentially because there is less supply of elite players.

Freeman isn't a substitute for Bell. He's an example of a guy we could use in a committee to to "replace" Bell's production.

You know what? I like that breakdown North.

Northern_Blitz
05-19-2018, 05:43 AM
You know what? I like that breakdown North.

Thanks. I think it makes sense but I'm not unbiased

Ernie
05-19-2018, 08:42 AM
I'm going to make a prediction...
Bell is going to be less of a "Bell Cow" back the next few years, and there are several reasons for that. If the Steelers sign Bell to a long term deal, they are going to do what they can to stretch out his "Shelf life" so to speak. With the drafting of Samuels and the emergence of Conner, those are two talented guys who are going to demand touches...so we are going to see more "By committee" than most folks may realize it this point in time... Getting Samuels involved in the offense early (including reps at RB) is going to open up our playbook while giving Defenses that much more to prepare for. Getting back to Conner, there's something to be said about his running style (being vastly different than Bells). He was very effective for us in very limited action...and I think this kid is poised to have a great year for us.

I look for the new OC to be a better "Steward" of talent for this offense, and kind ways to get these guys on the field. The ensuing Bell holdout gives him the opportunity to do it early.

feltdizz
05-19-2018, 11:20 AM
I'm going to make a prediction...
Bell is going to be less of a "Bell Cow" back the next few years, and there are several reasons for that. If the Steelers sign Bell to a long term deal, they are going to do what they can to stretch out his "Shelf life" so to speak. With the drafting of Samuels and the emergence of Conner, those are two talented guys who are going to demand touches...so we are going to see more "By committee" than most folks may realize it this point in time... Getting Samuels involved in the offense early (including reps at RB) is going to open up our playbook while giving Defenses that much more to prepare for. Getting back to Conner, there's something to be said about his running style (being vastly different than Bells). He was very effective for us in very limited action...and I think this kid is poised to have a great year for us.

I look for the new OC to be a better "Steward" of talent for this offense, and kind ways to get these guys on the field. The ensuing Bell holdout gives him the opportunity to do it early.

I’m not sure about that. I think Bell is still going to get most of the touches if we sign him long term. He is too deadly of a weapon and too consistent at protecting the QB to split carries.

I actually think we did a decent job getting Conner touches his first year. I put most of the blame on the defense for giving up big plays vs back up QB’s that kept games closer than they needed to be.

I would’ve preferred to see Conner salt away a few games but we didn’t have that luxury last year.

Steel Maniac
05-19-2018, 01:37 PM
I'm going to make a prediction...
Bell is going to be less of a "Bell Cow" back the next few years, and there are several reasons for that. If the Steelers sign Bell to a long term deal, they are going to do what they can to stretch out his "Shelf life" so to speak. With the drafting of Samuels and the emergence of Conner, those are two talented guys who are going to demand touches...so we are going to see more "By committee" than most folks may realize it this point in time... Getting Samuels involved in the offense early (including reps at RB) is going to open up our playbook while giving Defenses that much more to prepare for. Getting back to Conner, there's something to be said about his running style (being vastly different than Bells). He was very effective for us in very limited action...and I think this kid is poised to have a great year for us.

I look for the new OC to be a better "Steward" of talent for this offense, and kind ways to get these guys on the field. The ensuing Bell holdout gives him the opportunity to do it early.

Ernie, I agree with you. I think IF Bell were to be signed long term, that would be exactly what has to happen to that backfield. But I also think that at some point, Bell's true self of always being injured would rear it's ugly head and then Conner and Samuels would get more time then initially thought and therefore, an even bigger chance to be a bigger part of the offense.

Those flashes we saw from Conner (I hope) will be more consistent and with an off-season of working out with the big boys and rehabbing, he should come back strong and better then ever. We are all (except for Bell and his supporters) looking forward to seeing what Samuels brings to the table. I'm thinking we could have a Kamara/Ingram backfield in the near future. Here's hoping.

With Bell staying away until a week before the season opener, those two guys will get ample opportunity to showcase and get in sync with the new OC, O-line and with Ben. Can't wait.

Ernie
05-19-2018, 03:09 PM
I’m not sure about that. I think Bell is still going to get most of the touches if we sign him long term. He is too deadly of a weapon and too consistent at protecting the QB to split carries.

I actually think we did a decent job getting Conner touches his first year. I put most of the blame on the defense for giving up big plays vs back up QB’s that kept games closer than they needed to be.

I would’ve preferred to see Conner salt away a few games but we didn’t have that luxury last year.

No one's saying Bell won't get most of the touches. I'm saying Conner and Samuels will be more involved.

pittpete
05-19-2018, 04:02 PM
Also need to remember that Bell is one failed drug test away from another suspension.
Not positive, but if he failed a drug test isnt he suspended for a year?
Also, does anyone know if Bell is tested during the offseason when he's technically not employed by the Steelers or the NFL?

Steel Maniac
05-19-2018, 04:12 PM
No one's saying Bell won't get most of the touches. I'm saying Conner and Samuels will be more involved.

Conner and Samuels will get all the work during camp and preseason. That's where they will give management an idea of what they can and can't do this coming season.

Slapstick
05-19-2018, 05:30 PM
Also need to remember that Bell is one failed drug test away from another suspension.
Not positive, but if he failed a drug test isnt he suspended for a year?
Also, does anyone know if Bell is tested during the offseason when he's technically not employed by the Steelers or the NFL?

I believe that, as part of his appeal with the previous suspension, that Bell would only be suspended for four games if he were to fail another drug test.

feltdizz
05-19-2018, 07:04 PM
First off we have no idea how far along Conner is in rehab.

Second, regardless of what these 2 do in practice the coaches know what Bell can do during the season which is why he is tagged again.

Ernie
05-20-2018, 07:43 AM
First off we have no idea how far along Conner is in rehab.

Second, regardless of what these 2 do in practice the coaches know what Bell can do during the season which is why he is tagged again.

I remember reading an article in the Steelers Depot on Conner's rehab status. He stated that he was sprinting on the treadmill (this was back in February) and was overly optimistic in general. Based on what I've read, there's no reason to think he's not going to be 100% going into the Summer.

If Conner and Samuels can be effective in taking 20-25% of Bell's 2017 workload, what exactly would be the downfall to that?

feltdizz
05-20-2018, 10:27 AM
I remember reading an article in the Steelers Depot on Conner's rehab status. He stated that he was sprinting on the treadmill (this was back in February) and was overly optimistic in general. Based on what I've read, there's no reason to think he's not going to be 100% going into the Summer.

If Conner and Samuels can be effective in taking 20-25% of Bell's 2017 workload, what exactly would be the downfall to that?

No downfall at all.

Sounds encouraging for Conner but I will wait until I see him make a few cuts with my eyes before feeling good about him contributing early.

I have a feeling he won’t be ready for the start of the season.

Buzz
05-20-2018, 04:19 PM
I remember reading an article in the Steelers Depot on Conner's rehab status. He stated that he was sprinting on the treadmill (this was back in February) and was overly optimistic in general. Based on what I've read, there's no reason to think he's not going to be 100% going into the Summer.

If Conner and Samuels can be effective in taking 20-25% of Bell's 2017 workload, what exactly would be the downfall to that?

Don't see Tomlin agreeing to that. His philosophy has been to run the wheels off his top RB.

Slapstick
05-20-2018, 04:23 PM
As far as personnel decisions and who gets playing time, Tomlin is usually fairly hands off...

Steel Maniac
05-20-2018, 04:41 PM
I remember reading an article in the Steelers Depot on Conner's rehab status. He stated that he was sprinting on the treadmill (this was back in February) and was overly optimistic in general. Based on what I've read, there's no reason to think he's not going to be 100% going into the Summer.

If Conner and Samuels can be effective in taking 20-25% of Bell's 2017 workload, what exactly would be the downfall to that?

Ernie, look who your talking to about Bell. Felt has no logic when it comes to Bell. If Bell went and shot up a school, Feltz would come and defend him. He's that far gone. There is no logical conversation with him about Bell. That's why I don't talk to him about Bell. There is no objectivity in him about Bell.

Steel Maniac
05-20-2018, 04:42 PM
Don't see Tomlin agreeing to that. His philosophy has been to run the wheels off his top RB.

Tomlin has had no options to do other then run the wheels off. Considering the quality that has been behind the starter. We may have options now instead of running the wheels off. We'll see. Time will tell.

Ernie
05-20-2018, 04:43 PM
As far as personnel decisions and who gets playing time, Tomlin is usually fairly hands off...

I hope you are right about this... that and the new guy is hopefully a better OC than Todd Haley.

Buzz
05-20-2018, 04:59 PM
As far as personnel decisions and who gets playing time, Tomlin is usually fairly hands off...

Going back to the FWP days, he's said he likes to run the wheels off his lead RB, and that's pretty much what we've seen ever since. Even when we had DeAngelo Williams, it was pretty much all Bell unless Bell was hurt or suspended.

Steel Maniac
05-20-2018, 06:22 PM
Going back to the FWP days, he's said he likes to run the wheels off his lead RB, and that's pretty much what we've seen ever since. Even when we had DeAngelo Williams, it was pretty much all Bell unless Bell was hurt or suspended.

