Is Le'Veon Bell a punk?

galaxy27

That situation is quickly disintegrating. His o-line is calling him OUT.

perkdog

I don’t think he is a punk I think he is stupid. I got no problem with a player refusing a low ball offer but I think he is holding out over not a big difference in money. I think He wants to be paid like the highest RB AND WR? Either way there is no denying his talent

grote15

Usually players side with fellow players when it comes to salary issues but not when it's going to potentially cost the team victories. I'd be surprised if Bell doesn't report to camp by Friday. His game check is nearly 900K. I remember years ago when Emmitt Smith held out for first two weeks and Cowboys went on to win the Super Bowl.

DIMEMAN

@grote15 said:
Usually players side with fellow players when it comes to salary issues but not when it's going to potentially cost the team victories. I'd be surprised if Bell doesn't report to camp by Friday. His game check is nearly 900K. I remember years ago when Emmitt Smith held out for first two weeks and Cowboys went on to win the Super Bowl.

I remember that too!

perkdog

I remember that as well, I also remember them losing the first two games of the season and Charles Haley flipping out lol

Coinstartled

Names are confusing. Thought it was the Laker.

bronco2078

Is there an upside to playing in Pittsburgh? I haven't seen it Terrible coach , and no prospects of a super bowl , also Ben is a fat load now whats that all about?

perkdog

@bronco2078 said:
Is there an upside to playing in Pittsburgh? I haven't seen it Terrible coach , and no prospects of a super bowl , also Ben is a fat load now whats that all about?

I don’t think Bell cares where he plays as long as he gets his money.

1951WheatiesPremium

Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

bronco2078

the franchise tag is poison , it might seem like good money but you get kapped if you do it

galaxy27

@bronco2078 said:
the franchise tag is poison , it might seem like good money but you get kapped if you do it

i see what you did there

markj111

I find the question insulting.

perkdog

@markj111 said:
I find the question insulting.

YAWN

DIMEMAN

I guess 14.54M just isn't enough to get by on. Yes, I will go with PUNK!

royalbrett

Even though I am a fan of him, I do think that he is very selfish.

1951WheatiesPremium

So let me see if I understand this...

...everyone who thinks Bell is a punk would be willing to go to work today and have their boss tell them ‘We’re going to pay you less than you are worth’ and you’d be ok with it, right?

And you’d also be ok with your boss saying ‘Actually, not only am I am going to pay you less money but I’m also going to want to renegotiate next year if your skills diminish or simply underpay you again next year if they don’t. Oh, and I am also going to make sure that if your skills diminish too much or you get hurt, I am going to give you nothing, replace you and not pay the new guy either.’

perkdog

@/1951WheatiesPremium. You never commented to my response,

bronco2078

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
So let me see if I understand this...

...everyone who thinks Bell is a punk would be willing to go to work today and have their boss tell them ‘We’re going to pay you less than you are worth’ and you’d be ok with it, right?

And you’d also be ok with your boss saying ‘Actually, not only am I am going to pay you less money but I’m also going to want to renegotiate next year if your skills diminish or simply underpay you again next year if they don’t. Oh, and I am also going to make sure that if your skills diminish too much or you get hurt, I am going to give you nothing, replace you and not pay the new guy either.’

Yes they all would. For some reason they all think its important that everyone knows what they think about what some stranger is getting paid. But like if their own salary was posted somewhere for the world to comment on that would not be ok obviously. That would be an invasion of privacy or something. Why are salaries in the leagues even public ? Probably just so the mopes know that the players are better than they are. A way to say we are paying this guy this much for you!!! thats why you have to pay 9 bucks for a hot dog.

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

I think there’s some bad assumptions here - ‘very good’ long term contract is misleading. The only thing that matters in an NFL contract is the guaranteed money; I can give a guy a 10 year/$500 million dollar contract and if the language is right and that guy gets hurt year one he makes $50 million and loses $450.

Maybe his numbers are not realistic but that is because he can only negotiate with one team. There’s plenty of teams that would throw more money at him than the Steelers are offering. The average NFL career is around 3.5 years (and less for RBs) and yet you can’t ‘get paid’ until 5 years in? How does that makes sense?

perkdog

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

I think there’s some bad assumptions here - ‘very good’ long term contract is misleading. The only thing that matters in an NFL contract is the guaranteed money; I can give a guy a 10 year/$500 million dollar contract and if the language is right and that guy gets hurt year one he makes $50 million and loses $450.

