LeVeon Bell

[oldunclemark]

….he accepts the dreaded 'franchise tag' and is forced to play for $14.5 million this season..

I know LVB wants multiple years guaranteed to protect against injury but the reason he wants the 'security' is the reason they cant give it to him.

 

Bell is the highest paid runner by more than $6 mil but if he'd take non-guaranteed money (which was offered) he'd get paid record RB bucks if the stays healthy.

 

He's trying to change the pay scale for running backs and he's going to lose that fight.

And if he's a free agent in the summer of 2009, good luck getting $15 mil guaranteed for 3 years (He reportedly was offered $75 mil for 5 years.....$33 mil guaranteed) .  Bell  just does not play the right position for long term guaranteed cash and everybody understands why..

 

 

Edited July 19, 2018 by oldunclemark

[Superman]

Agreed.

 

I'm beginning to really dislike the franchise tag because teams are abusing it, IMO (a very low percentage of tagged players reach long term deals with their current teams, and the whole point of the tag is to give teams a better chance at keeping their best players). I think the tag needs to change dramatically.

 

That said, it's very obvious that the market doesn't support Bell's contract demands. His tag number is now inflated because when he was first tagged in 2017, the number was skewed due to Adrian Peterson's $18m salary that season. AP's deal was already an outlier -- it was almost twice as big as the next highest paid RB -- and then the tag value for Bell was partly based on that outlier. Now Bell is tagged for the second year, and the number at $14.5m for 2018 is even more inflated.

 

The next five highest paid backs in the NFL have yearly averages of  $8.25m, $8m, $7.5m, $6.8m, and $6.5m. That's an average of $7.4m/year. That means that if Bell's franchise tag salary -- which is itself an outlier -- was removed from the equation, the franchise tag value for RBs in 2018 would be worth about half of what Bell's tag is worth.

 

Bottom line, the market for RBs doesn't support his contract demands. I think the Steelers are silly for reportedly offering him the $70-75m contract in the first place. I question even tagging him, especially with the exclusive tag.

 

And then you get to the historical trend that says RBs begin to slip in ability and production in their late 20s. And you add in the 400 Touch Rule that says that RBs who log more than 400 touches in any season typically break down shortly thereafter (Bell had 406 touches last season; 336 touches in 2016). His per touch production has already started to slip. Then you consider that Bell already has some history with injuries. To me, there's just no way to justify paying any high usage RB $15m/year in the modern NFL, and that includes Bell.

 

And then you look at how the Steelers have performed at times in Bell's absence. In 2015 and 2016, when Bell missed a total of 14 games, their offense was more productive and explosive than it was with him. I'm in no way blaming him for that, but it does illustrate that their offense doesn't rely on him as much as his production would indicate, and that they can replace him when they're ready to do so. 

 

There's also the report from Rapaport -- who isn't necessarily reliable when it comes to contract details, but he's also not likely to report something that's totally false -- that says the Steelers offer would have paid Bell $33m in 2018 and 2019, and with a rolling guarantee structure it might have paid him another $12m in 2020. That's an average of $15m/year in the first three years, and while it would not have been fully guaranteed, there would be a likely guarantee for at least the first two years, and maybe a third. 

 

Now, Bell is likely to taste unrestricted free agency in 2019, and that's good. But he's unlikely to receive any offers like what he just turned down from the Steelers, unless some team goes stupid (and that's possible). I think he just left a lot of money on the table, and I don't think it's coming back. And heaven forbid he gets hurt... again.

 

TL:DR -- I think the market has already spoken on RB value, and I think it's going to speak even louder next offseason. I don't see Bell getting anything close to what he jut turned down from the Steelers. 

[chad72]

He needs to fire his agent, which he will after next season, once he realizes the folly of his ways.

 

How long does he have till the Steelers offer is valid? Does anyone know? If he just wants to up the guaranteed money to $40 mil., he might want to be paid like the elite wide outs, there is that but as an average, this is as high as he is going to see.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, chad72 said:

He needs to fire his agent, which he will after next season, once he realizes the folly of his ways.

 

How long does he have till the Steelers offer is valid? Does anyone know? If he just wants to up the guaranteed money to $40 mil., he might want to be paid like the elite wide outs, there is that but as an average, this is as high as he is going to see.

 

The deadline was Monday. Now he'll play out the tag and most likely hit free agency next year. 

