Array title="Born2Steel has a reputation beyond repute">
Colbert already said Bell won't see much, if any, contact at TC. They want to make sure Bell is 100% for week 1. If Bell doesn't show at TC, it doesn't mean it's contract related. Doesn't mean it isn't either.Originally Posted by tube517
If AV doesn't show, that's going to be placed directly on his contract talks.
If the offer really was 3y/$42M, Bell is an idiot for not signing it. Even if there were zero dollars guaranteed, they are not gonna cut him before the first year, so actually there is more money "guaranteed" than there is under the franchise tag.
If he really is holding out to be the first $15M-a-year running back, that's just stupid because it's not going to happen, not here, not anywhere. Just too much for any one player who's not a quarterback.
He wants to get into a separate discussion about why the pay cap for a good RB is less than that of a good player at a lower-impact position like a TE or a lineman, that's one thing. (yes, before we start down that road, I do believe a good RB has more of an impact over an average RB than a good lineman has over an average lineman, but not really the point here.) But it is not going to change just for him right now. And he was offered more than that anyway, so I guess it actually did change.
... which is not out of the realm of possiblity ...
The Patriots signed Joe Montana?
See you Space Cowboy ...
Honestly, Bell is an idiot for turning down that deal. If he wants to be selfish and break a team's salary cap, he'll probably have to break some other team's salary cap. At this point trading him for a boatload of high draft picks or for a star defensive back or ILB isn't the worst idea in the world
Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute">
Why not both stay out? Hot take here
Le'Veon Bell and Alejandro Villanueva should skip camp
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/z...s/201707190133
Array title="ALLD has a reputation beyond repute">
I can only think that not signing, Bell is communicating he wants a trade. Why would somebody take less $ as a tag unless there were other performance/behavior clauses? Bell is the best RB on the field when he plays, but not in his last game.
Didn't he learn anything from that one-trick WR we had named Mike that turned down $50million? What an idiot! Use him up in 2 years and let some other team have what's left.
All Defense!
Bell may NOT have turned down more money to play under the tag. The tag is guaranteed cash. He gets it no matter what.
Look at AB's most recent deal. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburg...io-brown-6702/
It is 4 years 68 million dollars - so about $17 million per year. But ONLY (I know right?!) $19 million is guaranteed cash.
This has been the Steelers new model for signing guys. They are only willing to guarantee the signing bonus and then basically it is a year to year thing for the most part.
This chart brings it a bit more into focus - http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/wide-receiver/
I can't find a non-rookie contract WR that is playing for less of a % of contract money guaranteed.
Taking a look at RBs - http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/running-back/
Top end of the pay scale is $7-8 million per year with about 40-45% of the total contract guaranteed money.
Doing the math for Bell he would need to have had roughly 62% of that 3 year 42 million dollar deal guaranteed in order to break even on what he can make on the tag the next two seasons (26/42=.619). While it has not been reported, I think we can safely assume that the Steelers were not offering to guarantee almost 2/3 of Bell's contract. This ends up being a pretty simple math problem for Bell. Say the Steelers were willing to guarantee 40% of the deal, that works out to about $16.8 million that the Steelers would likely pay out as a signing bonus. That means Bell would have to leave around $9 million in change on the table for the first 2 years of the deal and gamble that he can make it up on the back end by playing out years 3 and 4 at full value.
I'm certain that I am overlooking many intricacies and such of the cap math in this rough analysis, but I'm betting I'm close enough. Whether we like it or not, Bell's extension from the Steelers was asking him to potentially leave money on the table. Due to RB career arcs, this is Bell' s one and only big contract - no way he leaves cash out there.
Array title="tube517 has a reputation beyond repute">
LOL @ the airplane video.Why not both stay out? Hot take here
Le'Veon Bell and Alejandro Villanueva should skip camp
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/z...s/201707190133
Unfortunately, PPG won't let me open links anymore because I use an ad blocker. Even if i turn it off, it still comes up w/the ad blocker page.
Oh well.
I could be wrong but my money is on him playing with the cheats before all is said and done
Re: Schefter: Steelers Not Close To Signing Bell Long-Term With Deadline Looming
You should be banned for just the suggestion
"Zeds dead baby, Zeds dead." - Butch
Array title="ALLD has a reputation beyond repute">
Is he pulling a Max Starks? He needs to play to collect and if he exceeds his tag then he will have left money on the table too because he is not likely to have a 10-year career in the NFL. Bryant might be gone before LB, but Bell will surely follow if a new deal is not done next year, if he lasts and is not suspended.
All Defense!
Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute">
He will go wherever he is paid the most $$$, which usually involves lousy teams overpaying
Nothing wrong with that, but Bell does not strike me as the kind of player to leave money on the table to play with a more competitive team - he does not seem like a Franco or Bettis type back who will be cashing checks with a decade long career
He tells Ike Taylor he wants to be paid as a #1 RB and #2 WR? Lol. Bye bye in 2019.
Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute">
to 86WARD for passing along the tip on Ike's comments
Spot on assessment... Totally agree!!
Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk
Well all bellicheat does gush all over him when they ask him about bell
Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk
wish in one hand ....shit in the other and see which one happens first is all I can tell him
They wanted to pay you like a no. 1 RB and you said no.
While that may be true, I still believe that Sucker punch was and still is a BIG influence on him. If he leaves for money then so be it, but my gut tells me something different. I don't know who selected Sucker punch to be a Steeler but that alone is going to be the single most horrific free agent pick ever.
Can the team tag him for 3 consecutive seasons?
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
No but they can transition tag him the third year which allows them to match any offer and be compensated if he signs elsewhere.
I thought the transition tag leaves them nothing if they refuse to sign him. The Non-Exclusive Franchise tag is where they get compensated...no?
Array title="salamander has a reputation beyond repute">
Came across this:
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...-franchise-tag
Not that they would, but that article makes it sound like they can't negotiate a long term deal until after this season?
Array title="tube517 has a reputation beyond repute">
Yep, that was the rush to try and beat the deadline. They can't do any negotiations until after the 2017 season is over
whats left to negotiate though , we know what he wants and its so far out of the realm of possibility the only thing left to do is laugh at his joke of demands of self worth ....
the deadline was to get a long term deal done before the Tag officially kicks in ...
Ike suggests he MIGHT hold out and really make a statement ... since the tag is unsigned wondering if we can rescind it if it lingers into the season ??
I want this team focused on winning not on what Bell is doing ..last thing we need is a distraction
1. The formula has changed.
Under prior labor deals, the non-exclusive franchise tag was determined by calculating the average of the five highest-paid players at each position from the prior year. Under the 2011 CBA, the franchise tenders come from a more complex procedure.
Under Article 10, Section 2 of the CBA, the number is based on the five-year average cap percentage for the tag at each position.
So it’s no longer driven by what players at the same position made in the prior season, but by the average cap percentage consumed by the franchise tender over five years. Then, that percentage will be applied to the 2013 salary cap to determine the franchise tender at each position.
Already confused? We’ve got nine more.
2. In some cases, the formula doesn’t matter.
A player getting the non-exclusive franchise tag is entitled to the greater of the formula clumsily explained above (and that was the fourth draft of it) or 120 percent of the player’s cap number from the prior year.
That’s why, for example, the franchise tender for Dolphins tackle Jake Long would be much higher than the franchise tender for an offensive lineman. Long made enough in 2012 to result in a 20-percent raise, trumping the franchise tender.
This dynamic often applies to players who were taken high in the draft before the implementation of the rookie wage scale. As rookie contracts expire under the new labor deal, franchise tenders for many of them will be lower.
3. The transition tag has become meaningless.
Teams can use, in any given year, one franchise tag or one transition tag. The transition tag gives a team the right to match an offer sheet, but no compensation if the team chooses not to match.
At one point, the transition player’s contract was not fully guaranteed once it was accepted by the player. It now is.
The fact that the guaranteed pay on the one-year transition tender isn’t much less than the guaranteed pay for the one-year franchise tender, coupled with the lack of draft-pick compensation, has made the transition tag largely meaningless.
4. Franchise tags can be withdrawn.
The amount of the franchise tender becomes fully guaranteed once the player signs it. Since signing the franchise tender puts the player under contract, requiring him to show up to all mandatory offseason activities and training camp, some players choose to wait deep into the preseason before inking the offer.
The risk is that the franchise tag can be withdrawn, at any time, before it has been signed.
It doesn’t happen often, but it’s not unprecedented. Especially in Philly. In 2002, the Eagles pulled the franchise tag from linebacker Jeremiah Trotter in early April. Three years later, the Eagles removed the franchise tag from defensive tackle Corey Simon in late August.
The move immediately converts the player to an unrestricted free agent. But if it comes after the big money has been spent, the player will have a hard time getting the pay day he would have realized on the first day of free agency.
5. Franchise tender is guaranteed, with one exception.
Once a player signs the franchise tag, the one-year salary becomes fully guaranteed. But there’s a little-known exception.
Under Article 10, Section 2(c) of the CBA, the contract can be terminated if the player fails “to establish or maintain his excellent physical condition.”
Any effort to do so would result in a review of the situation by a neutral physician and, eventually and inevitably, arbitration. Still, the franchise tender technically isn’t fully and completely guaranteed.
6. No non-quarterback will be tagged more than twice.
Former Seahawks tackle Walter Jones once spent three straight years under the franchise tag, pocketing a total of $20 million and then signing a long-term deal that paid him $20 million more guaranteed, back when $20 million was a very big deal for NFL purposes.