True...Deangelo was better then I thought he'd be when he got the opportunity to seriously carry the ball. But he had a lot of milage and I see why Tomlin still kept going to Bell when Bell was healthy.

Slapstick
05-20-2018, 07:01 PM
This offseason, Tomlin stated that he was “open to dramatic change”...if Bell is with the team this year and making $14+ million dollars, I have no doubt that he will touch the ball 30+ times per game....if or when he is no longer with the team, that could be subject to change...

Northern_Blitz
05-20-2018, 07:07 PM
Tomlin has had no options to do other then run the wheels off. Considering the quality that has been behind the starter. We may have options now instead of running the wheels off. We'll see. Time will tell.

I get this when applied to Bell this season. But he did the same thing to Fast Willie who was a much mess dynamic back.

He also did it when we had Blount. He's not Bell but he has been a key contributor to 3 SBs.

I think that it might just be what Tomlin thinks is the best strategy.

feltdizz
05-21-2018, 08:57 AM
Ernie, look who your talking to about Bell. Felt has no logic when it comes to Bell. If Bell went and shot up a school, Feltz would come and defend him. He's that far gone. There is no logical conversation with him about Bell. That's why I don't talk to him about Bell. There is no objectivity in him about Bell.

another fine example of "ignoring" me..lol

marsha, marsha, marsha

feltdizz
05-21-2018, 09:01 AM
I get this when applied to Bell this season. But he did the same thing to Fast Willie who was a much mess dynamic back.

He also did it when we had Blount. He's not Bell but he has been a key contributor to 3 SBs.

I think that it might just be what Tomlin thinks is the best strategy.

exactly, it doesn't matter who is behind Bell. We aren't going to split carries when we have a 3 down back who can do it all. At most you will get a series or 2 but that's it.

Fitch may have a different philosophy but I think we will continue to play Bell 95% of the time because that's what you do when you have a Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson type RB. You feed them... you don't split carries.

You damn sure don't pay 14 mill for Bell to split carries.

I'm all for a slight reduction or letting other RB's grind it out when we have games in hand but that's about it.

Northern_Blitz
05-21-2018, 10:31 AM
exactly, it doesn't matter who is behind Bell. We aren't going to split carries when we have a 3 down back who can do it all. At most you will get a series or 2 but that's it.

Fitch may have a different philosophy but I think we will continue to play Bell 95% of the time because that's what you do when you have a Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson type RB. You feed them... you don't split carries.

You damn sure don't pay 14 mill for Bell to split carries.

I'm all for a slight reduction or letting other RB's grind it out when we have games in hand but that's about it.

I think that this is correct. I think that one of the downsides of Connor being hurt is that he has less time to work on pass protection. I think he showed that he can run the ball well. But, I think they felt that they couldn't put him on the field in some situations because they were worried about Ben's health.

feltdizz
05-21-2018, 10:36 AM
I think that this is correct. I think that one of the downsides of Connor being hurt is that he has less time to work on pass protection. I think he showed that he can run the ball well. But, I think they felt that they couldn't put him on the field in some situations because they were worried about Ben's health.

and this is why Bell is a 3 down back who rarely leaves the field. He stated that he has never given up a sack in his career (haven't researched) but if true, that in itself is extremely valuable with a QB like Ben.

The stress Bell puts on a defense is also valuable.

Hopefully Conner can improve his blocking because it limits our playbook if he can't be trusted to protect Ben when he gets in the game.

Steel Maniac
05-21-2018, 10:55 AM
I think that this is correct. I think that one of the downsides of Connor being hurt is that he has less time to work on pass protection. I think he showed that he can run the ball well. But, I think they felt that they couldn't put him on the field in some situations because they were worried about Ben's health.

You guys are so definitive on a guy after he's hurt; Yet, Bell too was also hurt after his first season. Well see.

feltdizz
05-21-2018, 11:37 AM
You guys are so definitive on a guy after he's hurt; Yet, Bell too was also hurt after his first season. Well see.

and you aren't?

You have been predicting Bell's demise since last summer.

Most folks on here are willing to wait and see how Conner looks before talking about replacing Bell with Conner and Samuel.

Northern_Blitz
05-21-2018, 11:56 AM
You guys are so definitive on a guy after he's hurt; Yet, Bell too was also hurt after his first season. Well see.

I think it's pretty clear that Connor isn't as good as Bell. That's not a slight. Bell is one of the top 5 backs in the league and he's one of the most well rounded backs ever.

I think that they wanted to play Connor more last year. I think it was Alex Kozora on a recent Terrible Podcast that talked about how they really limited using him in passing situations after he gave up a sack (against Cincy?) midway through the season. I think he's a good runner. But, if he winds up getting Ben hurt it doesn't matter that he has a good YPC.

I think Connor will come back healthy. But because he's been hurt, his focus has been on rehabbing. If he didn't get hurt, he'd be able to focus more on getting better at pass protection (which I think limited his usage last year).

On the same podcast, Steelers Depot said they went through all of Summers carries in college. They were raving about his versatility and how he could bring some excitement to the O. But, I think they said that they had to go back years to find snaps where he was a blocker in the back field. That scares me because we already limited Connor's snaps because he wasn't the blocker that Bell is. On the podcast they actually argued that we might keep UDFA Franklin over Summers if they think he's a better RB.

I hope that Connor or Summers (or Franklin) prove to be as good as Bell. But, I don't think that there's a realistic chance of that happening.

That doesn't mean that I think we should pay Bell whatever he wants. I think we should let him walk after this year. I was also for letting him walk this year so that we could try to get an impact player on D to try to make up for the loss of Shazier. But that doesn't diminish what Bell is. He's a great back even if I don't think we should pay him what he's worth.

Steel Maniac
05-21-2018, 12:36 PM
He may not be as good as Bell. But what I'm referring to is if he'll be able to pass block better this year then in his rookie year. People are speaking in definitive terms like he's never going to get better at that and all that we saw last year is all he can do or that is the best he can be. But what I want to see is if he and Samuels can become a good enough duo to carry the load after Bell is let go.

Bell is a great back. But unless we win this year, he won't be apart of us winning a Super Bowl.

feltdizz
05-21-2018, 12:45 PM
Most folks implied that until Conner gets better at blocking he isn't going to get more PT.

Conner missed a block that resulted in the first pick 6 vs the Jags in the first game in October.

Northern_Blitz
05-21-2018, 05:23 PM
He may not be as good as Bell. But what I'm referring to is if he'll be able to pass block better this year then in his rookie year. People are speaking in definitive terms like he's never going to get better at that and all that we saw last year is all he can do or that is the best he can be. But what I want to see is if he and Samuels can become a good enough duo to carry the load after Bell is let go.

Bell is a great back. But unless we win this year, he won't be apart of us winning a Super Bowl.

I think that he might get better by the end of the year.

My point was that it was unfortunate that he got hurt because it probably diverts his focus from "improving at pass blocking" to "being able to run again". It seems to me that it would stunt his improvement in pass blocking.

Ernie
05-21-2018, 05:37 PM
Here's a question to ponder... who's the last team to win a SB that had a RB as talented as Bell? Do we have to go back to the 90s to find that guy? For some reason Emmett Smith comes to mind. Maybe there's a more recent back that I am missing...

Slapstick
05-21-2018, 06:23 PM
Marshawn Lynch?

Ray Rice?

Slapstick
05-21-2018, 06:24 PM
Terrell Davis was back in the 90s...

Northern_Blitz
05-21-2018, 07:37 PM
Here's a question to ponder... who's the last team to win a SB that had a RB as talented as Bell? Do we have to go back to the 90s to find that guy? For some reason Emmett Smith comes to mind. Maybe there's a more recent back that I am missing...

This is the central question.

My opinion is that it's probably better to spend cap space on other positions.

But some make the leap from that to Bell's not with what he wants. He's not greedy for wanting his fair market value. Even the money I don't mind. I think it's the term that will sink the team he signs with.

Steel Maniac
05-21-2018, 07:47 PM
Marshall Faulk

Captain Lemming
05-22-2018, 12:29 AM
Marshawn Lynch?

Ray Rice?

No and No.....

Captain Lemming
05-22-2018, 12:30 AM
Terrell Davis was back in the 90s...

I could go with that.....ever so briefly. But even more recent........we have.........

Captain Lemming
05-22-2018, 12:34 AM
Marshall Faulk

THIS is the last back in the league who compares to Bell not just in ability, but the last back who got premium dough (for the day) and won a ring.
Since then no back who got elite money as a RB contributed to a SB.

THAT is why teams simply stopped paying the position.

Captain Lemming
05-22-2018, 12:35 AM
This is the central question.

My opinion is that it's probably better to spend cap space on other positions.

But some make the leap from that to Bell's not with what he wants. He's not greedy for wanting his fair market value. Even the money I don't mind. I think it's the term that will sink the team he signs with.

100 percent MONEY comment.

Eich
05-22-2018, 07:51 AM
But some make the leap from that to Bell's not with what he wants. He's not greedy for wanting his fair market value. Even the money I don't mind. I think it's the term that will sink the team he signs with.

