4pm deadline looms

[awboatguy]

He'll end up in Arizona or Jacksonville reeling he played "hardball". He'll be broken and broke by 30. Sad really.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[Ike Kelly]

He wants to be a martyr now for all the RB's in the league?

Keep tagging him as long as he is productive. Cheaper in the long term, it really is, because his shelf life isn't going to be what he thinks it's going to be.

And yes, I have no problem paying him $14 million next year (and maybe even $17 million the next year). Keep him hungry. Feed him touches.

He can only be tagged next year Del. CBA only allows Franchise tag to players for 2 years max.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[wig]

His history demonstrates he won't earn the value of the 12 million much less the 14. I hate the be the numbers guy, but there it is.

He's going to miss at least 5 games based on his 4 year historical average. And if the Steelers make the playoffs, odds are good he won't be there for one reason or another. I'm not saying it's his fault, I'm not blaming anyone but society. I'm just talking about numbers. Now, if you want to talk about being "reasonable". I agree. Running backs touch the ball much more often than receivers. They OUGHT to get a decent contract. They generally have a shorter shelf-life. That would again suggest to me greater value.

On the other hand, if you look at yards per touch - well... That's not even close. But (and sadly I only have 2 hands) Football is a TEAM game. If you don't have balance you have what happened in the AFCC game last year and the other team can just load up on your ONE ******* guy that can make a play and pretty much dictate how ****'s gonna go.

So - how much do you want to pay for a guy who gives you .09% extra win percentage over 4 years? What's that worth? I don't know?

 

[antdrewjosh]

His history demonstrates he won't earn the value of the 12 million much less the 14. I hate the be the numbers guy, but there it is.

He's going to miss at least 5 games based on his 4 year historical average. And if the Steelers make the playoffs, odds are good he won't be there for one reason or another. I'm not saying it's his fault, I'm not blaming anyone but society. I'm just talking about numbers. Now, if you want to talk about being "reasonable". I agree. Running backs touch the ball much more often than receivers. They OUGHT to get a decent contract. They generally have a shorter shelf-life. That would again suggest to me greater value.

On the other hand, if you look at yards per touch - well... That's not even close. But (and sadly I only have 2 hands) Football is a TEAM game. If you don't have balance you have what happened in the AFCC game last year and the other team can just load up on your ONE ******* guy that can make a play and pretty much dictate how ****'s gonna go.

So - how much do you want to pay for a guy who gives you .09% extra win percentage over 4 years? What's that worth? I don't know?

Even with the missed games and suspensions he has managed to be considered the best in the business. He is worth it. Its not a salary cap issue. We have space for him and others.

 

[Coryea]

He is the best RB in the NFL, but he's never started and finished a season, they offered him big time money, would that have made him the highest paid every in the game?

 

[SteelerSask2]

I dont agree with this. The owners lied or hid revenue to keep the cap down. The cap goes up because of the tv deals nothing to do with the owners

The cap is an agreed upon formula from the players association and the owners. Because each player is an independant contractor they cant impose an across the board 7% increase. But cap increases aren't found money. Any future contract you write will reflect that increase. As per guys who have essentially won nothing in this league at QB well exceeding future hall of famers. Kirk Cousins is a good qb. But you have 12 to 15 better qbs. Hes average.

 

[Coryea]

The problem he faces now is, he'll play for 12 this year, they'll tag him again next year hell play for 14 million, thats 26 over two years. He'll then be 28 and won't get no where near what he thinks he should get, especially if he misses games at that same pace.

 

[Litos]

So the Steelers end up paying 26M for probably the best two years of a franchise player, it isn't bad for us after all.

No dead money or cap hit attached after, no risk of suspension or injuries in the long term. Win - Win situation?

 

[antdrewjosh]

The cap is an agreed upon formula from the players association and the owners. Because each player is an independant contractor they cant impose an across the board 7% increase. But cap increases aren't found money. Any future contract you write will reflect that increase. As per guys who have essentially won nothing in this league at QB well exceeding future hall of famers. Kirk Cousins is a good qb. But you have 12 to 15 better qbs. Hes average.

