After...

[Captain Lemming]

Exactly, there are teams out there with a lot of cap space and a need for play makers, Bell is going to a lot of money and in the structure he likes. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Bell and his agent don't already know what team and how much they are willing to pay.

I do wonder about this. Some shady under the table assurance.
Bell seems way too confident about getting paid.

If he winds up on a division foe, I will highly suspect Schengens (failed desire to hurt us this year as secondary motive)

[Mr.wizard]

All this talk about how much value Bell has lost is nothing but speculation, we don't have a gauge on what the free agent market is going to bring Bell, not even Gurley's contract paints an accurate picture because he never hit the open market.

[Docosc]

No hate for Bell here. He played the game within the rules. It is my opinion that he will get a pretty damn good contract from someone, but has seen his best days as a player already and will underperform it. He has made a 14.5 million dollar bet, and we shall see how it plays out. Regardless of what happens with him, I think the team will be fine. And the extra cap space next year opens up some interesting options.

[Captain Lemming]

But he can Still make more than the Steelers offer and not make up the 14.5 million, he never came out and said he wanted to make more than the offer plus make up the additional 14.5 million.

But he loses a whole season in his prime (maybe beyond it).

I think the thought that he assuredly makes that up on the back end is flawed.

Skills diminish not just due to playing, simple age does as well.

[Moonie]

Skills diminish not just due to playing, simple age does as well.

I would bet age is by far the most significant factor in career length. I think people are overestimating the "skills diminish due to playing" and the perception that Bell was "overused" in previous years. Risk of injury goes up with every single play - but does a career get longer when someone plays, for example, 20% less snaps a year? How much longer? A game? 2 games? 8 games? 16 games? 32 games? Is there any evidence of that at all? I would bet that chronological age and biology is the primary factor in a determining the end of a career, that isn't shortened due to injury.

It is all speculation as to what contract Bell will get, but everything that has transpired so far suggests Bell's strategy has been a terrible one, and getting worse seemingly every day - if he is stupid enough not to show up on Tuesday, the chance of the big guaranteed payday he seeks is practically gone, IMHFO. The fact that the guy is a half-wit and a complete jagoff makes that pleasurable to contemplate.

[Mr.wizard]

But he loses a whole season in his prime (maybe beyond it).

I think the thought that he assuredly makes that up on the back end is flawed.

Skills diminish not just due to playing, simple age does as well.

He is 26 he will be 27 for his next deal he still has plenty in the tank. Besides he wasn't hitting free agency until next year anyways, he would of been the same age no matter if he played this year or not. This is Bell's entire point in my opinion, he fulfilled and exceeded his rookie deal and now in the prime of his career he can't maximize his value because a team can just tag him and hold his rights hostage without him even signed to a contract nor allowing him to get other offers.

[Mr.wizard]

I would bet age is by far the most significant factor in career length. I think people are overestimating the "skills diminish due to playing" and the perception that Bell was "overused" in previous years. Risk of injury goes up with every single play - but does a career get longer when someone plays, for example, 20% less snaps a year? How much longer? A game? 2 games? 8 games? 16 games? 32 games? Is there any evidence of that at all? I would bet that chronological age and biology is the primary factor in a determining the end of a career, that isn't shortened due to injury.

It is all speculation as to what contract Bell will get, but everything that has transpired so far suggests Bell's strategy has been a terrible one, and getting worse seemingly every day - if he is stupid enough not to show up on Tuesday, the chance of the big guaranteed payday he seeks is practically gone, IMHFO. The fact that the guy is a half-wit and a complete jagoff makes that pleasurable to contemplate.

You see, nothing suggests his strategy is terrible, you really just want that to be the case.

[Moonie]

You see, nothing suggests his strategy is terrible, you really just want that to be the case.

You are wrong. There is abundant informed and logical commentary on this topic that sets forth why his strategy appears to be terrible and getting worse. And at some point, we will find out to what degree it was a terrible strategy or, as you in the small minority seem to believe, a good one.

[Steel Maniac]

I don’t think coming back was ever in his plans. Offseason will be fun. Bell wants freedom and the Steelers still own his rights.

Judging from all those pictures on Twitter, he wasn’t preparing for football to me. I don’t think he ever planned to play this year. Just like his agent said in the summer that he would hold out the entire season. No one believed the agent but that was the plan all along.

[Mr.wizard]

You are wrong. There is abundant informed and logical commentary on this topic that sets forth why his strategy appears to be terrible and getting worse. And at some point, we will find out to what degree it was a terrible strategy or, as you in the small minority seem to believe, a good one.

I don't know if it's a good strategy, that is the point, there is absolutely no evidence that suggests his strategy won't work out for him. I am perfectly comfortable with saying " I don't know" on the situation. You on the other hand have already declared the strategy terrible and called him a "half-wit". I don't know how you can only include "commentary" that says his strategy is terrible in your "evidence" but exclude commentary that says it's a good strategy. Your also assuming that Bell and his agent don't know what they are doing, we don't know what type of information they have, to think that they decided to hold out an entire season worth 14.5 million without having an idea of where they would be at in the market is just silly.

[Steel Maniac]

I do wonder about this. Some shady under the table assurance.
Bell seems way too confident about getting paid.

If he winds up on a division foe, I will highly suspect Schengens (failed desire to hurt us this year as secondary motive)

Hmmm.. I see your point Cap. But he Is going up against Tevin Coleman in free agency and three dynamite rookie RB’s coming out of college. I don’t see the big contract that he thinks he’s going to get.