 

If he wants to be paid like a wide receiver, he has to play wide receiver at a high level. I don't know of any receivers averaging 8 yards/catch who make $15m/year. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

5 hours ago, chad72 said:

He needs to fire his agent, which he will after next season, once he realizes the folly of his ways.

 

How long does he have till the Steelers offer is valid? Does anyone know? If he just wants to up the guaranteed money to $40 mil., he might want to be paid like the elite wide outs, there is that but as an average, this is as high as he is going to see.

 

His agent has said the Steelers wanted to pay the position, not the player. However, his offer was supposedly much higher than the next highest paid RB.  Now, will he get his asking price (reportedly near 17 million / yr) on the FA market next year?  I guarantee he wont if he gets injured this year, especially a more major one.

 

5 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The deadline was Monday. Now he'll play out the tag and most likely hit free agency next year. 

 

If he wants to be paid like a wide receiver, he has to play wide receiver at a high level. I don't know of any receivers averaging 8 yards/catch who make $15m/year. 

 

Exactly. And the majority of his snaps (which were actually as RB offset or dotting the QB) near the LOS like one as well.  I hope he enjoys his $36,000.00 per touch payday this year.  I see the Steelers using him up (well over 400 touches) and putting him away (FA market) wet.  I wonder if there's a chance of the Steelers using the Transition tag for 2019?

[oldunclemark]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The deadline was Monday. Now he'll play out the tag and most likely hit free agency next year. 

 

If he wants to be paid like a wide receiver, he has to play wide receiver at a high level. I don't know of any receivers averaging 8 yards/catch who make $15m/year. 

 

....Its like Odell Beckham saying he wants to be paid like a starting quarterback.

He can make the argument just so long as he understands that it will never, ever happen

[Luck 4 president]

He’s being a diva like every offseason. He’s always saying he wants to retire a steeler but that’s obviously a lie. I honestly don’t think anyone will beat the Steelers offer next offseason and he’s going to regret not being more reasonable with the Steelers. He’s going to be 27 and we all know how RBs historically drop off at 28. No one is going to give him a long, heavily guaranteed contract because of that. And if the Steelers start preparing for the future and give more reps to the young guys, his stats won’t look as impressive which will hurt his value even more.

[southwest1]

1 hour ago, Luck 4 president said:

He’s being a diva like every offseason. He’s always saying he wants to retire a steeler but that’s obviously a lie. I honestly don’t think anyone will beat the Steelers offer next offseason and he’s going to regret not being more reasonable with the Steelers. He’s going to be 27 and we all know how RBs historically drop off at 28. No one is going to give him a long, heavily guaranteed contract because of that. And if the Steelers start preparing for the future and give more reps to the young guys, his stats won’t look as impressive which will hurt his value even more.

I agree with 90% of your post L4P. Bell does play his game of hold out chicken way too much. My only slight disagreement is this: Bell is solid on blitz pickup when Ben needs him to be & it bothers me when fans, not you, tend to forget or dismiss how skilled Bell is in this area of his game. When the playoffs come & you need to run or pick up a rusher or go home, that skill set is invaluable in my mind. 

 

I do admit that the Steelers know him the best & probably know how much Bell has left in his tank. No argument there. 

[southwest1]

10 hours ago, Superman said:

If he wants to be paid like a wide receiver, he has to play wide receiver at a high level. I don't know of any receivers averaging 8 yards/catch who make $15m/year.

I respectfully take issue with that statement Superman because why should Bell be penalized because he can do more than just take a QB handoff like a number of backs do? TE's go thru the same nonsense. They are expected to be swiss army knives & run crisp routes consistently & yet when it comes time to pay them for all their completions/moving the chains GMs go well technically, we only see you as a back with this slotted wage scale. Jimmy Graham went thru this foolishness in Seattle & Gronk in Boston. 

 

Also, OC's tend to draw up the first 15 plays & who gets which formations & touches when. If a coordinator uses another back on purpose, how come the GM gets to say your touches went down & therefore, you're not worth that much to our franchise anymore? Are you kidding me? Teams resort to these underhanded tactics all the time in order to reduce a back's salary. It's outrageous. 

[southwest1]

4 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

 

....Its like Odell Beckham saying he wants to be paid like a starting quarterback.

He can make the argument just so long as he understands that it will never, ever happen

Please don't compare OBJ to Leveon Bell Mark. OBJ is a problem child with his antics & lack of maturity on the field.

