Any news on Kelly?

[southside asshole]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

That is pretty tame compared to the statements some of his teammates made.

Yeah, I wouldn't read too much into that either. Backbiting and finger-pointing after a few losses is just the Steelers way.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

You are looking at this like its baseball-type free agency, but it isn't. The NFL system allows a team to use the franchise tag to keep one player a year. Those are the rules everyone agreed to. The downside for the team is that it is costly to do so - in Bell's case, because it was the second year in a row he was tagged, he was entitled to a 20% increase over his prior year's $12 million+ salary (or $14.5 million). What's more, this salary is fully guaranteed once the tag is signed. Because it's a one-year, fully guaranteed contract, the team can't do any of the financial engineering that it would otherwise be able to do with a longer contract containing up front bonuses and guarantee limits. So it's not a perfect solution for the team either.

As to your point that it was not intended to be used over multiple years, that is simply not correct. The NFL and the player's union anticipated this exact scenario, and agreed to allow the tag to be used repeatedly if a team desires to do so. The catch is that it will cost the team dearly to do so, because in the second tag year (like Bell this year), the team has to increase the player's salary by 20%. The third tag year is even more expensive, as the player gets another 44% salary bump.

Kirk Cousins is a great illustration of this, and how a player with enough guts can use this situation to their advantage. In the first year he was tagged (2016), he received the normal initial tag price - the average of the top five salaries at his position (something like $20 million for QBs). He signed the tag and played out the season. In 2017, he made aggressive contract demands and the Redskins tagged him again, but by doing so under the above rules they were forced to increase his salary by 20% to $24 million . Again, he refused to accept a contract offer he felt was too low, signed the tag and played out the year. The third year (this last offseason), he maintained his aggressive demands and put the Redskins in the unenviable position of either tagging him a third time at the astronomical cost of a fully guaranteed $34 million (a 44% increase over the prior year), or to finally wave the white flag and let him become a free agent. He became a free agent.

Bell was just one year from putting the Steelers in a similar financial predicament (though if my calculations are correct, Bell's tag price would have been $21 million this coming off season - still a massive guaranteed amount for a RB).

I am looking at it like an NFL FA situation. They created the tag so a team isn't screwed when losing its best player, but teams do not lose their best players as much anymore. With an ever-increasing cap and better cap management than two decades ago, this is not as common an occurrence anymore. The Colts are 70 million under the cap and could be a playoff team. The cap has outdistanced the salaries now. The player's union miscalculated because they did not anticipate the cap skyrocketing like it did. It is a system created over 20 years ago that needs to be updated.

Again you are using a QB money in a RB contract situation. QB's are not the model for this comparison because QB's have, by far, the most exorbitant contracts in the league. QB's can force the hand of the team because the averages the tag uses to base the one year salary off of are so big they can actually be a detrimental influence on the team's cap. RB's are paid much less money as an average, they are on par with say safties. I reject your comparison because it is not a good analogy and the situation is not the same for every position. Some positions are valued more and are paid more. Also, QB's have a longer average career in the league. A QB can play well into his 30's, they can wait 2-3 years for that escalating tag to add up. That is a lifetime in a RB's career and will directly affect his next contract negotiation. The Steelers are obviously using the tag to get enough years of Bell's prime, then they will cut bait once that is done, or they have found a replacement for him. That is not what the tag was intended for and it screws some players and positions more than others. The tag wasn't meant just to be used for QB's.

Bell has a legitimate argument that he is more valuable than the average RB on the Steelers and should be paid accordingly. That is backed up by unprecedented production from his position. The tag, even after a second year, does not even match what he was asking for yearly. So they actually saved money by using the tag twice to secure their best offensive player. Not to mention saving bonus money that they would have to pay right away. If they did it a third year, he would hit an estimated 25 million which is QB money. Only then would it really affect them. However, if they did the proper cap predicting, and the savings they had from the previous two tag years, they could make a judgment call whether to do it or not for one more year. Whether they were still in the SB window or not. But this outcome still costs Bell millions that he would find in FA. There are definitely two types of RB's in the league, the upper echelon that account for a large amount of the team's offense, and the committee systems that may approach the same as the stars. The tag is weighted down by the lower paid backs and it is not a fair system.

In my opinion, everybody loses here, and that is why they should address the tag. The Steelers window is closing and James Connor, while good, is not Bell. Bell loses an entire year's salary. But even more important, he loses another year in RB halflife and is forced to sit out because getting a second lucrative contract is in serious danger now. The Steelers are obviously not going to cut him loose and to me that is just sour apples and is fucking a guy that has been a good player for them.

