Steelers Expected to Franchise Bell

[Mike FF Today 607]

Sounds the two sides are closer than last year but expect the franchise tag to be used on Bell for the 2nd year in a row unless a last-minute deal can be reached before Tuesday's deadline. We got some new quotes from Bell, making the case why he deservers more jack...

 

"We're not coming to a number we both agree on -- they are too low, or I guess they feel I'm too high," Bell said. "I'm playing for strictly my value to the team. That's what I'm asking. I don't think I should settle for anything less than what I'm valued at."

 

Bell said he wasn't bluffing when he told ESPN in January that he'll contemplate retirement if asked to play on the tag another year. All options are on the table.

"I just have to decide if I'm going to play when the time comes," Bell said.

 

Bell, 26, confirmed last year he turned down a contract worth $42 million over the first three years and an average of $13.3 million over the life of the deal.

 

"Earlier I said I felt we would get one done, and this year we are a lot closer than last year. In good spirit, I feel we can get something done. But unless something drastic changes, it won't be [this week]."

[Smileseers 54]

Bluffers bluff until they have to show their cards or fold. ZERO chance Bell retires.

 

Even his mom wanted him to sign the contract last year.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Wow, franchising a rb for a second year.

[ralphster 274]

he's worth it to the steelers imo.

[LOD01 185]

Bluffers bluff until they have to show their cards or fold. ZERO chance Bell retires.

 

Even his mom wanted him to sign the contract last year.

Right. Zero millions sitting at home and watching vs at least $13 million? That would be an impressive level of stupidity.

 

Barry Foster retired out of the blue along the same lines back in the 90's but he made it pretty clear that he was saving the millions he made so he could do just that.....and did.

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

Right. Zero millions sitting at home and watching vs at least $13 million? That would be an impressive level of stupidity.

 

Barry Foster retired out of the blue along the same lines back in the 90's but he made it pretty clear that he was saving the millions he made so he could do just that.....and did.

 

Foster was always injured though and his last 2 seasons weren't much more than decent. He really only had 1 great season and that was volume based. At best, Foster was an "average" RB. Not really in the same class as Bell. He cashed in on about $5M over his career. Bell made that by November 1 last year. Being average and getting average money and turning it down (because you're always hurt), isn't the same as being elite, getting elite money, while always being healthy.

[seafoam1 1,878]

Right. Zero millions sitting at home and watching vs at least $13 million? That would be an impressive level of stupidity.

 

 

Not that it matters but the guy has made nearly $16 million by the age of 26. If he doesn't want to get beaten on, hit in the head, taken out at the knees, etc. 30 times a game for less than than what he wants to endure that, then why is he stupid?

Dude can switch focus on his life, and not get beat up for a job, with no worries of having to starve his way through life.

 

If it were me at that point, I would just work on a one year deal every year and decide year to year about choosing to retire from football or not.

 

Football $ are not guaranteed.

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

Not that it matters but the guy has made nearly $16 million by the age of 26. If he doesn't want to get beaten on, hit in the head, taken out at the knees, etc. 30 times a game for less than than what he wants to endure that, then why is he stupid?

Dude can switch focus on his life, and not get beat up for a job, with no worries of having to starve his way through life.

 

If it were me at that point, I would just work on a one year deal every year and decide year to year about choosing to retire from football or not.

 

Football $ are not guaranteed.

 

I don't know. I mean, I agree with your perspective, as I would say the same thing. But, when you have a life changing occupation, does your perspective change? Also, I think it's common knowledge that most athletes correlate money to respect, which is driven by ego. Can a player that good not have an ego to which staying home is really an option? Maybe... but I think, probably not. If I were a gambling man, I'd bet on players playing, every time.

[seafoam1 1,878]

 

I don't know. I mean, I agree with your perspective, as I would say the same thing. But, when you have a life changing occupation, does your perspective change? Also, I think it's common knowledge that most athletes correlate money to respect, which is driven by ego. Can a player that good not have an ego to which staying home is really an option? Maybe... but I think, probably not. If I were a gambling man, I'd bet on players playing, every time.

I would love to see a scenario where a team at the beginning of the year meets in a players only meeting to decide who gets what percentage of the salary cap for that year. I wonder how many fights would break out. What's the cap now, about $177 million?

 

But there are a lot of very good players out there that go home everyday with their 3-4 million dollar contracts and a smile on their face.

 

There are a lot of top players out there that you don't hear a peep out of them about salary. But to your point, some dudes absolutly want that big pay day to define or highlight themselves over other players. Just look at what is going on in baseball this year. Lance Lynn just turned down a 2 year $20 million contract. And all that money is guaranteed. I think Arrieta turned down 4 years for $100 million. They are both still free agents.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

I would love to see a scenario where a team at the beginning of the year meets in a players only meeting to decide who gets what percentage of the salary cap for that year. I wonder how many fights would break out. What's the cap now, about $177 million?