IMO, we already offered him Fair Market Value and he turned it down.

Bell doesn’t want FMV. He wants to raise the ceiling on market value.

squidkid
05-22-2018, 08:20 AM
IMO, we already offered him Fair Market Value and he turned it down.

Bell doesn’t want FMV. He wants to raise the ceiling on market value.


he was offered twice fair market value and turned it down. plus he is injury prone and a dope head.

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 09:27 AM
IMO, we already offered him Fair Market Value and he turned it down.

Bell doesn’t want FMV. He wants to raise the ceiling on market value.

They offered Bell a huge amount of money to play for the Steelers. That isn't the same thing as offering him his market value.

The purpose of the franchise tag is to pay elite players less than they would make on the free market.

I've said this before, but if the team thought it was fair market value they wouldn't have tagged him. And if they thought it was 2x his fair market value they should all be fired.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 09:37 AM
They offered Bell a huge amount of money to play for the Steelers. That isn't the same thing as offering him his market value.

The purpose of the franchise tag is to pay elite players less than they would make on the free market.

I've said this before, but if the team thought it was fair market value they wouldn't have tagged him. And if they thought it was 2x his fair market value they should all be fired.

bingo.. folks see money and immediately want Bell to sign or he is a greedy bum.

We keep franchising him for a reason. It will be interesting to see if they can bang out a contract before camp.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 11:11 AM
THIS is the last back in the league who compares to Bell not just in ability, but the last back who got premium dough (for the day) and won a ring.
Since then no back who got elite money as a RB contributed to a SB.

THAT is why teams simply stopped paying the position.

WRONG AGAIN

Teams didn't stop paying big money but there aren't a lot of Bell/Faulk type RB's. Those guys are rare.

McShady got paid but then he got shipped to Buffalo by the genius HC/GM who is no longer in the league.

LaDamian Tomlinson got paid big money

Adrian Peterson got big money

Those franchises had success they just didn't make SB's because they had unfortunate things happen. Anyone who plays the Pats in the playoffs has to beat Brady, Billicheat and the refs.

Vikes made the NFC championship game, Peterson had 122 yards, 5 ypc and 3 TD's. Favre threw an INT in overtime.. it happens.

They didn't lose that game because they had Peterson on the roster.

It's hard to make a SB and once again, it's foolish to play the field and scream "gotcha" because those 2 RB's ever won a SB.

Marino never won a SB, does that mean he wasn't worthy? Elway didn't win a SB until he got a running game. does that mean HE wasn't worthy?


This "name a RB like Faulk who won a SB" is a foolish/basic argument.

Name 5 RB's like Faulk since he retired?

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 11:29 AM
bingo.. folks see money and immediately want Bell to sign or he is a greedy bum.

We keep franchising him for a reason. It will be interesting to see if they can bang out a contract before camp.

After working on a long term deal for two years, I don't think either side is interested in moving far enough to satisfy the other.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 11:51 AM
After working on a long term deal for two years, I don't think either side is interested in moving far enough to satisfy the other.

this could be true..lol

but a part of me thinks Bell will cave if an offer is there before camp.

If it was me I would try to wait it out as long as possible in hopes of getting the most money and then signing for 14 or whatever the offer is (if there is one)

Eich
05-22-2018, 12:15 PM
We keep franchising him for a reason. It will be interesting to see if they can bang out a contract before camp.

We keep franchising him because he's well worth $14m/year short-term. It's the long-term stuff that makes a team nervous to sign someone to a deal that sets a new standard for the position.

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 12:48 PM
this could be true..lol

but a part of me thinks Bell will cave if an offer is there before camp.

If it was me I would try to wait it out as long as possible in hopes of getting the most money and then signing for 14 or whatever the offer is (if there is one)

You might be right. As far as we know the Steelers offer is still on the table and Bell could sign it today.

The tag is set up to entice the player into signing a very large (but under market) long term deal instead of making a bet that they don't get seriously injured in the next season. I think that virtually all regular people would take the money.

I think that the big difference between pro-athletes and "normal people" is that they have been letting the big bet ride all of their lives. Normal people don't pursue careers where almost no one makes insane money and everyone else busts out and makes "virtually nothing".

But, Bell has shown that he's willing to bet on himself and he might do it again.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 01:06 PM
We keep franchising him because he's well worth $14m/year short-term. It's the long-term stuff that makes a team nervous to sign someone to a deal that sets a new standard for the position.

Makes a team nervous or makes fans nervous?

Cause THIS team offered him a deal for $13.3 per year last year and we weren't nervous about it either.

Slapstick
05-22-2018, 01:30 PM
Makes a team nervous or makes fans nervous?

Cause THIS team offered him a deal for $13.3 per year last year and we weren't nervous about it either.

And Bell didn’t like the deal...he wanted more guarantees and that made the Steelers...



...nervous.

Buzz
05-22-2018, 01:50 PM
$13.3 m per year was not enough. He's yapped this year about wanting $17 m per year. He wouldn't listen to his agent last year. I can't see him doing it this year. I have every expectation that he will be wearing a different uniform in 2019.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 01:57 PM
And Bell didn’t like the deal...he wanted more guarantees and that made the Steelers...


...nervous.

nah, we just didn't budge.


that's why it's called negotiating.

Steel Maniac
05-22-2018, 02:31 PM
$13.3 m per year was not enough. He's yapped this year about wanting $17 m per year. He wouldn't listen to his agent last year. I can't see him doing it this year. I have every expectation that he will be wearing a different uniform in 2019.

Ditto...............

Slapstick
05-22-2018, 02:53 PM
nah, we just didn't budge.


that's why it's called negotiating.

They were clearly nervous about future guarantees...

Steel Maniac
05-22-2018, 02:59 PM
$13.3 m per year was not enough. He's yapped this year about wanting $17 m per year. He wouldn't listen to his agent last year. I can't see him doing it this year. I have every expectation that he will be wearing a different uniform in 2019.

Any concerns with Bell not being here for OTA’s when we have a new OC?

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 03:23 PM
They were clearly nervous about future guarantees...

we never make future guarantees past the first year unless it's a QB. We've always operated that way.

that's just how we operate. If we were nervous we wouldn't have made an offer for 13.3 mill.

I think nervous is the wrong word. We wanted it one way, Bell wanted it another so the offer didn't work out.

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 03:58 PM
Any concerns with Bell not being here for OTA’s when we have a new OC?

No.

Our "new OC" has been on the staff since 2007. I don't think we're going to see radical changes in the plays. Maybe he changes up situational play calling, but I think it's very unlikely that the structure of the O changes much this year. That's probably good because we have an excellent Offense.

Plus, he's an all-pro back and RB isn't a super complex. He'll stay in shape elsewhere. He knows what he need to do.

squidkid
05-22-2018, 04:20 PM
No.

Our "new OC" has been on the staff since 2007. I don't think we're going to see radical changes in the plays. Maybe he changes up situational play calling, but I think it's very unlikely that the structure of the O changes much this year. That's probably good because we have an excellent Offense.

Plus, he's an all-pro back and RB isn't a super complex. He'll stay in shape elsewhere. He knows what he need to do.


he didnt last year. took him 3-4 weeks to get going and it cost us a game and HFA

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 04:47 PM
he didnt last year. took him 3-4 weeks to get going and it cost us a game and HFA

I don't think that this is true.

The Steelers were 3 - 1 in their first 4 games last year. The loss was to the Bears in week 3. They lost 23-17.

In that game, Bell averaged over 4 YPC with 61 yards on 15 carries. He also contributed 37 yards on 6 receptions. He had 1 TD. I think that his production shows that he was ready to play at a high level. You could argue that he should have had more carries. But since they only had 1 other called rushing play (Watson 3 yards on 1 carry), this seems to be more of a game plan issue than a conditioning issue. This is in tune with the rumors that Haley was giving him fewer carries to teach him a lesson.

Personally, I think that Ben is more to blame for that loss than Bell (and he was there for all of camp). He was 22/39 for 235 with 1 TD. Not a bad game, but certainly not one of his best. I'd say that he did less with the opportunities he had than Bell did. That game definitely fit the pattern of Ben previous few seasons where he was significantly worse on the road than he was at home.

In the first 4 games Bell had:

Game----Carries-----Yards-----Receptions----Yards----TDs
1-------------10-----------32-------------3--------------15-------0
2-------------27-----------87-------------4---------------4--------0
3-------------15-----------61-------------6---------------37------1
4-------------35-----------144------------4-------------42-------2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total-------87------------324------------17-------------98------3

16 Game Pace-348---1,296----------68------------392-----12

Bell's first four games were on pace for almost 1,700 yards on the season with 12 TDs. That would be 6th best in the league. But one of the people ahead of him at that pace is him.

So when Bell "isn't ready to play" he's better than all but 4 other backs in the league. No wonder he wants $15M / season.

hawaiiansteel
05-22-2018, 05:22 PM
I don't think that this is true.

The Steelers were 3 - 1 in their first 4 games last year. The loss was to the Bears in week 3. They lost 23-17.

