Replacing Bell!

[steelreserve]

Here's how I look at it: If we were trying to win a championship 3 or 4 years from now, then letting him go and finding a replacement would be the right move. However, since we are trying to win a championship RIGHT NOW and are a few pieces on defense away from doing that, letting go of Bell just 1) opens up another significant hole that you may or may not be able to fix quickly, and 2) takes away from our ability to shore up the defense.

If there was a clear choice in front of us, like the equivalent of Shazier or Polamalu was available in free agency but we could either keep Bell or sign that player, then it would be a tougher call (assuming we also had a decent plan for a new RB). But as far as I know, that kind of player isn't going to be available and our money would be better spent retaining a star player we already do have.

Finally, I'd say that if we manage to win a championship but overpay Bell in the process of doing that, it would be fine by me. Most likely it would cost us the ability to re-sign one of our own free agents heading into 2020. Maurkice Pouncey, Marcus Gilbert and Bud Dupree are scheduled to be free agents then; being unable to retain one of them would not be the end of the world. Joe Haden will also be a free agent; losing him would be less good but he may also be deteriorating talent-wise at that point. We will probably be drafting to replace one or more of them between now and then, so we may be able to actually do it without hurting ourselves too much.

[Mojouw]

Here's how I look at it: If we were trying to win a championship 3 or 4 years from now, then letting him go and finding a replacement would be the right move. However, since we are trying to win a championship RIGHT NOW and are a few pieces on defense away from doing that, letting go of Bell just 1) opens up another significant hole that you may or may not be able to fix quickly, and 2) takes away from our ability to shore up the defense.

If there was a clear choice in front of us, like the equivalent of Shazier or Polamalu was available in free agency but we could either keep Bell or sign that player, then it would be a tougher call (assuming we also had a decent plan for a new RB). But as far as I know, that kind of player isn't going to be available and our money would be better spent retaining a star player we already do have.

Finally, I'd say that if we manage to win a championship but overpay Bell in the process of doing that, it would be fine by me. Most likely it would cost us the ability to re-sign one of our own free agents heading into 2020. Maurkice Pouncey, Marcus Gilbert and Bud Dupree are scheduled to be free agents then; being unable to retain one of them would not be the end of the world. Joe Haden will also be a free agent; losing him would be less good but he may also be deteriorating talent-wise at that point. We will probably be drafting to replace one or more of them between now and then, so we may be able to actually do it without hurting ourselves too much.

Good post. Couldn't agree more. Paying Bell doesn't have to mean that anyone is happy about giving a RB that much cash, but...

[DesertSteel]

I think that as long as we win a championship that no one cares about how much Bell is paid. It's not like it's our money. That said, we haven't even made it to the Super Bowl in the five years of his prime.

[Shoes]

I think that as long as we win a championship that no one cares about how much Bell is paid. It's not like it's our money. That said, we haven't even made it to the Super Bowl in the five years of his prime.

[Mojouw]

I feel like there just needs to be a constant reminder that correlation and causation are totally different things.

I know slot of it is joking around but still.

I mean no one on the team has been mauled by a tiger while Bell has been on the roster. Clearly he repels tigers. How many starters and key backups get eaten by tigers once Bell is let go?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mojouw]

Isn't today tag day? Anyone hear anything yet?

[DesertSteel]

I feel like there just needs to be a constant reminder that correlation and causation are totally different things.

I know slot of it is joking around but still.

I mean no one on the team has been mauled by a tiger while Bell has been on the roster. Clearly he repels tigers. How many starters and key backups get eaten by tigers once Bell is let go?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get what you're saying but I don't really understand your point. Folks clamor that we aren't going to win the Super Bowl if we let Bell go. It's a fair point that we have never won the Super Bowl with him. And at this stage of his career, I don't see him getting better. His splash plays were way down in 2017. I think that there's a reason that almost all of the beat writers for the Steelers hold the opinion that the money could be better spent elsewhere.

[Mojouw]

I get what you're saying but I don't really understand your point. Folks clamor that we aren't going to win the Super Bowl if we let Bell go. It's a fair point that we have never won the Super Bowl with him. And at this stage of his career, I don't see him getting better. His splash plays were way down in 2017. I think that there's a reason that almost all of the beat writers for the Steelers hold the opinion that the money could be better spent elsewhere.