 

Bell, on the other hand, has been extremely productive in playoff games & he deserves to be financially compensated. A 2 yr deal for 25-30 million seems reasonable to me. 

 

Funny, how no one scoffs at QB extensions of close to 30 million a yr, but we can't pay a back who delivers late in the year when the snow falls? Really? Unbelievable. 

[southwest1]

Look, I realize that the running back position has sifted or diminished as the NFL game became a more ariel attack game over the yrs. But, when teams can't run in December, they are screwed & bubble screen gadget plays seldom yield yardage as the competition of opposing defenses gets tighter, faster, & quicker with less mistakes to take advantage of on the field. 

 

People keep telling me it's a throwing game now. Okay. Yes, I agree that it is. But, what if the league took away or was more strict on what warrants a roughing the passer penalty now. I guarantee you that the value of RBs would skyrocket again if you could kick the snot out of QBs like Lawrence Taylor did in the 90's again. 

 

It's because QBs are so protected now in the pocket that running backs are being so devalued now. Owners wanna sell season ticket packages at stadiums & they can't do that if their face of the franchise gets sacked frequently & breaks more than a fingernail. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

8 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Look, I realize that the running back position has sifted or diminished as the NFL game became a more ariel attack game over the yrs. But, when teams can't run in December, they are screwed & bubble screen gadget plays seldom yield yardage as the competition of opposing defenses gets tighter, faster, & quicker with less mistakes to take advantage of on the field. 

 

People keep telling me it's a throwing game now. Okay. Yes, I agree that it is. But, what if the league took away or was more strict on what warrants a roughing the passer penalty now. I guarantee you that the value of RBs would skyrocket again if you could kick the snot out of QBs like Lawrence Taylor did in the 90's again. 

 

It's because QBs are so protected now in the pocket that running backs are being so devalued now. Owners wanna sell season ticket packages at stadiums & they can't do that if their face of the franchise gets sacked frequently & breaks more than a fingernail. 

The Steelers have also known to be cheap over the years as in not paying their better players. How they have won so many SB's is puzzling. That is 1 team that has got alot of REF help in SB's I will say that. 2005/06 vs Seattle looked rigged. That is another topic. I agree with you, I would've gave Bell a huge 2 year deal but not more because of his age. Predator is on HBO, great stuff. "If it bleeds, we can kill it" - Arnold.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The Steelers have also known to be cheap over the years as in not paying their better players. How they have won so many SB's is puzzling. That is 1 team that has got alot of REF help in SB's I will say that. 2005/06 vs Seattle looked rigged. That is another topic. I agree with you, I would've gave Bell a huge 2 year deal but not more because of his age. Predator is on HBO, great stuff. "If it bleeds, we can kill it" - Arnold.

Bell is actually only 26 but he does have alot of wear and tear on him. I thought he was older, he seems like he's been around forever LOL

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Bell is actually only 26 but he does have alot of wear and tear on him. I thought he was older, he seems like he's been around forever LOL

 

How old was Demarco Murray when he had his big season, and then never performed again?

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

How old was Demarco Murray when he had his big season, and then never performed again?

Great point, roughly the same age as Bell is now.

[southwest1]

35 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The Steelers have also known to be cheap over the years as in not paying their better players. How they have won so many SB's is puzzling. That is 1 team that has got alot of REF help in SB's I will say that. 2005/06 vs Seattle looked rigged. That is another topic. I agree with you, I would've gave Bell a huge 2 year deal but not more because of his age. Predator is on HBO, great stuff. "If it bleeds, we can kill it" - Arnold.

Uh huh. Pittsburgh does have a reputation for being frugal. Not as cheap as say the Bengals but close. I remember that Seahawks vs Steelers SB in Detroit. Worst zebra officiating I have ever seen in my life. Jesus. I like Bill Cowher & Jerome Bettis, but the refs gave them a gift. Wow. 

 

Yeah, the original Predator is a classic! They are re-making it again. I wish Hollywood would stop rebooting old money maker blockbusters & do something original. Yes, I know. Eventually, I will see this updated Predator too. You can joke that I'm being a hypocrite. LOL! Gotta compare the older version with the latest one. That's how the studios nail ya. 

 

Arnold was awesome in the original. I like Carl Weathers too. It's a shame that both Dutch & Apollo Creed had to die in 2 of his most famous flicks though. 

 

"Get to the choppa!" I mean chopper.

 

I love the sinister cackle of the alien at the end right before his nuclear weapon goes ka boom. 

 

Sneak peek trailer time...