Maybe his numbers are not realistic but that is because he can only negotiate with one team. There’s plenty of teams that would throw more money at him than the Steelers are offering. The average NFL career is around 3.5 years (and less for RBs) and yet you can’t ‘get paid’ until 5 years in? How does that makes sense?

I see what your saying, I really didn’t look at the contract offer but remembered it sounded pretty fair. Again I got no problem with a guy trying to get as much as he can it just comes to a point where playing for a one year tag comes with huge risk like he did last year. Personally I’m a bird in the hand rather than two in the bush kind of guy.

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

I think there’s some bad assumptions here - ‘very good’ long term contract is misleading. The only thing that matters in an NFL contract is the guaranteed money; I can give a guy a 10 year/$500 million dollar contract and if the language is right and that guy gets hurt year one he makes $50 million and loses $450.

Maybe his numbers are not realistic but that is because he can only negotiate with one team. There’s plenty of teams that would throw more money at him than the Steelers are offering. The average NFL career is around 3.5 years (and less for RBs) and yet you can’t ‘get paid’ until 5 years in? How does that makes sense?

I see what your saying, I really didn’t look at the contract offer but remembered it sounded pretty fair. Again I got no problem with a guy trying to get as much as he can it just comes to a point where playing for a one year tag comes with huge risk like he did last year. Personally I’m a bird in the hand rather than two in the bush kind of guy.

I think everyone is; the problem for Bell is that he is given two choices:

1) Take this long term deal which is below what you’d get on the free market.

2) Take this one year deal where the league (not the market) decides what you will make for one year and roll the dice long term.

And there isn’t a third option.

By the way, in both scenarios there is no downside for ownership. We either underpay an MVP caliber player or we ride him year to year until he’s not worth underpaying.

JoeBanzai

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

I think there’s some bad assumptions here - ‘very good’ long term contract is misleading. The only thing that matters in an NFL contract is the guaranteed money; I can give a guy a 10 year/$500 million dollar contract and if the language is right and that guy gets hurt year one he makes $50 million and loses $450.

Maybe his numbers are not realistic but that is because he can only negotiate with one team. There’s plenty of teams that would throw more money at him than the Steelers are offering. The average NFL career is around 3.5 years (and less for RBs) and yet you can’t ‘get paid’ until 5 years in? How does that makes sense?

I see what your saying, I really didn’t look at the contract offer but remembered it sounded pretty fair. Again I got no problem with a guy trying to get as much as he can it just comes to a point where playing for a one year tag comes with huge risk like he did last year. Personally I’m a bird in the hand rather than two in the bush kind of guy.

I think everyone is; the problem for Bell is that he is given two choices:

1) Take this long term deal which is below what you’d get on the free market.

2) Take this one year deal where the league (not the market) decides what you will make for one year and roll the dice long term.

And there isn’t a third option.

By the way, in both scenarios there is no downside for ownership. We either underpay an MVP caliber player or we ride him year to year until he’s not worth underpaying.

I'm with you 100%. NFL careers are short and ownership has too big of an advantage. As long as you are forced to negotiate with a team that can franchise you, it's going to be tough for most players (especially running backs) as a couple of years go by and suddenly your skills have diminished.

Especially in NFL with no (or very few) guaranteed contracts.

These guys are the best of the best in a business that makes insane money. I say get what you can.

1951WheatiesPremium

@JoeBanzai said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:

@perkdog said:

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Crazy as it sounds, he’s been the best back in the league for about five years and barely been paid for it. This is around the time NFL RBs break down.

So take another one year deal, absorb another 500 carries and hope for a better deal next year?

How’s that fair?

Well the Steelers offered him a very good long term contract last year and he refused and signed the tag, I think he has unrealistic numbers in his mind. You said it yourself this is when RB’s start to break down so why would the Steelers up their offer from a year + ago?

I think there’s some bad assumptions here - ‘very good’ long term contract is misleading. The only thing that matters in an NFL contract is the guaranteed money; I can give a guy a 10 year/$500 million dollar contract and if the language is right and that guy gets hurt year one he makes $50 million and loses $450.