1. Winning or not winning the SB is impossible to directly tie to Bell as the reason/cause either way. I have not been arguing that L. Bell + Steelers = SB.
2. The only thing we can tie together is that IF Bell is released, the Steelers have a hole at RB on their roster. This hole will require a combination of cap resources and draft picks to fill. Likely high draft picks. When you are attempting to put together a complete roster with limited resources, it seems dubious at best to open more holes.
3. My opinion of the beat writers for the Steelers is well known. They are correct as often as broken clocks and for similar reasons. They are almost universally lazy, grumpy, and wildly speculative. Honestly don't think they are much better than several bloggers and most of the posters on here.

[Neversatisfied]

I don't think the team would be close to a SB even if the team signs Bell long term. The culture of the locker room is more in line with a hard knocks TV show than a disciplined SB contender. Coaching has to do a 180 before the Steelers get back to the Superbowl. This team is brimming with talent but it's overrun with immature behavior and smugness. The current Steeler organization is completely different than just 10 years ago and it hasn't changed for the better. Sign Bell to a contract of his liking and your giving in to his selfendulged attitude, does the team improve? Possibly but his attitude is toxic. Let him walk and the Steelers are now burdened with replacing his immediately.

[Born2Steel]

Right now, today, there is only one glaring hole on this team and it is at ILB. Releasing players just because WE think they make too much money, and creating more holes in the process, is a dumb idea. Our FO seems to know what they're doing. Bell will get a long term offer. If he refuses it, he will get franchise tagged. Most likely that means a RB will be selected early in this draft, rounds 1 or 2, if a targeted guy is there. Then the tag will most likely be pulled and we head into the season with 2 rookies(Conner has 32 snaps), Nix, and possibly Ridley or another FA. So, as you can see, this would play out exactly as Mojouw predicts if Bell is not signed long term. A FA signing at RB plus a draft pick spent at RB. Those 'resources' could better be spent on the existing glaring hole rather than on one WE create. Now we solve the RB issue, but we still have an issue at ILB.

[DesertSteel]

1. Winning or not winning the SB is impossible to directly tie to Bell as the reason/cause either way. I have not been arguing that L. Bell + Steelers = SB.
2. The only thing we can tie together is that IF Bell is released, the Steelers have a hole at RB on their roster. This hole will require a combination of cap resources and draft picks to fill. Likely high draft picks. When you are attempting to put together a complete roster with limited resources, it seems dubious at best to open more holes.
3. My opinion of the beat writers for the Steelers is well known. They are correct as often as broken clocks and for similar reasons. They are almost universally lazy, grumpy, and wildly speculative. Honestly don't think they are much better than several bloggers and most of the posters on here.

But your premise regarding holes seems to leave out or dismiss the notion that the $13-15 a year cap hit can be used to fill more glaring holes that did lead to a failure in the playoffs.

[steelreserve]

Right now, today, there is only one glaring hole on this team and it is at ILB. Releasing players just because WE think they make too much money, and creating more holes in the process, is a dumb idea. Our FO seems to know what they're doing. Bell will get a long term offer. If he refuses it, he will get franchise tagged. Most likely that means a RB will be selected early in this draft, rounds 1 or 2, if a targeted guy is there. Then the tag will most likely be pulled and we head into the season with 2 rookies(Conner has 32 snaps), Nix, and possibly Ridley or another FA. So, as you can see, this would play out exactly as Mojouw predicts if Bell is not signed long term. A FA signing at RB plus a draft pick spent at RB. Those 'resources' could better be spent on the existing glaring hole rather than on one WE create. Now we solve the RB issue, but we still have an issue at ILB.

I would agree with this except for the tag being pulled. Given the progression of the offseason (be under salary cap -> free agency -> draft) there would be no point in drafting a replacement and then revoking the tag, because we'd have to be under the cap WITH the franchise tag already. So might as well let him play out the year, because a briefcase full of $17 million isn't going to gain any yards, and all the big free agents will be long gone by the draft.

Even if he's a dickhead like last year and sits out the entire preseason, by the end of the year we'll be glad we have him as far as trying to win playoff games goes. I don't think he'll do that again though, now that everyone saw the results. It almost certainly cost him a rushing title, as well as the outright title of best RB in the game, and both of those are worth big $$$$ elsewhere if your main goal is getting ♫♫ PAAAIIIIIYYYYYYED ♫♫

[Mojouw]

But your premise regarding holes seems to leave out or dismiss the notion that the $13-15 a year cap hit can’t be used to fill more glaring holes that did lead to a failure in the playoffs.