 

But there are a lot of very good players out there that go home everyday with their 3-4 million dollar contracts and a smile on their face.

 

There are a lot of top players out there that you don't hear a peep out of them about salary. But to your point, some dudes absolutly want that big pay day to define or highlight themselves over other players. Just look at what is going on in baseball this year. Lance Lynn just turned down a 2 year $20 million contract. And all that money is guaranteed. I think Arrieta turned down 4 years for $100 million. They are both still free agents.

One of the more sickening things a player has said, John Lester said it wasn't about the money after he signed. Uh.... fvck off you jerk off. Don't lie to everyone like we "don't get it". Be honest or don't address it at all. Fvck stick

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

One of the more sickening things a player has said, John Lester said it wasn't about the money after he signed. Uh.... fvck off you jerk off. Don't lie to everyone like we "don't get it". Be honest or don't address it at all. Fvck stick

 

Agreed, but I will give the MLB a "little bit" of slack on that. Because baseball does not have a salary cap, the MLBPA actually pushes players to take the biggest deal because that raises the number for the next guy. If a player gets a 5 for $50M from the Cubs and a 5 for $45M from the Reds, on the surface, it'll just look like he's taking the money, but the fact that the Cubs have a much better chance at winning over those 5 years than the Reds is the really reason he took the Cubs offer.

 

On the flip side, had the Reds offer the higher deal and said player took the Reds offer, we all know it's about the money, but did he really want to go there? Probably not. It was the MLBPA pressuring him to take the money. Well, he doesn't want to look like the jerk nor throw his union under the bus, so he's going to say it's not about the money because "I see the future looking bright here over the next 5 years", or some crap like that.

 

The NFL, with a hard cap, it's always about the money. Hey, take the money I say. If someone thinks your worth "X" amount of money and it's more than what someone else is going to pay you, take it. Why not? If another company made me an offer that's better than the one I have right now, I'd take it too,so I' not going to sit here and blame them. Besides, we've seen over and over again, teams go worst to first and first to worst. I'd just rather them not insult my intelligence.

 

After all, it's capitalism. Free market enterprise. It's what this country is all about.

[seafoam1 1,878]

 

 

 

If another company made me an offer that's better than the one I have right now, I'd take it too,so I' not going to sit here and blame them.

 

After all, it's capitalism. Free market enterprise. It's what this country is all about.

I don't think anyone is blaming a player for taking a higher salary, it's just that many flat out say that money wasn't the concern.

 

MLBPA does put pressure on players to take more money somewhere where they may not prefer, and that in itself should be a crime.

 

The player has the right to express/take what they want or what they can get, but I think the discussion here is more about those who define themselves by their paycheck. And then turn around and deny or alter the truth for their personal image.

 

Ironic to say the least.

 

And not everyone makes job moves based on pay alone. I've turned down higher offers for various reasons, and I'm sure others here has as well. It's up to the individual.

 

But in both the MLB and NFL the players often complain that nobody wants them for what they are asking. Too bad. It's a free market.

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

I don't think anyone is blaming a player for taking a higher salary, it's just that many flat out say that money wasn't the concern.

 

MLBPA does put pressure on players to take more money somewhere where they may not prefer, and that in itself should be a crime.

 

The player has the right to express/take what they want or what they can get, but I think the discussion here is more about those who define themselves by their paycheck. And then turn around and deny or alter the truth for their personal image.

 

Ironic to say the least.

 

And not everyone makes job moves based on pay alone. I've turned down higher offers for various reasons, and I'm sure others here has as well. It's up to the individual.

 

But in both the MLB and NFL the players often complain that nobody wants them for what they are asking. Too bad. It's a free market.

 

Of course, I don't mean just money. That's why I said "offer" and not "pay". The offer includes things like medical, retirement plan, pay, travel... will I have to move, et al. For these guys it's purely money.

[seafoam1 1,878]

 

Of course, I don't mean just money. That's why I said "offer" and not "pay". The offer includes things like medical, retirement plan, pay, travel... will I have to move, et al. For these guys it's purely money.

True. Many of the top guys anyway.

[lesjroza 70]

he's worth it to the steelers imo.

 

Agreed Ralphster for '18 anyway given the rest of the puzzle pieces such as Ben back, Antonio not falling off yet, etc.

 

They have made the calculation they would rather use the option to lock in Bell this year for another run rather than seeing what's behind door #3.

 

It is what it is............ Bell probably isn't getting what he feels he is worth any time soon because he suffers from the comps even if he is top of the line.