The NFL salary cap is going up because owners hid over $100 million from players
40 percent of that will now be handed back to the players, an amount which will boost the salary cap by around $1.5 million.
By Yaron Weitzman on February 23, 2016 10:16 am
TWEET SHARE PIN

Matthew Emmons-USA TODAY Sports
The NFL has been ordered by an independent arbitrator to return more than $100 million to the pool that it shares with its players, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal. This ruling will put an additional $50 million in players' pockets and boost the 2016 salary cap by about $1.5 million.

As per the league's collective bargaining agreement, there are three types of revenues that owners are not required to share with the players: personal seat licenses sales, premium seating sales and naming rights revenues. Players, however, are supposed to receive 40 percent of local revenues (which mainly consist of tickets sales), 45 percent of sponsorship deals and 55 percent of media revenues. That total is pooled and divided, which is how the league generates its annual salary cap number.

But during an audit of the league's finances, lawyers and accountants from the NFL Players Association discovered that over the past three years the NFL had filed nearly $120 million in local revenues under a category titled "waived gate," one which it said it was not required to share. The NFLPA filed a grievance in January and last week arbitrator Stephen Burbank ruled in the union's favor.


"They created an exemption out of a fiction and they got caught," NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said to the Wall Street Journal.

The former "waived gate" total will now be filed under local revenues, meaning players will receive 40 percent of that money, or around $50 million.

 

[Spike]

So the Steelers end up paying 26M for probably the best two years of a franchise player, it isn't bad for us after all.

No dead money or cap hit attached after, no risk of suspension or injuries in the long term. Win - Win situation?

Sounds good, look how fast all the 'name' RB's have been dropping off the cliff sooner rather than later these days

RB's are just not worth any big $$ long term investments

 

[wig]

Even with the missed games and suspensions he has managed to be considered the best in the business. He is worth it.

He is. I don't question it.

However, let's say you want to pay him $12 million annually (plus guaranteed money) based on his output. We know he's a phenomenal back. No question.

So essentially given his historical output, you are actually paying him the equivalent of $1 million a game as you know he's going to miss at least 4 games and probably 5 on average. (He's averaged 5 games a year over his 4 year career.) He's not going to play 16 games. He knows that going in and anybody with any sense knows that too. And odds are he's not going to play any playoff games for you either. (Remember, he's only been to the playoffs once in his 4 year career although he was admittedly extraordinary in 2 of those games and abysmal in the third. Again, I hold that against the coaches, not Bell but it doesn't really matter does it? He's either on the field or he's not. You're still paying him that $1 million + per game.)

I mean, given your argument DeAngelo Williams is also certainly "Worth it" as a backup. Why on earth did the Steelers not renew HIS contract and pay him the equivalent of 4 or 5 million a year to make up for those games that Bell will undoubtedly miss?

 

[antdrewjosh]

The NFL's 25 most outsized contracts

Bill Barnwell
ESPN Staff Writer
As important as it is to find the right players, signing them to the right contracts can be just as crucial. General managers Dave Gettleman and John Dorsey were both shockingly let go in recent weeks from Carolina and Kansas City, respectively. The reports surrounding each firing suggested contractual missteps were involved. Every team wants to build its roster around cheap rookies and veterans who are making less than market value, but what is market value, anyway?

Let's try to define that today, and in doing so, we can figure out which teams often hand out deals that exceed market value and whether they're right to do so. I've gone through every multiyear contract I could find since the new collective bargaining agreement was signed in July 2011 and measured each deal's three-year value, which is the actual money a player would take home if he stayed on the roster for three seasons without departing or renegotiating his contract. Several NFL organizations use this metric as a simple measure of a contract's value.