No, it doesn't. I have advanced the argument (and again I fully realize this is solely an opinion) that there is adequate cap space to do both. Or at the very least cap space can be created that allows the team to do both.

Additionally, I have also argued (again totally my own opinion and not a fact) that the free agent options at ILB, Safety, and WR are not better than what can be obtained via the draft.

Bottom line, if I have choose, I would spend the cap space on the RB and the draft resources on the defense. Again, totally my opinion.

[DesertSteel]

Bottom line, if I have choose, I would spend the cap space on the RB and the draft resources on the defense. Again, totally my opinion.

I think I’d go the other way. The chances of hitting a homerun at RB in the draft (2nd-3rd) are much greater than via FA, especially considering price and mileage.

I’d take my starting ILB in R1 and a Safety to compete with Sutton in R3. Free agency would mostly be for depth.

[Born2Steel]

But your premise regarding holes seems to leave out or dismiss the notion that the $13-15 a year cap hit can be used to fill more glaring holes that did lead to a failure in the playoffs.

This is true. And by that same rationale we could say that Haden is diminishing with age. Haden takes quite the cap hit as well. Plus, we already have Burns, Sutton, and Hilton, with Gay as the veteran leader. Cutting Haden would free up cap space without creating another hole. But the argument has been that Bell doesn't deserve a long term because he wants it? He has used social media in ways that some/most don't agree with? What I do not understand is the focus on Bell's money being the only money we can use to fix other things. There are restructures going on right now to hopefully fix things on this team. Creating new problems with new holes at RB is not fixing anything. It creates just as big a hole as it fills. That is how I see it anyway.
1. Cutting JH had to be done at the time to make a spot for Gilbert's return. IMO, that created a hole at the OLB position, as in now we must get another edge rusher. Unless 7th round pick Adams makes the 53 this year.
2. Safety is not so much a hole as much as NEEDS to get an upgrade bad. Hopefully FA money is used to bring in that upgrade. If not, it's an early draft pick need.
3. ILB is going to need to get 2 new players. Unless we find another sideline to sideline guy to replace Shaz, and I do not see him on the FA list. So, looks like multiple draft picks, 2 of which need to produce this season.

By my count, this list equals 3-4 early draft picks that we already need to score on. Adding a RB to do what Bell already does to that 'needs' list is bad business. No we don't hamstring the future, but we have to exhaust every option to retain Bell first. Let that play out, THEN we can have a rational conversation about replacing him. For now it's just emotional response to his "antics".

[Born2Steel]

I would agree with this except for the tag being pulled. Given the progression of the offseason (be under salary cap -> free agency -> draft) there would be no point in drafting a replacement and then revoking the tag, because we'd have to be under the cap WITH the franchise tag already. So might as well let him play out the year, because a briefcase full of $17 million isn't going to gain any yards, and all the big free agents will be long gone by the draft.

Even if he's a dickhead like last year and sits out the entire preseason, by the end of the year we'll be glad we have him as far as trying to win playoff games goes. I don't think he'll do that again though, now that everyone saw the results. It almost certainly cost him a rushing title, as well as the outright title of best RB in the game, and both of those are worth big $$$$ elsewhere if your main goal is getting ♫♫ PAAAIIIIIYYYYYYED ♫♫

Getting FAs after the draft happens every year. It was suggested to use the Bell money to do that. I was only speculating(I'm not in the FO) that can be done just as easily from both sides of the draft. We will not grab one of the most expensive guys either way. That's not how we usually do things anyway.

[Mojouw]

This is true. And by that same rationale we could say that Haden is diminishing with age. Haden takes quite the cap hit as well. Plus, we already have Burns, Sutton, and Hilton, with Gay as the veteran leader. Cutting Haden would free up cap space without creating another hole. But the argument has been that Bell doesn't deserve a long term because he wants it? He has used social media in ways that some/most don't agree with? What I do not understand is the focus on Bell's money being the only money we can use to fix other things. There are restructures going on right now to hopefully fix things on this team. Creating new problems with new holes at RB is not fixing anything. It creates just as big a hole as it fills. That is how I see it anyway.
1. Cutting JH had to be done at the time to make a spot for Gilbert's return. IMO, that created a hole at the OLB position, as in now we must get another edge rusher. Unless 7th round pick Adams makes the 53 this year.
2. Safety is not so much a hole as much as NEEDS to get an upgrade bad. Hopefully FA money is used to bring in that upgrade. If not, it's an early draft pick need.
3. ILB is going to need to get 2 new players. Unless we find another sideline to sideline guy to replace Shaz, and I do not see him on the FA list. So, looks like multiple draft picks, 2 of which need to produce this season.