In that game, Bell averaged over 4 YPC with 61 yards on 15 carries. He also contributed 37 yards on 6 receptions. He had 1 TD. I think that his production shows that he was ready to play at a high level. You could argue that he should have had more carries. But since they only had 1 other called rushing play (Watson 3 yards on 1 carry), this seems to be more of a game plan issue than a conditioning issue. This is in tune with the rumors that Haley was giving him fewer carries to teach him a lesson.

Personally, I think that Ben is more to blame for that loss than Bell (and he was there for all of camp). He was 22/39 for 235 with 1 TD. Not a bad game, but certainly not one of his best. I'd say that he did less with the opportunities he had than Bell did. That game definitely fit the pattern of Ben previous few seasons where he was significantly worse on the road than he was at home.

In the first 4 games Bell had:

Game----Carries-----Yards-----Receptions----Yards----TDs
1-------------10-----------32-------------3--------------15-------0
2-------------27-----------87-------------4---------------4--------0
3-------------15-----------61-------------6---------------37------1
4-------------35-----------144------------4-------------42-------2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total-------87------------324------------17-------------98------3

16 Game Pace-348---1,296----------68------------392-----12

Bell's first four games were on pace for almost 1,700 yards on the season with 12 TDs. That would be 6th best in the league. But one of the people ahead of him at that pace is him.

So when Bell "isn't ready to play" he's better than all but 4 other backs in the league. No wonder he wants $15M / season.

the Steelers have what is considered to be a very good offensive line, yet for the season Le'Veon Bell ranked only 25th in the NFL among RBs in yards per rush attempt with a 4.0 average.

Devonta Freeman is currently the highest paid RB in the NFL with a contract averaging $8.25 million/year. I love Le'Veon Bell but I agree with the Steelers front office, I wouldn't pay him $15 million/year either, I would much rather draft a RB early in next year's draft and allocate the money saved elsewhere on the roster.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/player-stat/rushing-yards-per-attempt

https://overthecap.com/position/running-back/

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 07:46 PM
How good is our OL? Jags ate our OL up last year. Someone else posted a thread about our OL being average based on stats by a website everyone swears by.

I think our OL is
much better in pass protection but Ben and Haley were also good at quick passes to minimize hits.

Blitz also blew the Freeman argument out of the water. Bell had 900 more yards than Freeman last year. His production was almost double of Freeman.

hawaiiansteel
05-22-2018, 08:03 PM
Blitz also blew the Freeman argument out of the water. Bell had 900 more yards than Freeman last year. His production was almost double of Freeman.

Freeman averaged 4.4 ypc, Bell 4.0.

and the fact that the Steelers have used Bell as a workhorse makes me even more worried about Bell's longevity and the wisdom of giving him that type of a lucrative long-term contract.

imo the Steelers made Bell more than a fair 5 years $12 million/yr contract offer which included $30 million in the first two years:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2722379-leveon-bell-reportedly-rejected-5-year-contract-offer-from-steelers
T

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 08:26 PM
Freeman averaged 4.4 ypc, Bell 4.0.

and the fact that the Steelers have used Bell as a workhorse makes me even more worried about Bell's longevity and the wisdom of giving him that type of a lucrative long-term contract.

imo the Steelers made Bell more than a fair 5 years $12 million/yr contract offer which included $30 million in the first two years:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2722379-leveon-bell-reportedly-rejected-5-year-contract-offer-from-steelers
T

I don’t think that .4 is more important than Bells receptions and blocking.

Freeman also gave up the sack that changed the outcome of the SB 2 years ago.

I agree we gave Bell a favorable offer last year and I think we will give him another offer this year.

If he thinks he is worth more, I can’t be mad at the FO for trying. Also can’t be mad at LB if he gets what he thinks he is worth by another team.

hawaiiansteel
05-22-2018, 08:36 PM
I agree we gave Bell a favorable offer last year and I think we will give him another offer this year.

If he thinks he is worth more, I can’t be mad at the FO for trying. Also can’t be mad at LB if he gets what he thinks he is worth by another team.

oh I agree, it's a business and both parties have to do what they believe is in their best interests.

it's unfortunate but I believe this will be Bell's last season in Pittsburgh so we might as well enjoy him.

RuthlessBurgher
05-22-2018, 09:20 PM
oh I agree, it's a business and both parties have to do what they believe is in their best interests.

it's unfortunate but I believe this will be Bell's last season in Pittsburgh so we might as well enjoy him.

Hawaiian!!! What's up, brother!?!? Hope all is well with the volcanic eruption. If you are on the Big Island, try to avoid the lava flow. If you are on any other island, try to avoid breathing in too much Ash...

hawaiiansteel
05-22-2018, 09:41 PM
Hawaiian!!! What's up, brother!?!? Hope all is well with the volcanic eruption. If you are on the Big Island, try to avoid the lava flow. If you are on any other island, try to avoid breathing in too much Ash...

aloha Ruthless, it's nice to be back posting here again.

I'm on Oahu and although we are getting some volcanic fog it's relatively minor to what those poor people on the Big Island are suffering through. people's lives have been devastated through the loss of their homes with no insurance to cover them, I realize that many wonder what they were thinking of owning a home so close to an active volcano but it's still really sad for them to have lost everything.

Northern_Blitz
05-22-2018, 10:42 PM
the Steelers have what is considered to be a very good offensive line, yet for the season Le'Veon Bell ranked only 25th in the NFL among RBs in yards per rush attempt with a 4.0 average.

Devonta Freeman is currently the highest paid RB in the NFL with a contract averaging $8.25 million/year. I love Le'Veon Bell but I agree with the Steelers front office, I wouldn't pay him $15 million/year either, I would much rather draft a RB early in next year's draft and allocate the money saved elsewhere on the roster.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/player-stat/rushing-yards-per-attempt

https://overthecap.com/position/running-back/

Me too (re: letting Bell walk next season).

I'm just trying to shed some light on the "Bell was bad in the first 4 weeks" narrative.

I don't think that him missing camp this year will diminish his performance this year either. I think that his age is a bigger driver for that than missing camp.

feltdizz
05-22-2018, 11:35 PM
Me too (re: letting Bell walk next season).

I'm just trying to shed some light on the "Bell was bad in the first 4 weeks" narrative.

I don't think that him missing camp this year will diminish his performance this year either. I think that his age is a bigger driver for that than missing camp.

Bell is only 26.

Captain Lemming
05-23-2018, 12:12 AM
I don’t think that .4 is more important than Bells receptions and blocking.

It is better. Just not as important as Freeman and Gurley combined. :)


Freeman also gave up the sack that changed the outcome of the SB 2 years ago.

You me and Bell saw that sack the same way ON TV.

I'd be all for paying Bell if his value resulted in AN OPPORTUNITY to "allow a sack" in the SB. :)


Also can’t be mad at LB if he gets what he thinks he is worth by another team.


With you 100 percent here.

Of course I can only hope Bell is uncompromising and turns his nose up on the "lowball" offer in excess of any TWO other backs combined. :)

hawaiiansteel
05-23-2018, 12:15 AM
Bell is only 26.

he may be only 26 years old but Bell has 1541 touches the last 5 years as a Steeler and you know we are going to give him a similar workload this upcoming season. NFL teams will be very reluctant to give a RB with that much wear and tear on the tires the lucrative long-term contract he's looking for because they have to be worried that the wheels are going to fall off him fairly soon.

Captain Lemming
05-23-2018, 12:45 AM
he may be only 26 years old but Bell has 1541 touches the last 5 years as a Steeler and you know we are going to give him a similar workload this upcoming season. NFL teams will be very reluctant to give a RB with that much wear and tear on the tires the lucrative long-term contract he's looking for because they have to be worried that the wheels are going to fall off him fairly soon.

There are always dumb teams my friend. If WE offered 14 or so annually as is rumored, barring injury or his play dropping off a cliff THIS year someone will offer more than us.

hawaiiansteel
05-23-2018, 12:53 AM
There are always dumb teams my friend. If WE offered 14 or so annually as is rumored, barring injury or his play dropping off a cliff THIS year someone will offer more than us.

very true, it only takes one team.

Eich
05-23-2018, 07:49 AM
Bell is only 26.

Don't running backs age like dogs? :)

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 09:02 AM
Don't running backs age like dogs? :)

yes.. but RB's of Bell's caliber don't need to be put to sleep until their early 30's.

Ernie
05-23-2018, 09:17 AM
high touches and an injury history.

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 09:25 AM
high touches and an injury history.

and a ton of yards

and receptions

and excellent QB protection

RuthlessBurgher
05-23-2018, 10:07 AM
Don't running backs age like dogs? :)

So Bell is 182 years old? ;)

Northern_Blitz
05-23-2018, 10:48 AM
Bell is only 26.

And I think that he's worth what we're paying him this year. He's actually probably worth more (or the same with longer term), but the tag lets us pay him at or under market for only 1 year.