Barnwell: The NFL's top QB deals ... and a little reality
Derek Carr got a massive deal Thursday, but he also taught us a lesson in NFL contracts.
The NFL's biggest three-year contract belongs to Andrew Luck, who will take home $75 million over that span in his extension. That's useful information, but it's not very helpful in setting the market for a right tackle or a punter. So I built a baseline three-year value for each position by taking the average of the top 20 contracts during this time frame at each spot. This includes both active and inactive contracts signed since 2011, because the latter still play a part in defining the market. In some cases, the biggest contracts at a position are ones that are no longer on the books. The top five running back contracts (led by Adrian Peterson) and top two wideout deals (Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald) aren't currently active, but they're used here to help set the baseline value.

Those baseline values range from $57,757,933 for quarterbacks to $2,904,166 for long snappers. (I lumped centers and guards as interior linemen, combined defensive ends with pass-rushing outside linebackers as edge rushers and mixed coverage linebackers with inside linebackers.) Luck's deal might be the biggest in the game, but once you account for the amount quarterbacks get paid, his three-year compensation falls in line as 29.9 percent above average.

As it turns out, Luck's deal comes in as the 26th-largest active contract after adjusting for positional value. Let's run through the 25 other deals and see what it tells us about the teams that signed them.

23. Antonio Brown, WR, Steelers

Three-year compensation: $48.91 million (30.9 percent over baseline)

Brown's deal is the only wide receiver contract on this list. The market is skewed by virtue of the fact that the two largest post-CBA deals are from 2011 (Larry Fitzgerald, $51 million) and 2012 (Calvin Johnson, $51.755 million). Each of those contracts maxed out in excess of $113 million, but the biggest active wideout deal is the five-year, $71 million contract given to Julio Jones. It's not clear those deals worked out. The Cardinals have needed to restructure the Fitz deal twice and will owe $4.9 million in dead money on their cap after Fitzgerald hits free agency this offseason. Brown's deal seems far more likely to work out.

Is there enough nunbers available to figure where Bell would have landed had he accepted



http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...t-big-money-contracts-adjusting-position-2017

 

[antdrewjosh]

He is. I don't question it.

However, let's say you want to pay him $12 million annually (plus guaranteed money) based on his output. We know he's a phenomenal back. No question.

So essentially given his historical output, you are actually paying him the equivalent of $1 million a game as you know he's going to miss at least 4 games and probably 5 on average. (He's averaged 5 games a year over his 4 year career.) So really, while you're writing a $12 million contract, you're paying him the equivalent of $16 million cause he's not going to play 16 games. And odds are he's not going to play any playoff games for you either. (Remember, he's only been to the playoffs once in his 4 year career although he was admittedly extraordinary in 2 of those games and abysmal in the third. Again, I hold that against the coaches, not Bell but it doesn't really matter does it? He's either on the field or he's not. You're still paying him that $1 + per game.)

Injuries happen. Ben has had his share

 

[wig]

He has indeed. And he was suspended for 3 games by the commissioner's allegations of conduct. So that's a perfectly fair comparison on every level.

As I pointed out, without Bell, the Steelers were at a .55% win rate. With him they were at a .64% rate. I wonder what the rate would be without Roethlisberger? I could look it up but I won't bother. It's not the argument I want to make or the hill I want to die on. It's not that I'm arguing against Bell here. I'm just saying if the reports are true that he was offered 12 million a year, he SHOULD have taken the money in a skinny second. He is without a doubt the best back in the league. However that contract is 33% above the next highest active paid back in the league. If that's not raising the bar, I don't know what is.

Again, we don't know what the guaranteed money verbiage is. Perhaps the Steelers put something in there that didn't sit well with Bell. He IS somewhat injury prone and he probably isn't any more interested in his contractual status being tied to his health than the Steelers are to it NOT being tied to his health, if you follow me.

Bell's a great running back. I think he is truly special. He is only weak in 1 aspect of his game as far as I can see and that's top end speed. If he had one more gear he'd truly be a generational back. As it is, he's something like 90% of Barry Sanders. Bell can juke guys out at the line like nobody you've ever seen. He can dodge linebackers and spin out of their grasp like they were little-leaguers. But he can't outrun the safeties and corners who alwasy catch him 20 to 30 yards downfield. I can't ever remember seeing Bell break a 40, 50 or 60 yard TD. Willie Parker could. Hell Kordell Stewart did it once or twice. I've never seen Bell do more than 25 or maybe 30 before he was caught or forced out of bounds. He just doesn't have that top gear.

