Le'Veon Bell

[Captain Lemming]

People talk about how smart the Steelers are for not overpaying a RB but the truth is they could have ended up with Bell's deal (and some even worse cap hell) if Bell had signed on the dotted line. That's a scary thought.

I've said it many times. Bells insatiable greed saved us from ourselves.

[hawaiiansteel]

I've said it many times. Bells insatiable greed saved us from ourselves.

you're absolutely right, I'm soooo glad we didn't cave in to his contact demands.

6 carries for 14 yards today and leaves with a hamstring injury.

[NorthCoast]

DO NOT OVERSPEND ON ANY RB!!! The list includes, Bell, Gurley, Elliot, Connor, etc.

[Northern_Blitz]

I've said it many times. Bells insatiable greed saved us from ourselves.

I think this is mostly true.

But I also think Bell didn't like our offer because it would have been pretty easy to cut him after about year 2.

I don't think he'd be on the team now even if he signed the (too rich) contract we offered him.

[BURGH86STEEL]

I think this is mostly true.

But I also think Bell didn't like our offer because it would have been pretty easy to cut him after about year 2.

I don't think he'd be on the team now even if he signed the (too rich) contract we offered him.

I think that Bell would be with the Steelers today if he signed with the team. I also believe the Steelers would had possibly made the post season the past two seasons with Bell on the team. It's possible that the Jets are not using Bell in a manner that maximizes his skill set. Bell had good chemistry on the field with the Steelers.

I disagree with people who say never sign a RB to a big contract. I believe that signing RB's or any player depends on the structure of the contract. I wouldn't guarantee a RB a significant amount of guaranteed money.

[Starlifter]

I believe that signing RB's or any player depends on the structure of the contract. I wouldn't guarantee a RB a significant amount of guaranteed money.

I think this is the relevant point. The Steelers do not routinely offer guaranteed money. In fact (if memory serves) they hardly ever give it, if at all. Rather they prefer to simply honor the contract as written. I believe this was the major point for LB. He wanted the security of guaranteed money. As a RB with a short shelf life, I don't fault that.

But the Steelers were never going to guarantee any sum for him, large or small. I think that's ultimately why he left.

[BURGH86STEEL]

I think this is the relevant point. The Steelers do not routinely offer guaranteed money. In fact (if memory serves) they hardly ever give it, if at all. Rather they prefer to simply honor the contract as written. I believe this was the major point for LB. He wanted the security of guaranteed money. As a RB with a short shelf life, I don't fault that.

But the Steelers were never going to guarantee any sum for him, large or small. I think that's ultimately why he left.

I believe the Steelers offered Bell a fair deal. I believe they offered him enough significant money up front for him to sign and have financial security. It appears he wanted more money up front. They probably wanted him to earn a significant amount of money over the life of the contract while protecting themselves from certain circumstances (laziness, injury, ect).
This seems to be the way the Steelers like to structure their contracts.

I might disagree with the way Bell handled the situation. I am not going to have sour grapes and act like he wasn't a good player for us. Bell earned the right to be paid a significant amount of money. He and AB were good fits for the Steelers. Their losses weakened the Steelers offense/team. Both probably regret the way they handled their situations. Sometimes the grass isn't always greener.

[NorthCoast]

this was the situation:

Guaranteed money is the bottom line — especially for RBs
When the Steelers offered $70 million to Bell in July, it came with a laughably low $10 million guaranteed. Pittsburgh tried to spin it as better than that by calling it a contract with “a rolling guaranteed structure,” but that’s — uh — not what guaranteed means.

The Steelers planned to “guarantee” Bell $33 million over the first two years and $45 million over the first three years. But that’s just a normal NFL contract with hardly any actual guarantees. It also would’ve given Pittsburgh the luxury to move on from his deal whenever the team decided his play didn’t warrant the pay.

It was a funny money contract at its finest, but still managed to accomplish its purpose: Establish a narrative that the Steelers made a real effort to sign Bell, but the running back was simply being unreasonable.

He wasn’t, and what he got from the Jets is much better.

Bell is guaranteed to see $35 million, or two-thirds, of his $52.5 million contract with the Jets. That means he’ll see the majority of his deal with the team — no matter if he’s injured, or if his play suddenly drops off.