 

The comps are the comps, ask any real estate agent...........a seller can tout all the upgrades but those darn comps are going to hold great weight regardless.

 

 

RB market context:

 

@TomPelissero

FollowingFollowing @TomPelissero

More

DeMarco Murray's release leaves just 5 NFL halfbacks on non-rookie contracts with base value of at least $5 million a year: Devonta Freeman, LeSean McCoy, Lamar Miller, Gio Bernard and Latavius Murray. No easy battle for Le'Veon Bell to reset that market.

2:33 PM - 8 Mar 2018

[murf74 461]

 

 

Agreed Ralphster for '18 anyway given the rest of the puzzle pieces such as Ben back, Antonio not falling off yet, etc.

 

They have made the calculation they would rather use the option to lock in Bell this year for another run rather than seeing what's behind door #3.

 

It is what it is............ Bell probably isn't getting what he feels he is worth any time soon because he suffers from the comps even if he is top of the line.

 

The comps are the comps, ask any real estate agent...........a seller can tout all the upgrades but those darn comps are going to hold great weight regardless.

 

 

RB market context:

 

 

@TomPelissero

 

FollowingFollowing

@TomPelissero

 

 

More

DeMarco Murray's release leaves just 5 NFL halfbacks on non-rookie contracts with base value of at least $5 million a year: Devonta Freeman, LeSean McCoy, Lamar Miller, Gio Bernard and Latavius Murray. No easy battle for Le'Veon Bell to reset that market.

 

2:33 PM - 8 Mar 2018

The Steelers are playing it right. Bell should have signed the offer last year.

 

A good crop of rookie RBs will drop Bells stock further next year.

[seafoam1 1,878]

The Steelers are playing it right. Bell should have signed the offer last year.

 

A good crop of rookie RBs will drop Bells stock further next year.

Not bad for the Steelers and not bad for Bell. He already stated he won't show up until week one without the contract. No OTAs, no nothing. He gets a couple extra months off, makes a cool $14 million, and who knows, finishes his career having made nearly $30 million and retires at age 27? Not a bad deal. For the Steelers he will be fresh for the playoffs barring injury.

[Smileseers 54]

 

The NFL, with a hard cap, it's always about the money. Hey, take the money I say. If someone thinks your worth "X" amount of money and it's more than what someone else is going to pay you, take it. Why not? If another company made me an offer that's better than the one I have right now, I'd take it too,so I' not going to sit here and blame them. Besides, we've seen over and over again, teams go worst to first and first to worst. I'd just rather them not insult my intelligence.

 

After all, it's capitalism. Free market enterprise. It's what this country is all about.

The franchise tag goes completely against capitalism and a free market, and not at all what this country is about.

 

The franchise tag is one of the sacrifices the NFL players union has given up in the last few collective bargaining agreements.

[seafoam1 1,878]

The franchise tag goes completely against capitalism and a free market, and not at all what this country is about.

 

Nope, it's company policy. Bell can go work anywhere else if he doesn't like it. Or start his own business and make his own policy.

[TBayXXXVII 2,108]

The franchise tag goes completely against capitalism and a free market, and not at all what this country is about.

 

The franchise tag is one of the sacrifices the NFL players union has given up in the last few collective bargaining agreements.

 

You said it... "the NFL players union has given up." The players don't have to agree to it if they don't want to. They did. It was collectively bargained. So that makes your first sentence incorrect. It's part of a contract that was freely agreed upon by both parties.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

The franchise tag goes completely against capitalism and a free market, and not at all what this country is about.

 

The franchise tag is one of the sacrifices the NFL players union has given up in the last few collective bargaining agreements.

It works well for both sides at many positions, RB is not one of them. The teams do need a safety valve to get more life out of players they developed through rookie contracts. Kirk Cousins got what he needed from the Skins to showcase his talent, then wanted out 2 years ago. How could they protect their investment?

[Smileseers 54]

 

You said it... "the NFL players union has given up." The players don't have to agree to it if they don't want to. They did. It was collectively bargained. So that makes your first sentence incorrect. It's part of a contract that was freely agreed upon by both parties.

I stand behind my opinion of my first sentence being correct because the franchise tag prevents a person from entering the free market after his contract has expired.

 

Name another union in the USA who has different rules for the best of the best, the top 1% of their members?

[lesjroza 70]

I stand behind my opinion of my first sentence being correct because the franchise tag prevents a person from entering the free market after his contract has expired.

 

Name another union in the USA who has different rules for the best of the best, the top 1% of their members?

 

 

I haven't given this a ton of thought but my first reaction is, its not a great analogy. The NFL agreement is pretty unique, most unions actually limit the earning power of the very best members in favor of treating everybody the same in compensation. In the case of the NFL work agreement there is plenty of room for individual contract differences.