Surge89

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    2,027
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

919 Starter

Recent Profile Visitors

7,981 profile views
  1. Surge89

    Is it time we started thanking Josh McDaniels?

    Popular opinion based on nothing but intuition: with McDaniels we would have no more than 2 wins this season and reports of players wanting out and the rumor mill saying Luck's dad wants him out of Indy before next year. I think my opinion is way way more likely than yours. Again based on nothing but common intuition and I never liked the guy to begin with. (I was one of the very few filled with dread on the supposed hire)
  2. Surge89

    Luck and manning.

    Ooof... Short term memories... Peyton came into a dumspter fire as well... With a coach that is now a common day football meme...
  3. Surge89

    Top Rated Rookie LB's (Mid Season)

    Watch LVE he's really good and a joy to watch if you like Linebacker play. I loved him in the draft but had him behind Leonard (I thought Leonard had better pass rushing ability so more valuable, in fact in one of my first big boards I posted here I believe I had him at outside Linebacker but ended with him being a higher ceiling ILB). LVE is playing lights out, I'm not sure I'd say he's performing better than Leonard but I don't think it's too outlandish for PFF to have this type of ranking. My opinion though is that Leonard is performing at the caliber everyone was expecting out of Roquan Smith. Which is pro bowl material.
  4. Ew. Not sure if I'll be a part of that take. I'm not sure Ben is in the gold jacket conversation without him and I'm not sure Manning has his gunslinger mentality without him. For sure he helped Luck as time has shown us the rest of coaching staff was not a good offensive minded staff. I won't even say he's a mediocre OC. Every offense he has had puts up elite numbers and has breakout players besides the QB. Of course he gets the QB killed so he always has a negative light but it is what it is.
  5. Watch out I've been saying this for about a year and have been dragged through the woodwork multiple times on this site lol...
  6. It's double edged... While he does get his QBs absolutely murdered he also has a really good track record of being a key developer of Manning, Ben, and Luck early in their careers. He sort of unlocks them. But yes I do agree shortly after you need to fire him before you see your QB in a wheel chair (see Manning, Ben and Luck ROFL).
  7. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    You make a ton of sense but the initial statement is what makes the rest flawed. There is piling evidence that grows by each week Bell misses that shows he is less special than his outstanding multiple first round pick oline. You state that he is no doubt an improvement to this team yet can you say he's a better runner than Mack? Mack has higher chances of taking it to the house, Mack runs a much more traditional style which is easier for olineman to block for (unlike Bell and his hold them for 10 seconds style) and Mack honestly has a higher ceiling. Bell can do 2 things better. He can catch it and he can pass protect. And those 2 things are awesome but also come with a heavily inflated contract, an easily disgruntled player, a player with suspension history, and a questionable passion for the game. Add all of that up and I don't think the answer is so cut and dry as you make it. In fact I'd argue he'd be more detrimental than an asset. But that's solely on my biased opinion.
  8. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    Right I completely understand that part but I still don't see how that is bad practice from the Steelers side when A. Even though it's not a high guarantee like consecutive tags it's still much higher than the previous average in an effort to avoid the tag and B. We are talking about a running back before the Gurley deal. There was just no precedent about giving running backs 3 tags worth of guaranteed money.
  9. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    Very interesting take. This is why I enjoy talking about this side of the game with you. Thank you for the insight. Still here is my issue with the particular stance on the Steelers use of the tag. 2 problems. First the tag is an inflator. It inflated the base number to an extremely high salary based off inflated free agent money that was far from the norm. To say the Steelers were obviously going to run him into the ground and cut him seems a little bit off as not only did they offer him 3 decent contracts (I understand the stance that the value of those contracts were lower than the value of 3 consecutive tags) but the fact still remains that all 3 were quite higher than the previous standard non franchise tag contracts. And the second issue is do the Steelers have any history of doing a run him into the ground and cut dealing with players? For the life of me I can't remember ever hearing of an issue with money in fact (and I may be wrong) but usually the Steelers are in cap hell because of their committed approach to paying players their value... That's why I second guess when you say it's obvious that was their intention as I just don't understand how you come to that conclusion based simply on the fact that the guaranteed wasn't more than three consecutive tags. Maybe I'm just naive, who knows... Also I'd like to add that you insinuated