By my count, this list equals 3-4 early draft picks that we already need to score on. Adding a RB to do what Bell already does to that 'needs' list is bad business. No we don't hamstring the future, but we have to exhaust every option to retain Bell first. Let that play out, THEN we can have a rational conversation about replacing him. For now it's just emotional response to his "antics".

Excellent points. I have hesitated to raise the point, because I suspect that NO ONE will agree with me, but Haden isn't an $11 million dollar a year CB anymore. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/cornerback/ - everyone on that list making Haden level dollars creates turnovers and simply eliminates the oppositions #1 target. While Haden is still a quality player and belongs as a starter in the NFL, he isn't a top tier CB anymore according to raw stats.

So why is not paying Bell a good idea but paying Haden is? FWIW, I would prefer Haden on the 2018 roster, but every argument against signing Bell (except "knucklehead") can be leveled at Haden. So what is the going rate for leadership?

[86WARD]

Right now, today, there is only one glaring hole on this team and it is at ILB. Releasing players just because WE think they make too much money, and creating more holes in the process, is a dumb idea. Our FO seems to know what they're doing. Bell will get a long term offer. If he refuses it, he will get franchise tagged. Most likely that means a RB will be selected early in this draft, rounds 1 or 2, if a targeted guy is there. Then the tag will most likely be pulled and we head into the season with 2 rookies(Conner has 32 snaps), Nix, and possibly Ridley or another FA. So, as you can see, this would play out exactly as Mojouw predicts if Bell is not signed long term. A FA signing at RB plus a draft pick spent at RB. Those 'resources' could better be spent on the existing glaring hole rather than on one WE create. Now we solve the RB issue, but we still have an issue at ILB.

If you think ILB is the only glaring hole on the roster (which is your opinion and not necessarily wrong), then the team, in my mind, would be in excellent condition. ILB has pretty much become the FB of the defense. Probably the least important position on the defensive side of the ball in this day and age. If you have a decent DL, OLBs that can rush and a couple good corners, you can get away with sticking a couple “no names” in at ILB and make it work...hell, a lot of GMs do that now. If you have one ILB that is okay at covering in space with what you have mentioned above, you have a great defense. DL, OLB, 3 CB all tank as priority above an ILB...

[86WARD]

Getting FAs after the draft happens every year. It was suggested to use the Bell money to do that. I was only speculating(I'm not in the FO) that can be done just as easily from both sides of the draft. We will not grab one of the most expensive guys either way. That's not how we usually do things anyway.

So a Doug Martin type (released today) and a 3rd round RB would be suitable to replace Bell and his production?

[DesertSteel]

Bell’s antics are probably no worse than AB’s but I don’t hear anyone pushing for his release or saying he isn’t worth the money. Some knowledgeable folks have thought it all out and believe that Bell is not worth a long term contract at his numbers.

[Mojouw]

If you think ILB is the only glaring hole on the roster (which is your opinion and not necessarily wrong), then the team, in my mind, would be in excellent condition. ILB has pretty much become the FB of the defense. Probably the least important position on the defensive side of the ball in this day and age. If you have a decent DL, OLBs that can rush and a couple good corners, you can get away with sticking a couple “no names” in at ILB and make it work...hell, a lot of GMs do that now. If you have one ILB that is okay at covering in space with what you have mentioned above, you have a great defense. DL, OLB, 3 CB all tank as priority above an ILB...

I couldn't disagree more. Every high end defensive unit has been focused on ILB/MLB for several years now. The player doesn't have to have name recognition or a draft pedigree, but they must be able to fill a specific role of ranging sideline to sideline and making plays in space while fulfilling the traditional duties of run stopping.