But, I think it's unlikely that he'll be worth the contract when he's 28-30. I think he'll still be good when he's healthy, but at that age I bet he could be replaced by someone like Freeman.

don't know how much / fast he'll regress. His style is different than anyone I can remember seeing. I think he succeeds because he's patient and he has insane acceleration. That lets him wait for the hole and squirt through it before the D can react. I would be worried about what happens when Bell's acceleration goes from elite to good. How many times do those 5 yard runs turn into -3 yard runs? I think that's the danger with Bell. I feel like so many of his plays are moments away from being losses, but his acceleration turns them into positive plays. When that happens I think he goes from being one of the best 5 backs in the league to being a very good 3rd down back who can reliably protect your QB and catch passes well out of the back field.

I've often read that speed is the first thing that players lose, but I don't think that really matters with Bell because he doesn't have elite speed. I haven't heard much about how age affects acceleration / burst. My guess is that they lose that before something like strength (so I'd expect someone like Lynch or Bettis to be better than Bell at age 30) because it's a fast twitch thing.

I haven't read it all yet, but this article seems to be interesting:

http://thesportdigest.com/archive/article/when-does-football-player-get-old

"There is a theory among professional football fans and executives alike that running back performance dramatically drops off when a player turns thirty years-old. This theory has been tested and proven by espn.com writer, Tristan Cockcroft. Cockcroft (2008), performed an analysis in which he compiled the seasonal and career rushing numbers for each running back in National Football League (NFL) history who ranks among the top fifty in career rushing yards. His results were clear.On average, the running backs saw a decline in rushing yards by approximately seventeen percent from their average in their seasons at age twenty-eight and twenty-nine to the season during which they were thirty. Furthermore, the running backs saw an additional decline in rushing yards of nearly fifteen percent from their age thirty seasons to their age thirty-one seasons. Those two seasons of age thirty and thirty-one show net a drop off of approximately twenty-eight percent from the age twenty-nine seasons."

"The reason for the decline in performance by running backs after they turn thirty is most directly related to the decline in necessary skills after the athlete has reached his physical peak. While some other skills may be improved upon in order to maintain or even improve performance after their physical peak at age twenty-five, the most important factors in a running back are the purely physical characteristics such as speed, quickness, explosiveness, and power.Furthermore, running backs take much more of a physical beating over the course of an NFL season than any other skill position players. While the best wide receivers in the league may catch 100 passes in a season, the top running backs will carry the ball 250 – 350 times or more. Additionally, when a running back carries the ball, he is almost always hit and tackled by multiple large defenders, whereas a wide receiver will often be tackled by one small (as compared to linemen and linebackers) defensive back or simply run out of bounds.Additionally, there is another theory concerning running backs known as the “Curse of 370,” (Cockcroft, 2009). This concerns the fact that every running back in history, with the exception of one, has had a decline in production in the year following a season in which he carried the ball 370 or more times. This curse, in fact, has an even more dramatic statistical correlation than age. Twenty-seven running backs have accrued over 370 carries in a season and, on average, their production in the following season in terms of rushing yards dropped by over forty-percent, and touchdown production dropped by fifty-percent."

For those comparing Bell to Brown:
"Throughout history, wide receivers are able to maintain their performance for a longer amount of time than running backs. According to a thorough analysis by Fein (2009), “Receivers have the latest and longest peak of any skill position.” Some of skills necessary for a wide receiver to be at his peak on-field performance are similar to a running back, but the receiver can utilize other non-physical peak skills such as the ability to catch the ball, and the knowledge and ability to run exact and precise routes to maintain his performance over a longer period of time.One top receiver who had some of his best years later in his career was Irving Fryar. Breer (2007) quoted Fryar as saying, “You're gonna lose speed. That's natural. It's how your body's made up. The first part of my career, I ran 4.2. By the time I was with the Eagles, I was a 4.4 or a 4.5. But I was able to play like a 4.2 guy, because I was smarter, I reacted quicker, and I could do things without even thinking about them.” This mental edge allowed Fryar to play at a high level even after he had passed his physical peak."

Based on the age of the references, this looks to be ~ a decade old. If it is, it may be that advances in sport science have allowed players to extend their prime years. But, it's saying that RBs start to decline pretty hard at ~28. I don't want to be paying Bell ~ $15M / year from 28 - 30. Especially when teams are regularly winning SBs without elite RBs.

Slapstick
05-23-2018, 10:53 AM
It is entirely possible that Bell is the exception...but, I don't think the Steelers really want to gamble on that...

Slapstick
05-23-2018, 11:18 AM
Also, FYI:

James Conner was ready and working on the field yesterday during OTAs...

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 11:39 AM
And I think that he's worth what we're paying him this year. He's actually probably worth more (or the same with longer term), but the tag lets us pay him at or under market for only 1 year.

But, I think it's unlikely that he'll be worth the contract when he's 28-30. I think he'll still be good when he's healthy, but at that age I bet he could be replaced by someone like Freeman.

don't know how much / fast he'll regress. His style is different than anyone I can remember seeing. I think he succeeds because he's patient and he has insane acceleration. That lets him wait for the hole and squirt through it before the D can react. I would be worried about what happens when Bell's acceleration goes from elite to good. How many times do those 5 yard runs turn into -3 yard runs? I think that's the danger with Bell. I feel like so many of his plays are moments away from being losses, but his acceleration turns them into positive plays. When that happens I think he goes from being one of the best 5 backs in the league to being a very good 3rd down back who can reliably protect your QB and catch passes well out of the back field.

I've often read that speed is the first thing that players lose, but I don't think that really matters with Bell because he doesn't have elite speed. I haven't heard much about how age affects acceleration / burst. My guess is that they lose that before something like strength (so I'd expect someone like Lynch or Bettis to be better than Bell at age 30) because it's a fast twitch thing.

I haven't read it all yet, but this article seems to be interesting:

http://thesportdigest.com/archive/article/when-does-football-player-get-old

"There is a theory among professional football fans and executives alike that running back performance dramatically drops off when a player turns thirty years-old. This theory has been tested and proven by espn.com writer, Tristan Cockcroft. Cockcroft (2008), performed an analysis in which he compiled the seasonal and career rushing numbers for each running back in National Football League (NFL) history who ranks among the top fifty in career rushing yards. His results were clear.On average, the running backs saw a decline in rushing yards by approximately seventeen percent from their average in their seasons at age twenty-eight and twenty-nine to the season during which they were thirty. Furthermore, the running backs saw an additional decline in rushing yards of nearly fifteen percent from their age thirty seasons to their age thirty-one seasons. Those two seasons of age thirty and thirty-one show net a drop off of approximately twenty-eight percent from the age twenty-nine seasons."

"The reason for the decline in performance by running backs after they turn thirty is most directly related to the decline in necessary skills after the athlete has reached his physical peak. While some other skills may be improved upon in order to maintain or even improve performance after their physical peak at age twenty-five, the most important factors in a running back are the purely physical characteristics such as speed, quickness, explosiveness, and power.Furthermore, running backs take much more of a physical beating over the course of an NFL season than any other skill position players. While the best wide receivers in the league may catch 100 passes in a season, the top running backs will carry the ball 250 – 350 times or more. Additionally, when a running back carries the ball, he is almost always hit and tackled by multiple large defenders, whereas a wide receiver will often be tackled by one small (as compared to linemen and linebackers) defensive back or simply run out of bounds.Additionally, there is another theory concerning running backs known as the “Curse of 370,” (Cockcroft, 2009). This concerns the fact that every running back in history, with the exception of one, has had a decline in production in the year following a season in which he carried the ball 370 or more times. This curse, in fact, has an even more dramatic statistical correlation than age. Twenty-seven running backs have accrued over 370 carries in a season and, on average, their production in the following season in terms of rushing yards dropped by over forty-percent, and touchdown production dropped by fifty-percent."

For those comparing Bell to Brown:
"Throughout history, wide receivers are able to maintain their performance for a longer amount of time than running backs. According to a thorough analysis by Fein (2009), “Receivers have the latest and longest peak of any skill position.” Some of skills necessary for a wide receiver to be at his peak on-field performance are similar to a running back, but the receiver can utilize other non-physical peak skills such as the ability to catch the ball, and the knowledge and ability to run exact and precise routes to maintain his performance over a longer period of time.One top receiver who had some of his best years later in his career was Irving Fryar. Breer (2007) quoted Fryar as saying, “You're gonna lose speed. That's natural. It's how your body's made up. The first part of my career, I ran 4.2. By the time I was with the Eagles, I was a 4.4 or a 4.5. But I was able to play like a 4.2 guy, because I was smarter, I reacted quicker, and I could do things without even thinking about them.” This mental edge allowed Fryar to play at a high level even after he had passed his physical peak."

Based on the age of the references, this looks to be ~ a decade old. If it is, it may be that advances in sport science have allowed players to extend their prime years. But, it's saying that RBs start to decline pretty hard at ~28. I don't want to be paying Bell ~ $15M / year from 28 - 30. Especially when teams are regularly winning SBs without elite RBs.

speed is different than quickness... I think Bell will have a longer shelf life because his style isn't based on speed. I think his lateral movement is the key to his success.

Once he loses the ability to go side to side it's a wrap. However, that can be said for any position. Bell is also big and I think he can extend his career as a straight line RB or one cut back if he lost a step.