In other sports, contracts are fully guaranteed. Bryce Harper will see all of the 13-year, $330 million contract he signed with the Philadelphia Phillies in February. It’s much more uncommon in the NFL — Kirk Cousins’ three-year, fully guaranteed $84 million deal in 2018 was a rare exception — and that means players often don’t get to the end of their contracts.


The Steelers tried to lock down Bell on a deal that they probably wouldn’t have fully honored.

“I don’t want sign a long-term deal and everybody says I signed for $70 million but only the first year is guaranteed,” Bell said on NFL Network back in February 2018. “So the first $17 million that you make in that year that’s the only year that’s guaranteed ...”

Bell could’ve played on the franchise tag in 2018 and he still would’ve been in line for free agency in 2019. But there would’ve been no reason for the Steelers not to give Bell as many touches as they possibly could.

Instead, Bell stood his ground. The result was less wear and tear, and possibly a blueprint for other star players held back from free agency by the NFL’s franchise tag scam.

He didn’t get the game-changing contract he probably hoped he’d find, but it doesn’t change the fact that the Steelers never offered him a deal worth signing

the writer also points out that of the 73 players that signed FA contracts of 3 or more years back in 2017, 31 have been cut or traded, only 42 are with their signing team.

[Captain Lemming]

I think that Bell would be with the Steelers today if he signed with the team. I also believe the Steelers would had possibly made the post season the past two seasons with Bell on the team. It's possible that the Jets are not using Bell in a manner that maximizes his skill set. Bell had good chemistry on the field with the Steelers.

I disagree with people who say never sign a RB to a big contract. I believe that signing RB's or any player depends on the structure of the contract. I wouldn't guarantee a RB a significant amount of guaranteed money.

When was the last time it was proven to be a smart move?

[Starlifter]

this was the situation: the writer also points out that of the 73 players that signed FA contracts of 3 or more years back in 2017, 31 have been cut or traded, only 42 are with their signing team.

Thanks for that. good information.

[BURGH86STEEL]

When was the last time it was proven to be a smart move?

It's always a smart move to sign quality players that produced and contribute to team success. Again, it depends on the structure of the contract.

Players that produce and contribute to team success deserve to be compensated. Teams that want quality players need to pay those players. That's the bottom line.

[Northern_Blitz]

I believe the Steelers offered Bell a fair deal. I believe they offered him enough significant money up front for him to sign and have financial security. It appears he wanted more money up front. They probably wanted him to earn a significant amount of money over the life of the contract while protecting themselves from certain circumstances (laziness, injury, ect).
This seems to be the way the Steelers like to structure their contracts.

I might disagree with the way Bell handled the situation. I am not going to have sour grapes and act like he wasn't a good player for us. Bell earned the right to be paid a significant amount of money. He and AB were good fits for the Steelers. Their losses weakened the Steelers offense/team. Both probably regret the way they handled their situations. Sometimes the grass isn't always greener.

I agree that I don't think Bell doing what he did was some kind of moral failing.

Football players are literally trading life expectancy for money. And I don't begrudge any of them for selling years of life at the highest possible price they can get.

I also agree with your comment on salary structure.

That's what made Bell's deal closer to reasonable for us. That's what I was trying to point out with my comment. That looking at the total value of the deal isn't necessarily the same as looking at what would have happened if he signed.

We disagree about Bell's decline and whether he'd see the same decline here. Maybe you're right, but I think that the big drop in YPC he had in his last year with us was telling. I think he still would have been great at pass pro. And still would have been a good receiving option.

But, my guess is that he wouldn't have done much more than Conner has. And I don't think we should keep Conner either given the cap crunch we seem to be heading for. Although Kahn is a wizard with the cap, so maybe it won't be as bad as it appears.

[NorthCoast]

A Kamara just signed 5 yr/$75M contract with the Aints. Too much.

[feltdizz]

A Kamara just signed 5 yr/$75M contract with the Aints. Too much.

Delvin Cook also signed 5/$63

Thats what I like to see. RB who reduce should be rewarded appropriately.

[Captain Lemming]

Delvin Cook also signed 5/$63

Thats what I like to see. RB who reduce should be rewarded appropriately.

I do too. As long as "we" don't follow suit.

If we do the smart thing and understand that their is zero association between paying big bucks to a back and championships, we get a competitive edge on stupid teams that overpay backs