Recent Denver teams have gotten really good ILB play. Ravens and Steelers built around Mosley and Shazier respectively. Seahawks demonstrated this season how important Wagner and Wright were to their defense. The Jags have excellent 'backers. Finally, the lack of LBs may have been on of the biggest factors in the Pats losing the SB.

Looking at the college level (and I don't really watch a bunch of college ball but I read things by people who do) it seems that smaller, athletic, agile LBs are being used as cornerstones in stopping spread offenses.

[86WARD]

I would have to disagree. Don’t get me wrong, Id overpay for Shazier when healthy, he’ll, even now I would...However, while it’s nice to have a Mosely or Shazier if you have the cap space, it’s not necessary in this day and age...especially to have a second one. I’d much rather spend money on a quality third starting CB and decent ILB than empty the bank on a star ILB and a lackluster Ross Cockrell type nickelback. With teams having a 3WR base offense in today’s game, that 3rd CB plays a very large part. For the Seahawks, Wright was an OLb...No? For all your examples, you can list the same that’s not so successful with a great MLB: Tampa, KC, Etc...they have great MLBs but they werent all that successful. Even the Tavens with Mosely weren’t that stellar.

Im just saying it’s not nearly as important as it once was and if that’s the only glaring need, it’s not a huge one...

[Mojouw]

I would have to disagree. Don’t get me wrong, Id overpay for Shazier when healthy, he’ll, even now I would...However, while it’s nice to have a Mosely or Shazier if you have the cap space, it’s not necessary in this day and age...especially to have a second one. I’d much rather spend money on a quality third starting CB and decent ILB than empty the bank on a star ILB and a lackluster Ross Cockrell type nickelback. With teams having a 3WR base offense in today’s game, that 3rd CB plays a very large part. For the Seahawks, Wright was an OLb...No? For all your examples, you can list the same that’s not so successful with a great MLB: Tampa, KC, Etc...they have great MLBs but they werent all that successful. Even the Tavens with Mosely weren’t that stellar.

Im just saying it’s not nearly as important as it once was and if that’s the only glaring need, it’s not a huge one...

I agree on not emptying the bank. That's kinda what I meant by "filling the role". You need someone who can do the job and they don't have to be a 10 million dollar a year star. Right now the Steelers don't have anyone who can do the job.

Agreed on the multiple DBs thing - super important.

Interesting debate can be had on pass rushing. It is also critical to defensive success, but where does it come from? Solely off the edge? Individuals? Scheme? Steelers seem to be trying to figure that out on the fly.

All I know for sure is that one of the major reasons, if not the reason that the Steelers went out in the playoffs was below the line play at ILB. So, for me, that is priority #1 and #2 this offseason. A starter and some real depth need brought in at the position.

[steelreserve]

Getting FAs after the draft happens every year. It was suggested to use the Bell money to do that. I was only speculating(I'm not in the FO) that can be done just as easily from both sides of the draft. We will not grab one of the most expensive guys either way. That's not how we usually do things anyway.

You can find free agents after that, like with training camp cuts, but you don't know who they're going to be and it's rare to get an impact player at the position you want (Haden was a remarkable exception). All the big-time FAs and most of the mid-level ones are gone in the first few weeks, so there's a good chance we'd be standing around in May with $17 million cap space and our dicks in our hands with nothing worth spending it on. So in that respect it's not just as easy. Might as well just keep the guy for a year at that point.

I would have to disagree. Don’t get me wrong, Id overpay for Shazier when healthy, he’ll, even now I would...However, while it’s nice to have a Mosely or Shazier if you have the cap space, it’s not necessary in this day and age...especially to have a second one. I’d much rather spend money on a quality third starting CB and decent ILB than empty the bank on a star ILB and a lackluster Ross Cockrell type nickelback. With teams having a 3WR base offense in today’s game, that 3rd CB plays a very large part. For the Seahawks, Wright was an OLb...No? For all your examples, you can list the same that’s not so successful with a great MLB: Tampa, KC, Etc...they have great MLBs but they werent all that successful. Even the Tavens with Mosely weren’t that stellar.

Im just saying it’s not nearly as important as it once was and if that’s the only glaring need, it’s not a huge one...