Jones rolled the dice on bearing the injury risk for the three franchise years, and he won. Most players prefer the certainty of a long-term deal.
That’s why the 2006 CBA changed the formula to pay a non-quarterback the quarterback franchise tender if he’s tagged a third time.
Quarterbacks are protected, too. In the third year of the franchise tag, they get at least a 44-percent raise over their cap number in the prior year.
7. Arguably, no player can be tagged more than three times.
Last year’s grievance filed by Saints quarterback Drew Brees established that, if a player is tagged once by two different teams, it counts as being tagged twice. Which would have entitled him to a 44-percent raise in 2013, if he had played under the franchise tag last year for the Saints. (He was tagged in 2005 by the Chargers.)
Based on the language of the CBA, there’s an argument to be made that no player may ever be tagged more than three times during the course of his career.
Of course, tagging a player a fourth time would entail paying out a second 44-percent raise one year after paying out an initial 44-percent raise. Which would make it highly unlikely that any team would ever want to use the tag more than three times.
8. It’s cheap to tag kickers and punters.
There’s a belief among some fans that the use of the franchise tag meant that the player was a “franchise player.” And so, when a team uses the tag on a punter or a kicker, fans are confused and/or amused.
But the formula for calculating franchise tenders has made it cheaper to use the tag than to sign the player to a market-value deal.
At $2.9 million for 2013, more kickers and punters could find themselves being regarded as “franchise players.”
9. Long-term deals can be negotiated, through July 15.
Previously, the window for a team signing its franchise player to a long-term deal closed not long after the free-agency period started and then opened again on July 15. Now, the window remains open until July 15.
After July 15, the franchise player can sign only a one-year deal with his current team. It can be for more than the franchise tender, and it can include other terms, like playing-time or performance triggers that would prevent the tag from being used again.
But the duration can be no more than one year.
10. One offer sheet may be signed, through July 15.
For a player carrying the non-exclusive tag, he can negotiate with any other team. Ultimately, one offer sheet can be signed.
Once it’s signed, the situation simplifies considerably. The player’s current team will match the offer and keep him, or the player’s team will not match the offer and collect a pair of first-round picks from the new team.
The two first-round picks given as compensation must be the team’s original picks — not any picks obtained via trade or otherwise.
And there’s a loophole which, eventually, a desperate coach or G.M. may use. The period for signing franchise players to offer sheets lingers beyond the current year’s draft. Thus, for example, a team that wants to sign quarterback Joe Flacco (if the Ravens use the non-exclusive tag) could, in theory, wait until after the draft, sign Flacco to a front-loaded offer sheet that the Ravens can’t match, and then surrender not the 2013 and 2014 first-round picks, but the first-round picks for 2014 and 2015.
There’s nothing in the labor deal that prevents this from happening until July 15, after which date the player can sign only a one-year deal with his current team.
Array title="AtlantaDan has a reputation beyond repute">
Bell was not kidding when he said in 2016 this was his contract demand
Bell released the single, titled "Focus," [last summer]. It references his three-game suspension for a marijuana arrest last year, his recovery from a torn MCL and the reason he plays football. He also addresses his upcoming free-agent status in 2017, for which he names a hefty price tag.
In the song, Bell drops the line, "I'm at the top and if not I'm the closest, Ima need 15 a year and they know this."
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news...m1nn71f48lvayo
Then there was this April Fools Day tweet that Bell later said was a "joke"
Much of Bell's twitter feed is dedicated to his own wonderfulness - he definitely thinks he is getting screwed by getting paid $12 million this upcoming season
Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute">
If he holds out so be it. No different than a season ending injury or suspension that happens all the time. What these non-QBs need to learn is that not a one of them is bigger than the team. LB has a very inflated opinion of himself. He's really good, but good RBs are a dime a dozen. We can still win the Super Bowl without him, especially if the D steps up.
Array title="Born2Steel has a reputation beyond repute">
Bell is gambling on Bell. I cannot blame him a bit. He will get just over $12M for this year, and if no deal gets done next offseason, stands to make over $14M for the '18 season.
If he gets injured, and/or suspended for any length of time, his stock drops. If he wins back to back SB MVPs, which is his goal obviously, his stock rises to QB money. Either way he pockets $26M for 2 seasons of work. It's risky, but it's all the leverage he has right now.
Which is nothing if that's the route the Steelers want to take. I thought the deal Pittsburgh offered was fair. Not knowing exactly how it's structured, it's hard to say but they could put some bullshit bonuses in there to maybe get it up to $13.5/ year and say he's getting 11 as a RB and 2.5 as a WR. Or offer him 10M a season and give him 5M a year in WR bonuses...lol.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