One other thing, Bell is unique because he turns a lot of no gain or losses into positive plays by making defenders miss. The OL gets a ton of credit but part of it is due to Bell being ridiculous in tight spaces.

It will interesting seeing how his career plays out after this year. Folks swear he will fall off a cliff but I don't see it. Then again, it's football and anyone could lose it all on the next play.

That doesn't stop teams from signing players to big contracts. Look at Andrew Luck?

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 11:53 AM
Also, FYI:

James Conner was ready and working on the field yesterday during OTAs...

good to hear.

Eich
05-23-2018, 12:03 PM
So Bell is 182 years old? ;)

Nah. Dog years only kick in when the RB becomes a professional starter and gets worked like a dog. That was 5 years ago when he was 21. So, 21 human years, plus 5 dog years = a mere 57!

RuthlessBurgher
05-23-2018, 12:14 PM
Nah. Dog years only kick in when the RB becomes a professional starter and gets worked like a dog. That was 5 years ago when he was 21. So, 21 human years, plus 5 dog years = a mere 57!

Le'Veon Bell runs like Eric Dickerson, and now they are the same age! :)

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 12:50 PM
Nah. Dog years only kick in when the RB becomes a professional starter and gets worked like a dog. That was 5 years ago when he was 21. So, 21 human years, plus 5 dog years = a mere 57!

this is where injury and suspension actually works to Bells advantage..

not really

but he missed most of his second season due to injury and another 4 to 7 games due to smoking weed.

Buzz
05-23-2018, 03:00 PM
AB suggests Bell should get his butt over to OTA's

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/steelers-antonio-brown-leveon-bell-ota-practices-2018/

Steel Maniac
05-23-2018, 03:11 PM
AB suggests Bell should get his butt over to OTA's

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/steelers-antonio-brown-leveon-bell-ota-practices-2018/

There you have it;..

AB saying Bell needs to be there. New OC; new emphasis on certain things; new view point and philosophy. And Bell needs to learn all of it. It is never " OK" to be absent on offense and you have a new offensive coordinator. Bell is going to have quit a bit to pick before game # 1 of the season. If anyone thought he was slow to come around last year, watch this year.

squidkid
05-23-2018, 03:23 PM
high touches and an injury history.


and a dope head

pittpete
05-23-2018, 03:50 PM
Steelers take care of their own.
If Bell wants to remain a Steeler he'll wise up.
If not, then bye bye next year.

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 04:03 PM
AB suggests Bell should get his butt over to OTA's

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/steelers-antonio-brown-leveon-bell-ota-practices-2018/

haha.. easy for AB to say. He got his money and forced the team to renegotiate his contract (something they never do when a guy has 2 years left on his contract).

feltdizz
05-23-2018, 04:08 PM
and a dope head

I expected a better joke with all the highs being thrown out at Bell.

Ernie
05-23-2018, 04:11 PM
haha.. easy for AB to say. He got his money and forced the team to renegotiate his contract (something they never do when a guy has 2 years left on his contract).

AB's deal was a no brainer...and "In line" with market value for his position/rank. AB would be in Bell's situation right now (or worse) if he was requesting 2x the #2 WR in the league money. Folks can argue all they want about what they think Bell is worth...and markets "Needing corrected". The best teams in the league DO NOT typically make trend setting moves such as "Correcting markets"...
Leave that to teams like the Redskins to "Reach"...(giving away their future to draft RGIII) or the Bills (Mario Williams deal).

squidkid
05-23-2018, 04:35 PM
I expected a better joke with all the highs being thrown out at Bell.


not in the joking mood right now. was just stating a fact to go along with the other bell warning signs

Steel Maniac
05-23-2018, 06:23 PM
AB's deal was a no brainer...and "In line" with market value for his position/rank. AB would be in Bell's situation right now (or worse) if he was requesting 2x the #2 WR in the league money. Folks can argue all they want about what they think Bell is worth...and markets "Needing corrected". The best teams in the league DO NOT typically make trend setting moves such as "Correcting markets"...
Leave that to teams like the Redskins to "Reach"...(giving away their future to draft RGIII) or the Bills (Mario Williams deal).

Boom.............................

BURGH86STEEL
05-23-2018, 06:25 PM
There you have it;..

AB saying Bell needs to be there. New OC; new emphasis on certain things; new view point and philosophy. And Bell needs to learn all of it. It is never " OK" to be absent on offense and you have a new offensive coordinator. Bell is going to have quit a bit to pick before game # 1 of the season. If anyone thought he was slow to come around last year, watch this year.
The offense probably isn't going to change that much. Especially considering that the QB and most of the offensive players are the same.

Bell needs to attempt to get as much money as he can. Business is business. The Steelers will move on with or without Bell.

Ernie
05-23-2018, 08:34 PM
only if they cave to his demands.
run the hell out of him and let him walk next year.
players dont care about winning, they want the money
fans that want to give those guys the money, dont care about winning. they care about their favorite player and his fantasy stats
franchise qbs are a different breed. you have to have a great one(most of the time) if you really want to stay relevant and win a super bowl

Just going back and reading these old posts and found the highlighted phrase quite comical. There's more truth to that idea than most folks care to admit.

Steel Maniac
05-23-2018, 11:42 PM
The offense probably isn't going to change that much. Especially considering that the QB and most of the offensive players are the same.

Bell needs to attempt to get as much money as he can. Business is business. The Steelers will move on with or without Bell.

Brown is in the huddle ; in the classroom; looking at the playbook. You know more then Brown?

Steel Maniac
05-23-2018, 11:43 PM
Just going back and reading these old posts and found the highlighted phrase quite comical. There's more truth to that idea than most folks care to admit.

Boom.......

Ernie
05-24-2018, 05:31 AM
Brown is in the huddle ; in the classroom; looking at the playbook. You know more then Brown?

All I know is, there had better be some changes to the playbook as well as situational play calling this year.

Steel Maniac
05-24-2018, 08:31 AM
All I know is, there had better be some changes to the playbook as well as situational play calling this year.

definitely. But if Brown (who is in camp and seeing all the changes that are taking place) says Bell should be here, (and no other players are disputing Brown) then I think a Pro Bowl player such as Brown knows more of what he's talking about them random posters who say ," Just because we have a new OC, Bell will still be fine" .

Brown knows more about that offense then all of us in this room combined. And he knows more of it then we ever will know.

Northern_Blitz
05-24-2018, 09:53 AM
definitely. But if Brown (who is in camp and seeing all the changes that are taking place) says Bell should be here, (and no other players are disputing Brown) then I think a Pro Bowl player such as Brown knows more of what he's talking about them random posters who say ," Just because we have a new OC, Bell will still be fine" .

Brown knows more about that offense then all of us in this room combined. And he knows more of it then we ever will know.

I think Browns comments are being blown out of propotion. In the interview I saw him speaking in (i.e. not just snipped quotes), he basically says:

"I'd prefer he was here, but he'll be fine either way"

and not

"The O is super different and there is no way Bell will be able to understand what we're doing when he finally gets his out of shape but onto the field."

But, having a headline of "Brown says it doesn't really matter if Bell shows up to OTAs" doesn't get as many clicks as "Bell says 'Come out here and show up'". I think the second headline takes what he said (shown in the videos below) totally out of context.


http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/steelers-antonio-brown-leveon-bell-ota-practices-2018/

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/ab-offers-up-takes-on-additions-of-washington-rudolph-loss-of-bryant/ <-- This has a longer version of the same interview

Slapstick
05-24-2018, 10:26 AM
Brown didn’t say that Bell needed to be present for OTAs...

He said that the only way to improve your play at this point in the year is to be present for OTAs...which is pretty much common sense...

Slapstick
05-24-2018, 10:35 AM
He also intimated what we all know:

You are more likely to get the contract you want if you show up...

Brown could have held out, could have skipped OTAs and training camp, but he didn’t...he got his contract...

Alejandro Villanueva could have declined to sign his tender offer and miss OTAs...he didn’t and ended up getting his contract...

Bell is within his rights to hold out, but he isn’t increasing his chances of getting a deal done with the Steelers by doing so...

Steel Maniac
05-24-2018, 10:53 AM
I think Browns comments are being blown out of propotion. In the interview I saw him speaking in (i.e. not just snipped quotes), he basically says:

"I'd prefer he was here, but he'll be fine either way"

and not

"The O is super different and there is no way Bell will be able to understand what we're doing when he finally gets his out of shape but onto the field."

But, having a headline of "Brown says it doesn't really matter if Bell shows up to OTAs" doesn't get as many clicks as "Bell says 'Come out here and show up'". I think the second headline takes what he said (shown in the videos below) totally out of context.


http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/steelers-antonio-brown-leveon-bell-ota-practices-2018/

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2018/05/ab-offers-up-takes-on-additions-of-washington-rudolph-loss-of-bryant/ <-- This has a longer version of the same interview

thanks north. :thumbsup:

Captain Lemming
05-25-2018, 03:16 AM
He also intimated what we all know:

You are more likely to get the contract you want if you show up...

Brown could have held out, could have skipped OTAs and training camp, but he didn’t...he got his contract...