 

 

 

My apologies for the profanity used above in the clip moderators. My bad. 

[Dark Superman]

1 hour ago, southwest1 said:

Uh huh. Pittsburgh does have a reputation for being frugal. Not as cheap as say the Bengals but close. I remember that Seahawks vs Steelers SB in Detroit. Worst zebra officiating I have ever seen in my life. Jesus. I like Bill Cowher & Jerome Bettis, but the refs gave them a gift. Wow. 

 

Yeah, the original Predator is a classic! They are re-making it again. I wish Hollywood would stop rebooting old money maker blockbusters & do something original. Yes, I know. Eventually, I will see this updated Predator too. You can joke that I'm being a hypocrite. LOL! Gotta compare the older version with the latest one. That's how the studios nail ya. 

 

Arnold was awesome in the original. I like Carl Weathers too. It's a shame that both Dutch & Apollo Creed had to die in 2 of his most famous flicks though. 

 

"Get to the choppa!" I mean chopper.

 

I love the sinister cackle of the alien at the end right before his nuclear weapon goes ka boom. 

 

Sneak peek trailer time...

 

 

 

My apologies for the profanity used above in the clip moderators. My bad. 

2

 

 

Don't forget about his death as "Chubbs" in Happy Gilmore!

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 7/20/2018 at 12:35 AM, southwest1 said:

I respectfully take issue with that statement Superman because why should Bell be penalized because he can do more than just take a QB handoff like a number of backs do? TE's go thru the same nonsense. They are expected to be swiss army knives & run crisp routes consistently & yet when it comes time to pay them for all their completions/moving the chains GMs go well technically, we only see you as a back with this slotted wage scale. Jimmy Graham went thru this foolishness in Seattle & Gronk in Boston. 

 

They have to have the NFL and NFLPA agree to a better range for each position, and subsets for 'extra' capability that is quantified.  The system is a mess.  You brought up Jimmy Graham. He lined up out wide or in the slot 2/3 of his snaps, yet an arbitrator ruled he was a still TE, and not a WR; and thus allowed Saints to keep his reduced his tender. This ruling was because his position in the Saints offense has always involved a combination of splitting out wide to run pass routes and staying in to block -- especially in today's modern passing offenses.  Add carrying the ball to that, and you get Bell's duties with Steelers. He likely would lose in arbitration as well. 

 

It's reported Bell rejected a last minute offer from the Steelers that was worth a total of $70 million over five years (or $14 million per season). One reason he likely rejected that is because it was nowhere near his asking price, which was reportedly in the neighborhood of $17 million per season. So he took the 14.5 million franchise tag deal instead.

The Pittsburgh offer supposedly included $33 million guaranteed in the first two years and a value of $45 million over the first three years (not all of that guaranteed, and evidently none guaranteed in his last 2 years).

 

OTOH, Guards hit the FA market and racked up huge sums of money. Why?  they were O line, and the LT position raised that (tender) money up many notches for all O lineman. Some teams wouldn't shell that out for their OG, thus Those FA Guards like Norwell got new teams.

 

Quote

Also, OC's tend to draw up the first 15 plays & who gets which formations & touches when. If a coordinator uses another back on purpose, how come the GM gets to say your touches went down & therefore, you're not worth that much to our franchise anymore? Are you kidding me? Teams resort to these underhanded tactics all the time in order to reduce a back's salary. It's outrageous. 

 

If a team wants to get rid of you, that could be one way on how it is done.  NFL is a tough business.  But this is more injurious to the 'incentive laden' players contract. Mind you, once a vested veteran is on a roster at the very beginning (week 1), his salary is guaranteed.  He collects it all, even if he doesn't play much, or even gets released.  Another team can sign him and he can thus 'double dip'. But the vet player can only do that once, I believe.  The players recourse is more guaranteed money, over more years.  That is the push/pull that goes on even today.

 

But I feel a teams need to win overrules any desire to possibly reduce 'touches' for a player just to devalue him.

 

[Dark Superman]

No way I'm paying a Running Back $14 million a year. Teams roll with 2-3 backs a game for a reason.

[oldunclemark]

10 hours ago, Savage said:

No way I'm paying a Running Back $14 million a year. Teams roll with 2-3 backs a game for a reason.

Exactly,  He just isn't worth it..when you consider his replacement value.

He just got offered the best contract he's ever going to get as an active player in the NFL...and he turned it down...

 

...And his arguement is bogus.