Would I trade him? Oh hell no. But I also know in my heart that he's not going to break a 50 yarder. He's never going to hit a home run. Sure he'll make you BELIEVE he can hit one every time he touches the ball, but that linebacker always just gets the ankle before he breaks past the last defender, or the safety always just gets a push on him to edge him out of bounds before he quite gets over the plane. If he has one weakness, that's it.

But again, he's still the best all around back in the league right now. He's certainly worth 10, maybe even 12 million a year. I wouldn't go more than that. I don't want to bash him down at the goal line because he's too frickin' valuable. so he's not much use to me in short yardage. I could play-fake him and pass. But it wouldn't take long for teams to figure out that I would be stupid to ever actually give him the ball in short yardage situations, so they'd probably be more prepared for him to flare out on pass routes or dive through the hole and look for a dump off.

No, you don't pay a guy $1 million a game and then put him in a situation where some meathead can take him out on a stupid meaningless play. That's criminally stupid. Course we have the coach for it...

 

[antdrewjosh]

The Pittsburgh Gambler? Steelers RB Le’Veon Bell Comfortable Betting On Himself


BY DAVE BRYAN JULY 18, 2017 AT 02:00 PM



Pittsburgh Steelers running back Le’Veon Bell is a gambling man and especially when it comes to him betting on himself. If you want proof of that, all you need to do is look at the reported contract from the Steelers he just turned down.

If the Tuesday numbers that Tom Pelissero of the NFL Network passed along on Twitter are true, and there’s no reason to believe they aren’t, Bell turned down a five or six year contract offer from the Steelers that would have paid him $30 million in the first two years and $42 million through the first three. That’s a lot of damn money and $14 million per over the course of the next three to be exact. Even so, most of it wasn’t fully guaranteed.

While we dont know the full layout of Bell’s reported offer from the Steelers, logic tells you that he probably turned down roughly $18-20 million in 2017. While all of that first year money probably wasn’t fully guaranteed, he really would have had to do something stupid not to get it all. For all practical purposes, the same really goes for the $30 million he would have earned through the first two years of the deal. Outside of another suspension or a very serious injury, he was more than likely going to see that money.

Now, Bell enters 2017 with the notion that he’s already going to earn nearly $27 million at the very least over the course of the next two seasons thanks to possible back-to-back franchise tags and possibly even more than that should he work out a long-term deal with the organization a year from now. Should, however, Bell ultimately not receive the $14.5 million franchise tag from the Steelers next offseason, he is betting that another team will be willing to pay him way more than $18 million in 2018 as an unrestricted free agent to sign with them as part of long-term deal that will average well over the $12 million-plus per year the Steelers reportedly offered him. Additionally, he is betting that that new deal with another team will have second-year earnings that would bring his three-year total (2017-2019) to way more than the $42 million he would have received during the same span of years with the Steelers.

So, what happens if the Steelers tag Bell next offseason and they fail to work out a long-term deal with him again by this same time next year? Well, Bell will have pocketed just shy of $27 million come the end of the 2018 season and he and his agent will dare the Steelers to place a third consecutive tag on him, which will be the equivalent to the quarterback franchise tag amount. That’s not going to happen, so Bell would become an unrestricted free agent in 2019 at the age of 27 looking for one last big payday from another team. He would, however, need to get more than $15.5 million in year-one of his new deal in order for his gamble to pay off and as long as he stays healthy and keeps his nose clean, that shouldn’t be a problem, at least as we sit here today.