Maybe his numbers are not realistic but that is because he can only negotiate with one team. There’s plenty of teams that would throw more money at him than the Steelers are offering. The average NFL career is around 3.5 years (and less for RBs) and yet you can’t ‘get paid’ until 5 years in? How does that makes sense?

I see what your saying, I really didn’t look at the contract offer but remembered it sounded pretty fair. Again I got no problem with a guy trying to get as much as he can it just comes to a point where playing for a one year tag comes with huge risk like he did last year. Personally I’m a bird in the hand rather than two in the bush kind of guy.

I think everyone is; the problem for Bell is that he is given two choices:

1) Take this long term deal which is below what you’d get on the free market.

2) Take this one year deal where the league (not the market) decides what you will make for one year and roll the dice long term.

And there isn’t a third option.

By the way, in both scenarios there is no downside for ownership. We either underpay an MVP caliber player or we ride him year to year until he’s not worth underpaying.

I'm with you 100%. NFL careers are short and ownership has too big of an advantage. As long as you are forced to negotiate with a team that can franchise you, it's going to be tough for most players (especially running backs) as a couple of years go by and suddenly your skills have diminished.

Especially in NFL with no (or very few) guaranteed contracts.

These guys are the best of the best in a business that makes insane money. I say get what you can.

And so who could blame him at this point - he’s finally a free agent next year. If healthy, he gets paid. So training camp is definitely out. Now it’s a 15 game season and at this point maybe 14. Less risk for Bell.

Make no mistake - the Rooney’s have the money and could easily pay him. They also could have gotten a lot for him in trade. They want him for as cheap as possible and give him another 500 carries and cut him loose - since there’s no chance he’s a Steeler next year. The workload he’s had has cost him time almost every year. (Look up the league leaders among RBs in touches since he entered the league. It’s absurd what percentage of the offense he accounts for and yet he’s not worth paying because as mentioned every year takes a toll and backs lose ‘it’ pretty quick in the NFL.

In sports (and ‘labor’, at large), the modern day worker is paid incredibly disproportionately to the CEO/owner and the gap only seems to widen further as time passes. Without giving a lesson in economics and history, I’ll just say that has proven to be disastrous for civilizations in the past. Sports and society mirror each other pretty well when you really think about it.

Right now, all of the power rests in the hands of the owners. All of it. We rely on their benevolence.

perkdog

I wonder if Bell will sit out 10 games?

galaxy27

He's not reporting, he's planning on sitting out for an extended period of time, he's watching close to a mil flush down the toilet every week, he has alienated himself from his teammates and ticked many of them off, his team is going to suffer considerably in his absence, and he has pissed off 34895072458906782904567809245768902467809 people in fantasy land.

other than that, everything is seamless.

bronco2078

well the more pissed off people in fantasy land get the better . With any luck they will quit , they are ruining real football lets not help them out

Justacommeman

@bronco2078 said:
well the more pissed off people in fantasy land get the better . With any luck they will quit , they are ruining real football lets not help them out

Between you and Grim Reaper Glicker we are all doomed

m

galaxy27

@bronco2078 said:
well the more pissed off people in fantasy land get the better . With any luck they will quit , they are ruining real football lets not help them out

i knew that would elicit a response from you

bronco2078

All these flags on the defense are there for fantasy football alone.

money money money money money money money money money money money money

perkdog

Fantasy Football is way less of a game ruiner than betting on the games. Argument ended

1951WheatiesPremium

@perkdog said:
Fantasy Football is way less of a game ruiner than betting on the games. Argument ended

They’re the same thing - gambling on sports. They may get to it from different avenues but the same end result...

bronco2078

@perkdog said:
Fantasy Football is way less of a game ruiner than betting on the games. Argument ended

fantasy is betting on players and not caring about the actual games, Fantasy is turning a team game into an individual game . I have so and so I don't want the coach to use him to win the game I need points the team can lose for all I care.