that the Steelers only offered him the tag. "Bell's position is this: "You're tagging me, you obviously agree that I'm valuable, I'm asking you to commit to that value." And that's a fair stance;..." This is just not a fair paragraph as the Steelers offered him 12 million per year before the tag was even in the conversation and he refused it because he had his eyes set on the 14 million tag that was coming the next year. He forced the situation for the Steelers to place that tag as yes they did value him and they showed him how much but he wanted an absurd number and used his negotiating tactics to get to that number by playing hard ball. I don't see how that is bad practice by the Steelers when from the beginning they have been trying to avoid the tag (since their salary cap situation is a mess right now anyways) and Bell is the one who keeps pushing the number as far as he can go. I see it as a very smart move from the Steelers to use him as much as possible if he doesn't agree with the value you have on him as an org and you aren't even close. The only tactic the Steelers have in response is ok we will use whatever we can and pay a consecutive tag which will still get you your money and give us another year to try and reach on a higher market. Yet still the offer was below Bell's standard. As far as Mack goes and the pay equal to 3 consecutive tags. I can see how that type of negiating tactic works for a pass rusher or QB who not only have the leverage to pull that off but also have actual business sense to invest in those positions. If you let a RB use those same tactics with much less leverage you are going to run into huge problems with contract inflation. (Yet another issue with this dang tag). I am just too ignorant of the subject to offer any resolutions but I do agree the tag needs reform and seems abusive no matter which way you slice it.
  10. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    Hmm So here is one. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/leveon-bell-reportedly-turned-down-a-monstrous-70-million-deal-from-the-steelers/amp/ That's 14 mil per year. Then we have this https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/platform/amp/nfl-pittsburgh-steelers-news/2017/7/19/15994860/steelers-rejected-5-year-offer-to-leveon-bell-released-to-the-public-franchise-tag This was 12mil per year a whole year before. Then we have the original offer that you are mentioning https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2799309-report-leveon-bell-offered-3-year-47m-contract-from-steelers-in-summer.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwjl4r2exKreAhVIC6wKHRFyAWUQFjAGegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0mQlD4lTRLRIjiST0UoR2w&ampcf=1 Which is still overpayment I'm not sure how you justify that it wasn't.
  11. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    Are you confusing me with someone else? I have never said running backs should be one dimensional. This isn't even a conversation about that. This about why paying Bell at his demanded price was a bad idea to begin with. I would get your people straight before attempting to insult Mr. Einstein.
  12. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    You alluded to Marshall Faulk... You are the one who brought him. And yes plenty can do both but very very few can do both at an elite level. Hence why they aren't payed as such.
  13. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    So how did I say running backs need to be piegeon holed? Still facts are facts running backs (it's even in the name) need to be able to run the ball. And if you are going to pay them elite money they need to be able to run the ball at an elite level not just catch at an elite level. This is why the RB by committee works wonders for teams. Good teams get above average runners who can do one other thing above average like pass blocking or catching and pay a 1/4 of the salary but get the same type of production. Your allusion to Marshall Faulk is a fallacy because there has been only one Marshall Faulk and yes he would have been a no brainer to pay big money.
  14. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    And that right there is the issue. Bell is not Faulk. It's not even close. Faulk was a home run hitter who could inflate an oline. Bell has no where near the same running capability. He may be a similar threat as a pass catcher but as a RB you need to be a better runner before being compared to HoF RUNNING BACKS.
  15. Surge89

    Marlon Mack / Le'Veon Bell

    Despite the franchise tag being bad in it's innant nature, how did the Steelers not handle this well exactly? Their offer was not weak in the slightest and was an overpayment in the first place. Short term memory. The Steelers offer was one of the highest in history for a runningback who had multiple off the field questions and suspensions with a ton of use. In no way did the Steelers ever short change him (they we're fools to offer that in the first place) and we're consistently trying to offer him deals throughout the past year and a half. To say they handled it badly is just not correct. This is completely at the fault of the RB who overvalued himself thinking he somehow has a higher case for salary than a younger, more productive, less oline dependent Todd Gurley. Bell bought into the hype fans gave him that he was on his way to a gold jacket and the facts say otherwise.