[Moonie]

You on the other hand have already declared the strategy terrible and called him a "half-wit".

Yes. Yes, I did do that. And I can support both declarations.

I don't know how you can only include "commentary" that says his strategy is terrible in your "evidence" but exclude commentary that says it's a good strategy.

Quite easily. I'm not aware of any logical commentary that says his strategy is a good one. You, apparently, aren't either.

Why did you put commentary in quotes?

Your also assuming that Bell and his agent don't know what they are doing, we don't know what type of information they have, to think that they decided to hold out an entire season worth 14.5 million without having an idea of where they would be at in the market is just silly.

No, I don't know all the information they have, but I do know some of it. And no, it is not silly to be of the opinion that people have made poor strategic decisions, because that happens very often. I am of the opinion, for good reasons, that they have pursued the wrong strategy, and it will backfire on them. We will find out at some point whether I, along with many others, are correct in our opinions.

[Mr.wizard]

Yes. Yes, I did do that. And I can support both declarations.


Quite easily. I'm not aware of any logical commentary that says his strategy is a good one. You, apparently, aren't either.

Why did you put commentary in quotes?



No, I don't know all the information they have, but I do know some of it. And no, it is not silly to be of the opinion that people have made poor strategic decisions, because that happens very often. I am of the opinion, for good reasons, that they have pursued the wrong strategy, and it will backfire on them. We will find out at some point whether I, along with many others, are correct in our opinions.

Jones-drew has supported Bell, Antonio Brown, Todd Gurley, and many former players on sports talk shows. It doesn't matter how many opinions you gather they will never add up to fact. The point is there are arguments for both sides of the debate but you are using only the ones that you want to make your point.

People also make good strategic decisions and it's possible Bell and his agent are privy to information that the public is not.

[BURGH86STEEL]

But talented RUNNING BACKS were not being paid big bucks. Gurley is to date the exception.
Gurley is.
1. Younger
2. Faster
3. Less beat up
4. Less injury prone as a pro
5. Is not ONE STRIKE from a year suspension
6. Was not replaced by another back who is putting up superior numbers.
7. Played great ON THE TEAM THAT SIGNED HIM

Point 6 and 7 are big because Bell ain't no young Adrian Peterson (or even Gurley) supreme physical talent.

Bell averaged 4 ypc.....on our team. If he simply did not get the ludicrous carries we gave him last season he was NOT special as a runner.

What success would he have on a team with a lesser line?

Our line is weird. It excels at limiting penetration (thus the very low sacks), but save for Decastro, is not a special drive blocking unit.

Our line is a perfect compliment to Bells weird patient style.

I really think the already declining Bell will never be the same back on another team as he was with us a couple of years ago.

As you said, it only takes one. But the fact that Gurley got his doesn't mean Bell gets what he wants.

And dont forget what he needs is 14.5 mil more than we offered to make his plan worthwhile.

That is far more than Gurley money.

Bell is not one strike from a year suspension. Bell is still a good player. His place in history won't matter in contract negotiations going forward.

As with a lot of situations in life this is about understanding. I understand why Bell did what he did. Do you understand? We can go back and fourth on this issue. The reality is one team is going to pay Bell a lot of money. That's a fact. Will it be what the Steelers offered? Maybe. Will it be less than the Steelers offered? Maybe? Will it be more than the Steelers offered? Maybe. If I had to put money down I'd bet that Bell will get more money than the Steelers offered him.

Understanding. These were the questions. Make 14 mill for this season, suffer more wear and tear, or potentially an injury that might lessen his value as a FA? Or should Bell not play for 14 mill, have no more wear and tear, and no injury? He decided to not play. It's less risk involved not to play. Especially if he believes he will get more money as a FA.

Again, it's a risk. Bell is going to make a lot of money regardless.

"And dont forget what he needs is 14.5 mil more than we offered to make his plan worthwhile." Not really. Again, he's going to make a lot of money as a FA regardless of the contract he gets offered.

Is playing another year for 14 mill worth the risk of more wear and tear/potential injury vs reaching FA for untold millions? One team bro, one team. Simple understanding.

[Moonie]

Jones-drew has supported Bell, Antonio Brown, Todd Gurley, and many former players on sports talk shows. It doesn't matter how many opinions you gather they will never add up to fact. The point is there are arguments for both sides of the debate but you are using only the ones that you want to make your point.

You forgot to mention his mother supports him too. Supporting Bell is a lot different than discussing whether his strategy is any good. I tried to find where the 3 people you mention above said anything about the strategy Bell is pursuing. I found nothing by Brown or Gurley except that they hope Bell gets what he wants. There is an interview of Jones-Drew where he talks in circles a lot, but essentially says nothing except that Bell is not playing football because he is attempting to not get injured. He basically assumes that the contract Bell wants is just waiting for him, if he can survive the year without a career debilitating injury. If you and Jones-Drew think that is a good strategy for getting the contract he wants, so be it. Most people think it will not work, and can recite reasons to back that up.

I remain in the dark with respect to anyone, other than Jones-Drew, who has said Bell is pursuing a good strategy, so you are wrong when you suggest I was cherry-picking arguments. I was unaware of any. I am now aware of Jones-Drew and to the extent it matters, I think his opinion is flawed and assumes the answer to the question. He also seems to enjoy discussing Bell because he can continually raise his own contract negotiations from his playing days, which he appears to be bitter about.