   You cant use other players salaries at your position to base your salary on when you are under the league pay ceiling (which the franchise tag does) and then use other positions salary scale to base your salary on when you want more. 

That's like the best paid offensive tackle claiming that since he clears the way for the QB and blocks for rushers on top of it...….that he certainly should make as much as the QB who only throws passes..right?

 

The assistant manger at Kentucky Fried Chicken certainly should get paid more because he does all the work the workers do,  virtually is the manager in the evening, works 40% more hours  and stays till closing time while the manager goes home at 5 p.m.

Sounds great. Try flying that argument past the colonel.  You can get all the leftover wings at closing time but you don't get paid the manger's money unless you are the manager.

 

Edited July 21, 2018 by oldunclemark

[oldunclemark]

21 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

They have to have the NFL and NFLPA agree to a better range for each position, and subsets for 'extra' capability that is quantified.  The system is a mess.  You brought up Jimmy Graham. He lined up out wide or in the slot 2/3 of his snaps, yet an arbitrator ruled he was a still TE, and not a WR; and thus allowed Saints to keep his reduced his tender. This ruling was because his position in the Saints offense has always involved a combination of splitting out wide to run pass routes and staying in to block -- especially in today's modern passing offenses.  Add carrying the ball to that, and you get Bell's duties with Steelers. He likely would lose in arbitration as well. 

 

It's reported Bell rejected a last minute offer from the Steelers that was worth a total of $70 million over five years (or $14 million per season). One reason he likely rejected that is because it was nowhere near his asking price, which was reportedly in the neighborhood of $17 million per season. So he took the 14.5 million franchise tag deal instead.

The Pittsburgh offer supposedly included $33 million guaranteed in the first two years and a value of $45 million over the first three years (not all of that guaranteed, and evidently none guaranteed in his last 2 years).

 

 

If Bell was offered $14 mil for 5 years and he truly wants to get paid what he.s worth (and not just win an argument with the Steelers), he should have taken it.

If his play in 2018 and 2019 equals what he has done previously, his contract would have been guaranteed for 2020..

If his 2020 play maintained his standard....LVB would have been paid for 2021...and so on.

 

By not taking the deal, he could be forced to accept a much smaller salary in 2019 (somewhere else) and could be unemployed and unpaid by 2021.  It sounds like the money, while important to him, isnt as big a deal as 'trying to win the argument' (one he cant win) about the pay scale.

 

 The NFL doesnt pay injured or washed up players millions simply because they signed them to long term guaranteed contracts years before they got hurt or went down hill performance-wise.  That's one reason the league is so successful financially.

Edited July 21, 2018 by oldunclemark

[jameszeigler834]

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 10:57 PM, oldunclemark said:

….he accepts the dreaded 'franchise tag' and is forced to play for $14.5 million this season..

I know LVB wants multiple years guaranteed to protect against injury but the reason he wants the 'security' is the reason they cant give it to him.

 

Bell is the highest paid runner by more than $6 mil but if he'd take non-guaranteed money (which was offered) he'd get paid record RB bucks if the stays healthy.

 

He's trying to change the pay scale for running backs and he's going to lose that fight.

And if he's a free agent in the summer of 2009, good luck getting $15 mil guaranteed for 3 years (He reportedly was offered $75 mil for 5 years.....$33 mil guaranteed) .  Bell  just does not play the right position for long term guaranteed cash and everybody understands why..

 

 

He is a tool last year they wouldn't give him 15 mil a year this year AB restructured his deal so he could get paid then the Steelers agree to 15 then he says he wants 17 he is just being a ** now.

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

Exactly,  He just isn't worth it..when you consider his replacement value.

He just got offered the best contract he's ever going to get as an active player in the NFL...and he turned it down...

 

...(snip)

 

2 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

If Bell was offered $14 mil for 5 years and he truly wants to get paid what he.s worth (and not just win an argument with the Steelers), he should have taken it. 

...(snip)

 

OK, after the season ends, do the Steelers at some point place the Transition tag on him?  It let's him try the market, and the club gets a chance to match an offer and retain him if they desire?

[oldunclemark]

52 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

OK, after the season ends, do the Steelers at some point place the Transition tag on him?  It let's him try the market, and the club gets a chance to match an offer and retain him if they desire?

Possible. He could choose not to play.

It seems this is about him making a statement.  Not playing a year would be making a big statement.  Go for it.

 

But he has to decide what he actually can do here. 