I agree about betting on games though . Gamblers are degenerates

perkdog

LOL not all gamblers are degenerates! Trust me I know all about it

galaxy27

@bronco2078 said:

Gamblers are degenerates

try genuinely enjoying any NFL tilt, having a favorite team, gambling on the games, and managing multiple fantasy teams

it's like stuffing cognitive dissonance in a crack pipe and smoking it

bronco2078

Let me just say that people who are already fans of football teams who take up fantasy or betting on games are not hurting the game. Those people are expanding the way they enjoy the games.

I'm talking about the daily fantasy really .

If you are a pats fan and bet on the pats to win you are reinforcing your bond with the team right? Putting your money where your mouth is basically. Thats not your Pete rose or Michael Jordan type degenerate gambler

perkdog

Honestly I never draft Patriots players for my fantasy teams, if I have a player against the Pats I don’t even care if he gets shut down. As far as betting on NFL I haven’t touched a game since 2004

fergie23

Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

DIMEMAN

@fergie23 said:
Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

I thought he was losing pay for every week he doesn't play, which is the way it should be.

grote15

@DIMEMAN said:

@fergie23 said:
Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

I thought he was losing pay for every week he doesn't play, which is the way it should be.

He is. Nearly 900K per game. In order to qualify as a free agent next year, however, he will have to report (IIRC) by Week 10.

DIMEMAN

@grote15 said:

@DIMEMAN said:

@fergie23 said:
Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

I thought he was losing pay for every week he doesn't play, which is the way it should be.

He is. Nearly 900K per game. In order to qualify as a free agent next year, however, he will have to report (IIRC) by Week 10.

So if he doesn't report by this deadline...what does that mean for next year?

grote15

@DIMEMAN said:

@grote15 said:

@DIMEMAN said:

@fergie23 said:
Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

I thought he was losing pay for every week he doesn't play, which is the way it should be.

He is. Nearly 900K per game. In order to qualify as a free agent next year, however, he will have to report (IIRC) by Week 10.

So if he doesn't report by this deadline...what does that mean for next year?

He remains under team control.

DIMEMAN

@grote15 said:

@DIMEMAN said:

@grote15 said:

@DIMEMAN said:

@fergie23 said:
Bell is using the system to his advantage. With the short careers and non-guaranteed contracts football players have to use every ounce of leverage they have. I hope he reports the last possible day that still ensures he gets credited with a full season.

Robb

I thought he was losing pay for every week he doesn't play, which is the way it should be.

He is. Nearly 900K per game. In order to qualify as a free agent next year, however, he will have to report (IIRC) by Week 10.

So if he doesn't report by this deadline...what does that mean for next year?

He remains under team control.

It's hard to feel sorry for someone giving up close to 1M a week...….because he wants more!

PaulMaul

Perhaps the franchise system isn’t fair. If that’s the case, it was a collective bargaining error by the players, one which they will hopefully try to correct in the next CBA.

Since the owners are very unlikely to give up the franchise system outright, perhaps a reasonable compromise would be limiting each player to being franchise tagged only once.

fergie23

I'm sure Bell figures that his next contract will more than offset any $$s lost by sitting out today. He probably believes the reduction in wear and tear on his body is worth the money he is forgoing.

Bell is following the rules of the system that is in place. He doesn't have to report until week 10 or so. There is no difference between Bell choosing to sit out until he has to report and a team cutting a player in the middle of his contract. Both are part of the rules that owners and players choose to collectively bargain. If someone is going to criticize Bell for not showing up then they should criticize the teams for cutting players in the middle of their contracts.

I think NFL players see all the guaranteed money in baseball, basketball and hockey and realize they have done a terrible job collectively bargaining. Kirk Cousins has shown that owners will guarantee entire contracts for free agents.

That said, I doubt he can really give up $800+k a week for much longer.

Robb

perkdog

If he is committed to sitting out then so be it, I’m sure his agent figured in the money lost by potentially sitting out 10 games by making sure he gets it back with his next contract done way. It’s Bells insurance policy by sitting out and not ruining his value by getting hurt or tallying another 375 + touches

Brick

With Bell not in the lineup and an over the hill QB I fully expect the Steelers to lose their season opener.

grote15

LeVeon who?

DIMEMAN

@grote15 said:
LeVeon who?

I love it!

perkdog

Go Brownies!!!

erikthredd

@perkdog said:
Go Brownies!!!

No 0-16 happening this year