Is there a drawback to Bell’s gamble? Well, first, he must remain healthy and out of trouble with the league office moving forward and he really can only control one of those two things. As for him potentially staying healthy, he’ll need to do so while likely touching the football at least 300 more times in 2017. If the Steelers tag him back-to-back years and fail to work out a long-term deal with him, he’ll probably need to touch the football roughly 650 or more times prior to hitting free agency in 2019. Any substantial drop-off in production or missed games due to injury will undoubtedly hurt his future market value to some degree.

In short, Bell and his agent are betting that nearly $27 million is already in the bank even without a long-term deal and that amount is just a little more than $3 million shy of what the Steelers were willing to pay him over the course of the next two. That’s a worst-case scenario in their eyes and they’re gambling that earnings over the course of the next three years will be much more than the $42 million he would get from the Steelers and that he’ll earn even more through years number four and five. I haven’t even touched on possible outside endorsement deals that Bell probably stands to get and perhaps he already has a few to help offset his recent gamble.

Instead Bell being nicknamed “The Juice”, perhaps “The Gambler” is more fitting for Bell moving forward into his career. While you might not agree with his decision to turn down the Steelers offer, hopefully you can see now why he probably did. He’s betting on himself.





http://www.Invalid Link - Check SN ...-steelers-rb-leveon-bell-comfortable-betting/

 

[SteelerFan448]

Remember to take those numbers with a gain of salt. No one knows if they are real or not.

I believe they are and that the Steelers leaked them for a reason. That was a very good offer per Tom Pelissero's report "#Steelers' offer to Le'Veon Bell averaged over $12M per, with $30M in first 2 years, $42M over 3, per sources."

It was a great offer for the team and one that shows they made a legitimate effort to keep one of their star players at a cost well above the current market for running backs. Bell is a special player and can do things that few other backs in the league can do, however, I don't blame the team for not offering more than what they did. From Bell's point of view, good for him for looking at maximizing his value.

 

[wig]

I feel badly for him. Dude had Huge money sitting on the table in front of him and he totally blew it.

Epic failure. This is Johnny Manziel dumb. This guy has managed 1 season where he played all 16 games and he STILL didn't make it into the playoffs. He was HURT by the time the playoffs came around. Seriously. Epic Epic dumb. I do like him though. I hope it works out well for him and the Steelers. I really do.

But, you did see the wording. "Most of it NOT guaranteed." Big deal there. He knows he can't stay healthy.

 

[Hines57]

Another thought is why the hell do we need to be paying for a RB at $15 million/season when Roethlisberger isn't here and we're wallowing with Landry & Dobbs? Why do we want dead money to hit in 2020 when we are trying to re-build the team?

This logically should be the thinking for everything except maybe offensive and defensive lines. All the "bling" positions on offense should only really be committed to as long as Roethlisberger is our QB.... After that, you completely change your thinking on how to rebuild the offense.

There's enough journeymen QBs out there that we can pick up a free agent to come in and go 8-8, 9-7 or maybe better with the current set of players. Ben is the piece that puts us over 10+ wins and makes us a Super Bowl contender. This team is going to have a lot of talented players after Ben retires

 

[SteelerFan448]

There's enough journeymen QBs out there that we can pick up a free agent to come in and go 8-8, 9-7 or maybe better with the current set of players. Ben is the piece that puts us over 10+ wins and makes us a Super Bowl contender. This team is going to have a lot of talented players after Ben retires

Del is right that you need to keep the trenches strong. The defensive skill players should be on their second contracts and they'll be able to keep a ton of talent in place without that huge QB contract. At this point, invest in a young quarterback and throw them into the fire with all of that talent. No reason this team should pack it in with this roster. A rookie QB can succeed with the right talent in place.

 

[antdrewjosh]

I feel badly for him. Dude had Huge money sitting on the table in front of him and he totally blew it.

Epic failure. This is Johnny Manziel dumb. This guy has managed 1 season where he played all 16 games and he STILL didn't make it into the playoffs. He was HURT by the time the playoffs came around. Seriously. Epic Epic dumb. I do like him though. I hope it works out well for him and the Steelers. I really do.

But, you did see the wording. "Most of it NOT guaranteed." Big deal there. He knows he can't stay healthy.