He cannot change the salary structure of the NFL.  He has no way to do that.

He got $12 mil last year and he's getting $14 mil this year.

He's not being low-balled or shortchanged by the Steelers in any way.

They are being more than fair to him.

So the question still stands: Is he trying to get a 'victory' over Steelers management?.

..and if so, how does he 'win' this negotiation when he has zero leverage.

 

[Surge89]

On 7/19/2018 at 11:52 PM, southwest1 said:

Please don't compare OBJ to Leveon Bell Mark. OBJ is a problem child with his antics & lack of maturity on the field.

 

Bell, on the other hand, has been extremely productive in playoff games & he deserves to be financially compensated. A 2 yr deal for 25-30 million seems reasonable to me. 

 

Funny, how no one scoffs at QB extensions of close to 30 million a yr, but we can't pay a back who delivers late in the year when the snow falls? Really? Unbelievable. 

 

???? 

 

Issue with the bolded.  Since when has Bell ever been a playoff performer.  He's usually hurt by that time of the season hence why he's only played in 2016/2017 playoffs... Again yet another argument against him as he's never there when he's actually needed. 

 

We need to remember that the NFL market still works on a type of supply and demand.  No one scoffs at 30 million dollar extensions for quarterbacks because it is common knowledge that a QB who can perform at an NFL level is extremely rare.  And one who is elite at the NFL level is even rarer hence the amount of money thrown to QBs.  Bell has a fundemental issue against him in that yes he's a great blocker and yes he's a great pass catcher and yes he can run well but every single attribute he brings to the table isn't in high demand because he only blocks/runs at an elite level which are both low desired traits since committee and specialist backs can take care of that issue more efficiently. 

 

Also imo his biggest issue is that the Steelers have a ton of talent at the receiver position.  They don't need Bell to receive a 100 balls they have Schuster and AB.  They don't need Bell to have 2000 yards rushing they have a promising rookie in Connor who can carry for about 1200 and still squeeze out some more yards from the other complimentary backs.  His pass blocking is nice but they also have one of the most talented Olines in the NFL and definite top 3 in the AFC...

 

Bell has nothing to stand on and the sheer fact that the Steelers offered anything over 12 million a year is laughable.  Sadly though I knew this was coming. Me and Superman had a discussion a couple years ago about the diminishment of the RB and such and I knew the inflation was coming. It's inevitable and Gurley/Elliot will be the next ones with 12million plus contracts. 

 

[Superman]

On 7/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, southwest1 said:

I respectfully take issue with that statement Superman because why should Bell be penalized because he can do more than just take a QB handoff like a number of backs do? TE's go thru the same nonsense. They are expected to be swiss army knives & run crisp routes consistently & yet when it comes time to pay them for all their completions/moving the chains GMs go well technically, we only see you as a back with this slotted wage scale. Jimmy Graham went thru this foolishness in Seattle & Gronk in Boston. 

 

Also, OC's tend to draw up the first 15 plays & who gets which formations & touches when. If a coordinator uses another back on purpose, how come the GM gets to say your touches went down & therefore, you're not worth that much to our franchise anymore? Are you kidding me? Teams resort to these underhanded tactics all the time in order to reduce a back's salary. It's outrageous. 

 

Penalized? He just got offered nearly twice as much as the next highest paid player at his position. He wants to be paid like he's one of the best players at a different position. 

 

Also, you get paid for your production and the value you bring, not because of sentimentality. Any back with a high usage rate, a history of injury, and approaching his late 20s has diminishing value, specifically because his production is likely to decrease, and because the production from RBs is highly replaceable. So why should any team pay any player like he's going to be a prime performer when history indicates he won't continue to be a prime performer?

[crazycolt1]

On ‎7‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 1:15 AM, southwest1 said:

Look, I realize that the running back position has sifted or diminished as the NFL game became a more ariel attack game over the yrs. But, when teams can't run in December, they are screwed & bubble screen gadget plays seldom yield yardage as the competition of opposing defenses gets tighter, faster, & quicker with less mistakes to take advantage of on the field. 

 

People keep telling me it's a throwing game now. Okay. Yes, I agree that it is. But, what if the league took away or was more strict on what warrants a roughing the passer penalty now. I guarantee you that the value of RBs would skyrocket again if you could kick the snot out of QBs like Lawrence Taylor did in the 90's again. 