Alejandro Villanueva could have declined to sign his tender offer and miss OTAs...he didn’t and ended up getting his contract...

Bell is within his rights to hold out, but he isn’t increasing his chances of getting a deal done with the Steelers by doing so...

Quoted so Maniac can actually see what you say Slappy.

Maniac, how bout a "Boom" for good ol Slappy.

Slapstick
05-25-2018, 06:12 AM
Quoted so Maniac can actually see what you say Slappy.

Maniac, how bout a "Boom" for good ol Slappy.

That’s very kind of you, but I’m good.

Steel Maniac
05-25-2018, 09:03 AM
Quoted so Maniac can actually see what you say Slappy.

Maniac, how bout a "Boom" for good ol Slappy.

Boom....................................... LOL

RuthlessBurgher
05-25-2018, 12:21 PM
Steelers bet big on James Conner after humbling rookie year

8:00 AM ET

Jeremy Fowler
ESPN Staff Writer

PITTSBURGH -- James Conner rivaled Tom Brady in jersey sales before playing an NFL snap. His courageous cancer fight resonated with fans on a human level. Those who understand what he overcame as a Pitt running back -- all those masked-up morning workouts between chemotherapy treatments for Hodgkin's lymphoma -- will celebrate his every tote of the rock.

But Conner's journey as a first-year Steeler was a common one for many rookies: He showed flashes in 2017 but generally struggled with the nuances of the professional game. That's why Conner wasn't about to pump his fist over a few swift cuts in the open field during Thursday's organized team activities, which featured Conner prominently in the absence of Le'Veon Bell.

Out here, it's simply limiting mental errors and earning the trust of coaches and teammates, who will watch closely.

"Didn't really do much [last season] so I have a lot to prove," Conner said. "I just needed to learn more, needed to grow more. I'm in the process of growing right now."

It's no coincidence that quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, unprompted, brought up Conner when asked about Bell. This is a "big time" for Conner, he said, to get reps "so we can all see what he can do." Wide receiver Darrius Heyward-Bey said virtually the same thing when asked about Bell.

A spotlight is squarely on Conner's shoulder pads in Year 2.

Gaining 144 yards on 32 carries last season was enough to showcase Conner's potential, but a Week 15 medial collateral ligament tear cut his production short. Conner is happy to be healthy, which makes him an intriguing backfield option alongside rookie Jaylen Samuels and veterans Stevan Ridley and Fitz Toussaint. There's depth and competition behind Bell, and Conner needs to shine.

Tight end Jesse James believes Conner will do just that, assuming he overcomes a few rookie pitfalls he noticed -- in the film room and on the field.

"He's a little bit more confident in the playbook, handling protections -- he's just in better shape," James said. "He's running fast, running every ball to the end zone. He looks good."

James knows every rookie who steps foot into the UPMC Rooney Sports Complex learns quickly his conditioning needs to improve. James came here three years ago as a 272-pound tight end out of Penn State and stands 252 today. Today's NFL game is all about speed, so keep up.

Even with that hurdle, Conner was always a punishing runner, which the Steelers covet. The details were a problem, though. Former offensive coordinator Todd Haley pointed out lackluster special-teams play kept Conner out of the rotation.

James said fine-tuning pass protections should catalyze Conner's second season.

"If he makes a jump there, we'll see huge improvements," James said. "He'll make a big jump this year."

To validate that faith, Conner is taking nothing for granted.

He plans to improve in "every category," he said, citing route-running and a full command of the playbook.

Bell will be the workhorse upon his return, but Conner wants to punctuate his NFL career sooner than later.

"I haven't proved anything yet," Conner said. "Just another opportunity for me to prove to my coaches and earn respect from my teammates that I'm capable of playing on Sundays."

http://www.espn.com/blog/pittsburgh-steelers/post/_/id/27965/steelers-bet-big-on-james-conner-after-humbling-rookie-year

Steel Maniac
05-25-2018, 03:24 PM
They should invest/believe in Conner's abilities. Why not? Because he got hurt his first year? Hello...so did Bell!! What I'm saying is Conner isn't a finished products. He'll be better in pass protection because of having a full year /practice under his belt.

Poster's around here talk like Conner was garbage last year. In the limited carries he had he looked good and he needs to work on his pass protection but that's what camp and pre-season is for. I like his upside. Not saying he's Bell but he's by no means a slug either.

Ernie
05-25-2018, 03:56 PM
https://steelerswire.usatoday.com/2018/05/25/leveon-bell-reportedly-asking-for-17-million-per-year-from-the-steelers/

Steel Maniac
05-25-2018, 04:07 PM
https://steelerswire.usatoday.com/2018/05/25/leveon-bell-reportedly-asking-for-17-million-per-year-from-the-steelers/

As the Captain stated in earlier post, the more stuff like this that Bell does, the closer he's moving himself out the door.

Ernie
05-25-2018, 04:14 PM
As the Captain stated in earlier post, the more stuff like this that Bell does, the closer he's moving himself out the door.

Damn it! We shoulda signed him when he was on his "Ima get my 15 miyion a year" kick lol.

Northern_Blitz
05-25-2018, 05:36 PM
As the Captain stated in earlier post, the more stuff like this that Bell does, the closer he's moving himself out the door.

I hope that this report is correct because I believe that a long term deal with Bell at $15+M / year will end up hurting the team in the medium to long term. If his demands keep going up, I think it decreases the chances that we sign him long term. That being said, my guess is that the "report" that "sources say" that Bell wants $17M / year is mostly speculation / fabrication.

BURGH86STEEL
05-25-2018, 05:40 PM
Brown is in the huddle ; in the classroom; looking at the playbook. You know more then Brown?
So you believe the Steelers are making wholesale changes to the offense? There are reasons why the Steelers decided to stick with Randy as OC. Bell will eventually be fine when he returns to the team. Some fans love to make an issue out of every little thing.

Slapstick
05-25-2018, 06:10 PM
To be fair, it isn’t fans or media that are making a big deal out of it...It is Bell himself...

If he showed up like everyone else, it would be noted and become a non story...

Ernie
05-25-2018, 06:49 PM
To be fair, it isn’t fans or media that are making a big deal out of it...It is Bell himself...

If he showed up like everyone else, it would be noted and become a non story...

But but but... its okay though because of "Personal issues" and "The coaches are aware" lol.

In all seriousness.. as Bell further distances himself from the team, and raises his demands, the likelihood of him signing long term dwindles even more. This wouldn't be the first time the Steelers will have cut ties with a guy who thought he was bigger than the team. Bell will be no exception.

Ernie
05-25-2018, 06:51 PM
So you believe the Steelers are making wholesale changes to the offense? There are reasons why the Steelers decided to stick with Randy as OC. Bell will eventually be fine when he returns to the team. Some fans love to make an issue out of every little thing.

and the same could be said about the folks who downplayed Bell's actions leading up to the Jags game.

Ernie
05-25-2018, 06:52 PM
The way he's acting, I truly believe he wants out of Pittsburgh

Buzz
05-25-2018, 10:49 PM
Let me put it this way: he seems to be doing little to show that he wants to stay.

feltdizz
05-26-2018, 09:30 AM
and the same could be said about the folks who downplayed Bell's actions leading up to the Jags game.

How did he perform in the Jags game? How did his actions impact our offense?

Ernie
05-26-2018, 09:33 AM
How did he perform in the Jags game? How did his actions impact our offense?

Dizz... you've stated your theory on here many times.. in that "Its okay to act like you are bigger than the team.. if you are truly a great player". There's a hell of a lot more to being part of a team than how you perform in the game.

feltdizz
05-26-2018, 09:46 AM
Dizz... you've stated your theory on here many times.. in that "Its okay to act like you are bigger than the team.. if you are truly a great player". There's a hell of a lot more to being part of a team than how you perform in the game.

not really.

Look at Ben off the field over the years.

What matters is performing on the field.

If Bryant played like we all expected on day 1 after he returned he would still be here.

I think the right word is tolerable. When you play well your actions will be tolerated if you are a star player. It’s always been that way.

Look around the league at players who didnt attend ORA’s this year. Gronk and Brady didn’t attend. Brady has his own trainer and Billicheat doesn’t like how players are using his trainers voodoo techniques.

But guess what? In the end it doesn’t matter because those guys produce.

Ernie
05-26-2018, 09:51 AM
not really.

Look at Ben off the field over the years.

What matters is performing on the field.

If Bryant played like we all expected on day 1 after he returned he would still be here.

I think the right word is tolerable. When you play well your actions will be tolerated if you are a star player. It’s always been that way.

Look around the league at players who didnt attend ORA’s this year. Gronk and Brady didn’t attend. Brady has his own trainer and Billicheat doesn’t like how players are using his trainers voodoo techniques.

But guess what? In the end it doesn’t matter because those guys produce.

Riiggghhhttttt.... so I guess that explains why Tomlin and Colbert have paid special attention to drafting "Hi Character" types in recent drafts.. lol.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
05-26-2018, 12:49 PM
I think that he might get better by the end of the year.