According to reports and Bell there was nothing in it about staying healthy or drugs. "Most of it NOT guaranteed" vs 12 this year and possibly 14 next year total of 26 GUARANTEED

 

[wig]

No, he gets 12.2 this year and as long as he doesn't get hurt he has an opportunity to get a possible 14 next year.

To do that however, he needs to stay healthy AND produce at a level commensurate with what he's been doing in the past. What he's done is turn down an offer for 12 million plus whatever signing bonus they gave him for 12.2 million and no signing bonus. It's a HUGE gamble. Like I said, I hope it works out well for both sides. Best case scenario, he plays well, doesn't get hurt and Haley doesn't run him to death before the playoffs or through them so he's not gimped up when he's most needed.

THEN the arguments can start about what he's truly worth. Fact is though, if he plays a full season, stays healthy and the Steelers STILL can't get over the hump and Ben leaves, there's very little point in signing him to that kind of money because the Steelers aint no way no how going to compete at the AFCC or Superbowl level without Ben. It's a GIANT Gamble.

 

[Litos]

No, he gets 12.2 this year and as long as he doesn't get hurt he has an opportunity to get a possible 14 next year.

To do that however, he needs to stay healthy AND produce at a level commensurate with what he's been doing in the past. What he's done is turn down an offer for 12 million plus whatever signing bonus they gave him for 12.2 million and no signing bonus. It's a HUGE gamble. Like I said, I hope it works out well for both sides. Best case scenario, he plays well, doesn't get hurt and Haley doesn't run him to death before the playoffs or through them so he's not gimped up when he's most needed.

THEN the arguments can start about what he's truly worth. Fact is though, if he plays a full season, stays healthy and the Steelers STILL can't get over the hump and Ben leaves, there's very little point in signing him to that kind of money because the Steelers aint no way no how going to compete at the AFCC or Superbowl level without Ben. It's a GIANT Gamble.

He still will get a **** load of money from another team next year or the following l, he knows it. He can be the face of a franchise, he's that talented

 

[Spike]

He's not going anywhere for at least a year.

Calm down muffins, one game at a time

 

[6Lombardis]

I'll be in the minority, but I say tag him two years run the hell out of him. Hopefully we get another trophy that way.

 

[Spike]

Steelers leak final offer to Le’Veon Bell, with incomplete details

Tom Pelissero of NFL Media reports that the Steelers offered Bell a contract that carries an annual average of more than $12 million per year, with $30 million payable in the first two years and $42 million over three. While that’s better than nothing, it’s impossible to fully evaluate the quality of the deal without more.

Most importantly, how much was fully guaranteed at signing? With a $12.1 million in guaranteed salary for 2017 and the promise of a 20-percent raise for 2018 under the tag, Bell should have been looking for $26.62 million fully guaranteed over the first two years. The Steelers, however, typically don’t fully guarantee money beyond year one. Without knowing the full guarantee from the moment Bell inked the deal, there’s no way to know whether he should have taken it.

Also, what’s the cash flow in year one? By simply saying he’d make $30 million in the first two years, the Steelers adroitly glossed over the key question of whether Bell would make $12.1 million this year, $26.62 million, or something in between that. Absent that detail, there’s no way to know the quality of the deal.

Finally, what’s the term of the deal? Ian Rapoport of NFL Media chimes in that it would have been a five-year contract. This means that Bell would have been swapping one year at $12.1 million for one year at whatever the offer would have paid this year (we still don’t know) plus a team-held option for 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021.

In leaking the information (which is a bit of a surprise), the Steelers want to seem reasonable — even if it makes Bell look greedy. Whatever the details of the offer were, Bell gets $12.1 million this year (if/when he signs the tender) and either $14.52 million next year or a shot at the open market. If the Steelers weren’t willing to give Bell any guarantees beyond 2017 and likewise not willing to pay him $26.62 million or close to it this year, he made the right decision.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...offer-to-leveon-bell-with-incomplete-details/