 

It's because QBs are so protected now in the pocket that running backs are being so devalued now. Owners wanna sell season ticket packages at stadiums & they can't do that if their face of the franchise gets sacked frequently & breaks more than a fingernail. 

One reason RBs have diminished in value is teams are balking at spending a lot of money on just one RB.  To gamble a lot of money on the RB position when it is one of the most injured positions in football is not smart. Look, when Bell went down a couple of years ago the back up RB stepped in and the Steelers lost very little punch.

With that said for a RB to be real successful the team has to have the O-line to make him good. I understand that Bell is a very good RB but he hasn't been that durable his career. Not enough to be paid two times as much as the next RB anyway.

[NewColtsFan]

I saw an interesting article in the last few weeks....

 

Basically said the recent rash of RBs drafted in the top-10 the last few years is going to makes those backs among the highest paid players at their position when their rookie deal hits year 5.

 

So guys like Gurley, Elliott, Fournette, McCaffrey,  Barkley and Gordon (drafted around 20-ish). are going to face interesting negotiations on their second contract.

 

All could get the same treatment as Bell and get tagged for a couple of years or teams could try to work out a reasonable deal.   But with rookie deals lasting 5 years and then you get tagged twice,  it’s not hard to look down the road and seeing history repeat itself with these backs.   Teams will have had them for 7 years, and at that point with the service they’ve given, these guys won’t have much tread left on their tires.

 

Sucks to be a RB.   But you can see the logic from the management side.

 

Worth watching in the near future.

 

[oldunclemark]

On 7/19/2018 at 11:52 PM, southwest1 said:

Please don't compare OBJ to Leveon Bell Mark. OBJ is a problem child with his antics & lack of maturity on the field.

 

Bell, on the other hand, has been extremely productive in playoff games & he deserves to be financially compensated. A 2 yr deal for 25-30 million seems reasonable to me. 

 

Funny, how no one scoffs at QB extensions of close to 30 million a yr, but we can't pay a back who delivers late in the year when the snow falls? Really? Unbelievable. 

The contract situations with Beckham and Bell are the same......sw..

It has nothing to do with Odell's off the field craziness or LeVeon's suspensions.

It has little to do with their on-the-field production.

It has to do with them not being quarterbacks.  That's it.

This is a situation where we all know why something is the way it is but we talk it up and down and around the block..  Its being reported that LeVeon Bell has turned down 70 over 5 years...33 milion guaranteed..so he has already rejected your very reasonable deal...and took $14 mil for one year.  Doesnt that suggest to you that hes trying to make a point?. Its not all about him and his money?

 

Again. Star QBs are much more valuable than running backs.

You just cant compare them.

The QB will always get paid more

LeVeon Bell, can gain 2,500 yards and score 40 TDs next season and he still wont get guaranteed money like Andrew Luck got. Its the salary scale...and its fair.

 The Colts didnt offer their 1,000-yard rusher a one-year low bucks deal because a 1,000-yard rusher is easily replaced any year..and you dont need one to win anyway.

We're about to see how many wins Andrew Luck means to the Colts.

My guess is 6 to 8.

Edited July 23, 2018 by oldunclemark

[NewColtsFan]

On 7/19/2018 at 9:52 PM, southwest1 said:

Please don't compare OBJ to Leveon Bell Mark. OBJ is a problem child with his antics & lack of maturity on the field.

 

Bell, on the other hand, has been extremely productive in playoff games & he deserves to be financially compensated. A 2 yr deal for 25-30 million seems reasonable to me. 

 

Funny, how no one scoffs at QB extensions of close to 30 million a yr, but we can't pay a back who delivers late in the year when the snow falls? Really? Unbelievable. 

 

Not sure you realize that Bell has turned down offers much larger than that.    He's turned down offers of 3 years, 4 years, and now 5 years.     He's turned down more guaranteed money than you have in your sentence that you think is far.

 

The last offer was reportedly 5 years, 70 million with roughly 33 Mill guaranteed.     Turned down. 

 

If you were Pittsburgh,  you'd have done the exact same thing.    I personally think Bell and his agents are going to mis-read the market.     Hard to see Bell being offered 5/75 with 40 mill guaranteed a year from now after this coming season.     I could be wrong,   but it's hard to see it.

 

[Superman]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Basically said the recent rash of RBs drafted in the top-10 the last few years is going to makes those backs among the highest paid players at their position when their rookie deal hits year 5.