My point was that it was unfortunate that he got hurt because it probably diverts his focus from "improving at pass blocking" to "being able to run again". It seems to me that it would stunt his improvement in pass blocking.

Maybe, but if he was smart he spent much of his rehab down time watching film and learning from his coaches what they want him to do. Some players can improve during injury because they observe the game from above instead of seeing it straight on from the sidelines.

Northern_Blitz
05-28-2018, 05:41 AM
Maybe, but if he was smart he spent much of his rehab down time watching film and learning from his coaches what they want him to do. Some players can improve during injury because they observe the game from above instead of seeing it straight on from the sidelines.

I hope you're right. I would be nice if we were more comfortable putting him on the field because it looks like he can run.

Ernie
05-28-2018, 05:48 AM
I hope you're right. I would be nice if we were more comfortable putting him on the field because it looks like he can run.

I feel confident that he'll be better in pass protection this year. He's a smart kid and has a great attitude... wants to do whatever he can to contribute and help the team win. Look for marked improved in that area this summer.

Steelerphile
05-29-2018, 06:01 AM
The Steelers should prepare for a season without Bell. I think he is being unreasonable with his demands and showing no inclination to compromise. He is acting as though the world revolves around Bell and so far, the Steelers are allowing him to do it. He is a very good back, but there are other good backs.

Bell's last season doesn't cry out that the team should bow down and pay him 17M. He averaged 4.0 a carry, gained 1291 yards on 321 carries. That is down .9 yards per carry from 2016 when he gained 4.9 a carry and gained 1268 on 261 carries.

That is also a far cry from some of the historic seasons by running backs such as Walter Payton in 1977 gained 1852 an average 5.5, Barry Sanders in 1994 gained 1883 and averaged 5.7, Ladanian Tomlinson in 2006 gained 1815 and ave 5.2, Eric Dickerson in 1984 gained 2105 and aver 5.6. You could see this coming, Bell is full of himself and blinded by his celebrity. Being paid is of utmost importance, not being on a winning team. Missing OTAs doesn't matter much for a veteran like him, but missing training camp is significant especially when he did not start the season well.

Since he plans on missing training camp again unless they pay him 17m, which they shouldn't, he apparently hasn't thought much about that.

Even though Conner is still basically unproven, I like him a lot and is a good building block. They drafted Samuels and have a few other guys in camp. I think they should be looking ahead and try to move Bell before the season, and perhaps add another back. The Steelers existed and thrived before Bell and can do so after Bell.

feltdizz
05-29-2018, 08:49 AM
The Steelers should prepare for a season without Bell. I think he is being unreasonable with his demands and showing no inclination to compromise. He is acting as though the world revolves around Bell and so far, the Steelers are allowing him to do it. He is a very good back, but there are other good backs.

Bell's last season doesn't cry out that the team should bow down and pay him 17M. He averaged 4.0 a carry, gained 1291 yards on 321 carries. That is down .9 yards per carry from 2016 when he gained 4.9 a carry and gained 1268 on 261 carries.

That is also a far cry from some of the historic seasons by running backs such as Walter Payton in 1977 gained 1852 an average 5.5, Barry Sanders in 1994 gained 1883 and averaged 5.7, Ladanian Tomlinson in 2006 gained 1815 and ave 5.2, Eric Dickerson in 1984 gained 2105 and aver 5.6. You could see this coming, Bell is full of himself and blinded by his celebrity. Being paid is of utmost importance, not being on a winning team. Missing OTAs doesn't matter much for a veteran like him, but missing training camp is significant especially when he did not start the season well.

Since he plans on missing training camp again unless they pay him 17m, which they shouldn't, he apparently hasn't thought much about that.

Even though Conner is still basically unproven, I like him a lot and is a good building block. They drafted Samuels and have a few other guys in camp. I think they should be looking ahead and try to move Bell before the season, and perhaps add another back. The Steelers existed and thrived before Bell and can do so after Bell.

Did we really thrive on offense before Bell? We were more of an all or nothing offense with BA and Wallace.

We need a #1 defense that is stout vs the run and stingy against the pass to thrive.

Most think this is impossible with Bell on the books because we can't get expensive FA's on D who can bring us to greatness. However, I think our best D's were created through the draft and I'm not sure its even possible to have a stellar D in this day in age.

I think there was one punt in the SB last year.

I also don't think training camp is that big of a deal. We always start slow on offense and get it going when we need it the most. It's damn near impossible to have a potent offense for 16 games. Brady, Rodgers, etc.. have all had the "it's a long season, calm down" talk after the first 4 games.

and no, I don't think Bell is worth 17 a season. IF we offer him a long term deal it will be in the 14 per year range. If that isn't enough, then I have no problem letting him walk. Also think he is holding out because he can.. it's the only bargaining chip he has left.

Steel Maniac
05-29-2018, 09:02 AM
The Steelers should prepare for a season without Bell. I think he is being unreasonable with his demands and showing no inclination to compromise. He is acting as though the world revolves around Bell and so far, the Steelers are allowing him to do it. He is a very good back, but there are other good backs.

Bell's last season doesn't cry out that the team should bow down and pay him 17M. He averaged 4.0 a carry, gained 1291 yards on 321 carries. That is down .9 yards per carry from 2016 when he gained 4.9 a carry and gained 1268 on 261 carries.

That is also a far cry from some of the historic seasons by running backs such as Walter Payton in 1977 gained 1852 an average 5.5, Barry Sanders in 1994 gained 1883 and averaged 5.7, Ladanian Tomlinson in 2006 gained 1815 and ave 5.2, Eric Dickerson in 1984 gained 2105 and aver 5.6. You could see this coming, Bell is full of himself and blinded by his celebrity. Being paid is of utmost importance, not being on a winning team. Missing OTAs doesn't matter much for a veteran like him, but missing training camp is significant especially when he did not start the season well.

Since he plans on missing training camp again unless they pay him 17m, which they shouldn't, he apparently hasn't thought much about that.

Even though Conner is still basically unproven, I like him a lot and is a good building block. They drafted Samuels and have a few other guys in camp. I think they should be looking ahead and try to move Bell before the season, and perhaps add another back. The Steelers existed and thrived before Bell and can do so after Bell.

Conner will be better at pass blocking. And Samuels will contribute as well. Our running game will be fine..like it always has been BEFORE Bell. We've been an organazation who has always gotten our running game going and we will have it going after Bell. All these people talking like we are the Tampa Bay Buccaneers or something...like rarely in our history have we had a running game until Bell got here.

Our history has been to have a running game.

Eich
05-29-2018, 09:20 AM
and no, I don't think Bell is worth 17 a season. IF we offer him a long term deal it will be in the 14 per year range. If that isn't enough, then I have no problem letting him walk. Also think he is holding out
because he can.. it's the only bargaining chip he has left.

Bell doesn't even know what Bell wants. It doesn't matter, he just wants more than the Steelers want to pay. And he wonders why fans think he's greedy.


"I'm at the top and if not I'm the closest, Ima need 15 a year and they know this.


I’mma need 17, cuz 26 is savage

feltdizz
05-29-2018, 09:35 AM
Bell doesn't even know what Bell wants. It doesn't matter, he just wants more than the Steelers want to pay. And he wonders why fans think he's greedy.

everyone should want more than what their employer will pay them.

It's not greed tho, it's bargaining...

there is a lot of money out there and a short amount of time to get it.

feltdizz
05-29-2018, 09:39 AM
Riiggghhhttttt.... so I guess that explains why Tomlin and Colbert have paid special attention to drafting "Hi Character" types in recent drafts.. lol.

we can TRY to draft high character guys but once they get fame and praise in the media we have no idea how they will respond.

Ben was a high character, God fearing dude when we drafted him. Fame came real quick and he changed overnight.

TJ Watt seems like a good guy but if he has a JJ Watt type year he could become more of a "look at me dancing" type guy.

Same with Rudolph, Washington, etc... we really have no idea how a person will handle success on the field.

Northern_Blitz
05-29-2018, 09:51 AM
The Steelers should prepare for a season without Bell. I think he is being unreasonable with his demands and showing no inclination to compromise. He is acting as though the world revolves around Bell and so far, the Steelers are allowing him to do it. He is a very good back, but there are other good backs.
... Missing OTAs doesn't matter much for a veteran like him, but missing training camp is significant especially when he did not start the season well.

Since he plans on missing training camp again unless they pay him 17m, which they shouldn't, he apparently hasn't thought much about that.

Even though Conner is still basically unproven, I like him a lot and is a good building block. They drafted Samuels and have a few other guys in camp. I think they should be looking ahead and try to move Bell before the season, and perhaps add another back. The Steelers existed and thrived before Bell and can do so after Bell.

I don't think missing camp will be a big deal for Bell either. I think the "started slow" thing is a bit of a narrative. He didn't get many carries in the first few games (maybe as punishment?), but was on pace for being a top 3-5 RB in the league by the end of game 4 (basically exactly where he ended up).

That being said, I agree that the Steelers should be ready to move on from him. But, I think that basically gets rectified with a day 1 or 2 draft pick next year. High talent tirst year RBs generally do a decent job of being plugged right into an offense.