I think we saw at the end of last season what happens when you just plug a couple of randos in at ILB and hope for the best. You don't need all of your linebackers to be stars, but you need at least one ILB with the skill to cover the underneath stuff from TEs and running backs or you will get your shit ruined, and you need the mobility to deal with stuff laterally to the outside. Especially in a 3-4; you can't have two guys in the middle of the field who are just OK. It's like having a big sign taped to your back that says "Fist me, Tom!" Or any other halfway decent QB for that matter.

[Born2Steel]

If you think ILB is the only glaring hole on the roster (which is your opinion and not necessarily wrong), then the team, in my mind, would be in excellent condition. ILB has pretty much become the FB of the defense. Probably the least important position on the defensive side of the ball in this day and age. If you have a decent DL, OLBs that can rush and a couple good corners, you can get away with sticking a couple “no names” in at ILB and make it work...hell, a lot of GMs do that now. If you have one ILB that is okay at covering in space with what you have mentioned above, you have a great defense. DL, OLB, 3 CB all tank as priority above an ILB...

That is exactly how I see this defense. DL is very good. OLBs are good, need depth. CBs are very good. Safeties are ok, need an upgrade. ILBs are completely missing. Not sure how you grade out this defense, but that is how I see it, yes.

[Born2Steel]

So a Doug Martin type (released today) and a 3rd round RB would be suitable to replace Bell and his production?

I have no idea what you mean by "Doug Martin type". Plus I specifically said "rounds 1 or 2", so how did you get "3rd round RB"? I have posted on here many times I do not believe any 1 RB is going to come in here and do what Bell does, out of the gate. If it's a move to a tandem backfield, that's a different discussion all together. Rather than cherry pick a post, read the *whole* discussion and enter with some knowledge of the actual conversation and the context of the posts. It will make more sense that way.

[Born2Steel]

You can find free agents after that, like with training camp cuts, but you don't know who they're going to be and it's rare to get an impact player at the position you want (Haden was a remarkable exception). All the big-time FAs and most of the mid-level ones are gone in the first few weeks, so there's a good chance we'd be standing around in May with $17 million cap space and our dicks in our hands with nothing worth spending it on. So in that respect it's not just as easy. Might as well just keep the guy for a year at that point.




I think we saw at the end of last season what happens when you just plug a couple of randos in at ILB and hope for the best. You don't need all of your linebackers to be stars, but you need at least one ILB with the skill to cover the underneath stuff from TEs and running backs or you will get your shit ruined, and you need the mobility to deal with stuff laterally to the outside. Especially in a 3-4; you can't have two guys in the middle of the field who are just OK. It's like having a big sign taped to your back that says "Fist me, Tom!" Or any other halfway decent QB for that matter.

That is a very real result that can happen as well. This is why I put in the part about "if our targeted guy is there". You take risks with players every year. If the FO does not think they have a suitable replacement then Bell stays. If they believe they drafted their guy, THEN let Bell walk, and if you're standing there with "$17M and your dick in your hand", what's the problem?

[steelreserve]

That is a very real result that can happen as well. This is why I put in the part about "if our targeted guy is there". You take risks with players every year. If the FO does not think they have a suitable replacement then Bell stays. If they believe they drafted their guy, THEN let Bell walk, and if you're standing there with "$17M and your dick in your hand", what's the problem?

The problem would be that we let Bell walk for no real reason, since we had the money. Then if anything at all goes wrong with the new guy - from injury, to just not being as good - we'll wish we hadn't cut Bell loose just so we could stare at a pile of money. Exposing ourselves to unnecessary risk with no payoff, basically.

[Shoes]

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburgh...ewis-115346881

[86WARD]

I have no idea what you mean by "Doug Martin type". Plus I specifically said "rounds 1 or 2", so how did you get "3rd round RB"? I have posted on here many times I do not believe any 1 RB is going to come in here and do what Bell does, out of the gate. If it's a move to a tandem backfield, that's a different discussion all together. Rather than cherry pick a post, read the *whole* discussion and enter with some knowledge of the actual conversation and the context of the posts. It will make more sense that way.

Lol. First, Doug Martin Type = below average veteran back, because really that’s all that would be available. Secondly, there’s way too many holes on the defense to waste a first or second round pick on a RB. If you think that a draft pick and below average veteran are replacing Bell and his production, you’re living a pipe dream. No need to cherry pick the thread as you say...lol. It’s just not a realistic thought. Easily one of the best backs in the league...you don’t hope to replace that with what you are suggesting.

No need to get all snippy about it...lol.