 

Believe it or not, some of them already are. Elliott, Fournette and now Barkley are all in the top 8. Based on yearly average, Barkley is #4, Fournette is #6, and Elliott is #8. (Elliott's average is $6.2m; #9 is Duke Johnson, who just signed an extension that will pay him $5.2m/year.) 

 

The fifth year option, like the franchise tag, is based on the average of players at the same position. The three are all top ten picks, so their options will be based on the top 10 RB cash earned for the previous season. The Cowboys have to decide on Elliott next offseason, and his option, based on this year's cash for top ten RBs, will be a just about $9m (which is slightly less than Gurley's $9.3m). We'll see what kind of contract Bell gets next offseason. His Year 1 cash might create a big bump for Fournette the following season; Gurley's next deal will have an impact also.

 

Even if we assume those three all continue to play at a high level throughout their rookie deals, it's difficult to project what will happen after their options. Elliott's fifth year is 2020, which is the last year of the CBA. Fournette's is 2021; Barkley's will be 2022. I don't expect any of them to get new long term contracts before a new CBA is done, and I bet Elliott's negotiations will wind up being the most protracted because a) he'll be setting the precedent for the next generation of RBs, and b) he has off the field concerns.

 

All of these numbers continue to be affected by Adrian Peterson's 7 year, $100m contract, which was signed in 2011, about 6 weeks into the current CBA, even though free agent RBs don't come close to that kind of value anymore. Three years ago, when Demarco Murray was 27 and coming off of a monster season, he barely got $8.5m/year. The RB tag that year would have been nearly $11m. 

 

The market is pretty clear when it comes to RB value. The last vestiges of an old era of RB compensation are muddying the waters. I think Bell being a free agent next year will start to clear things up a little.

[jvan1973]

Gurley just got 4 yrs for 60 million.   40 million guaranteed.    He has a lot fewer miles on him than bell though

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Gurley just got 4 yrs for 60 million.   40 million guaranteed.    He has a lot fewer miles on him than bell though

 

I don't like the number, but they're smart to lock him down early and spread that money over 6 years, assuming he plays out the contract. They'll probably add some cap space in 2019 and not have to worry about the tag in 2020, so between flexibility and keeping their best offensive weapon, it makes sense. 

[stitches]

I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but Bell has been dropping some not so subtle hints about liking the possibility of playing for the Colts on social media:

 

 

[jameszeigler834]

On ‎7‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 7:56 PM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

OK, after the season ends, do the Steelers at some point place the Transition tag on him?  It let's him try the market, and the club gets a chance to match an offer and retain him if they desire?

He wanted 15 last offseason and they offered that this year he said he now wanted 17 he isn't worth that what a head case.

[Statiik82]

16 minutes ago, stitches said:

I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but Bell has been dropping some not so subtle hints about liking the possibility of playing for the Colts on social media:

 

 

In this day and age, sometimes this means a lot!

That would be so legit!

[Superman]

5 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

He wanted 15 last offseason and they offered that this year he said he now wanted 17 he isn't worth that what a head case.

 

Why does that make him a head case? 

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, jameszeigler834 said:

He wanted 15 last offseason and they offered that this year he said he now wanted 17 he isn't worth that what a head case.

 

Without taking a side in the “is he worth it” discussion here....

 

This is my understanding...

 

Pittsburgh has reportedly offered 5/70, 14 per.    Bell reportedly wants 5/75, 15 per.

 

But, even that is not the biggest hurdle to clear.   Reportedly the Steelers have only guaranteed 33 mill.   That’s less than 50 percent of the total offer.

 

By comparison,  Todd Gurley just received 4/60, 15 per year.   But the key is the Rams guaranteed 45 mill.   That’s 75 percent of the offer.

 

The Rams have offered LESS total, 60 vs 70 and yet have guaranteed MORE, 45 vs 33.   

 

What the Rams did will make it harder for every other team with a top running back to agree on a deal.   Good for the Rams.   Everyone else now has to react, which us going to be much harder and more expensive.

 

[Surge89]

8 hours ago, stitches said:

I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but Bell has been dropping some not so subtle hints about liking the possibility of playing for the Colts on social media:

 

 

 

Ugh hope not.  I don't want a player who sees it more improtant to rap and smoke weed than come in shape to camp.  

 

And he wants rediculous money? No thank you.

[stitches]

BTW someone on reddit went through every nfl instagram post and Bell commented on 0 posts related to any team other than the Colts, he's commented on multiple Colts stories and all with veiled hints.