[YDFL Commish]

We don't need an elite RB to win a SB.

The Eagles did not have an elite RB last season and the Patriots have never had one.

Actually go back and look at the past 20 SB winners, and the only elite RB'S were Terrel Davis, Faulk and possibly Lynch.

In today NFL an elite RB is not the road to success. It's about building your OL and DL, having a QB and some guys that can cover and catch.

Let's go get those guys.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

I doubt they go the Bell route. I don’t know who it will be. Whether it be a free agent or a rookie. I just don’t think Ballard is going to look at this group and be happy with one of them as a rb1.

They all should have a role but I think we have 3 situational guys at rb. I imagine we use a committee approach next year so it probably won’t be a big name.

There are some decent RBs in this upcoming draft that should be available around the 30-90 range picks. I think that will be the back up if FA doesn't work out.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

We don't need an elite RB to win a SB.

The Eagles did not have an elite RB last season and the Patriots have never had one.

Actually go back and look at the past 20 SB winners, and the only elite RB'S were Terrel Davis, Faulk and possibly Lynch.

In today NFL an elite RB is not the road to success. It's about building your OL and DL, having a QB and some guys that can cover and catch.

Let's go get those guys.

I agree you are right that it doesn't have to be a RB. I think fans chase the past a little and want that Faulk/Edge to compliment Luck and Hilton. But I would argue you need playmakers or matchup problems for opposing defenses. That could come from the RB position or TE/WR. That is what we need more of in my estimate. Having a good RB that can also block back there would not be the worst thing in the world.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

I am looking at it like an NFL FA situation. They designed the tag so a team isn't screwed when losing its best player, but teams do not lose their best players as much anymore. With an ever-increasing cap and better cap management than two decades ago, this is not as common an occurrence anymore. The Colts are 70 million under the cap and could be a playoff team. The cap has outdistanced the salaries now. The player's union miscalculated because they did not anticipate the cap skyrocketing like it did. It is a system created over 20 years ago that needs to be updated.

Again you are using a QB money in a RB contract situation. QB's are not the model for this comparison because QB's have, by far, the most exorbitant contracts in the league. QB's can force the hand of the team because the averages the tag uses to base the one year salary off of are so big they can actually be a detrimental influence on the team's cap. RB's are paid much less money as an average, they are on par with say safties. I reject your comparison because it is not a good analogy and the situation is not the same for every position. Some positions are valued more and are paid more. Also, QB's have a longer average career in the league. A QB can play well into his 30's, they can wait 2-3 years for that escalating tag to add up. That is a lifetime in a RB's career and will directly affect his next contract negotiation. The Steelers are obviously using the tag to get enough years of Bell's prime, then they will cut bait once that is done, or they have found a replacement for him. That is not what the tag was intended for and it screws some players and positions more than others. The tag wasn't meant just to be used for QB's.

Bell has a legitimate argument that he is more valuable than the average RB on the Steelers and should be paid accordingly. That is backed up by unprecedented production from his position. The tag, even after a second year, does not even match what he was asking for yearly. So they actually saved money by using the tag twice to secure their best offensive player. Not to mention saving bonus money that they would have to pay right away. If they did it a third year, he would hit an estimated 25 million which is QB money. Only then would it really affect them. However, if they did the proper cap predicting, and the savings they had from the previous two tag years, they could make a judgment call whether to do it or not for one more year. Whether they were still in the SB window or not. But this outcome still costs Bell millions that he would find in FA. There are definitely two types of RB's in the league, the upper echelon that account for a large amount of the team's offense, and the committee systems that may approach the same as the stars. The tag is weighted down by the lower paid backs and it is not a fair system.

In my opinion, everybody loses here, and that is why they should address the tag. The Steelers window is closing and James Connor, while good, is not Bell. Bell loses an entire year's salary. But even more important, he loses another year in RB halflife and is forced to sit out because getting a second lucrative contract is in serious danger now. The Steelers are obviously not going to cut him loose and to me that is just sour apples and is fucking a guy that has been a good player for them.

To begin with, I want you to understand that I’m not trying to be combative on this issue, and no disrespect is intended in my posts. Tone is a hard thing to capture in a cold internet post, so I feel I should say that up front. Second, I will not go too far into detail in responding to your post, since I don’t want the posting to get out of hand and irritate everyone with another long post. With these things out of the way, I’ll respond as follows:

The collective bargaining agreement is not outdated nor is it 20+ years old. It is renegotiated periodically as it expires. The last renegotiation occurred in 2011, and it is due to expire in 2020. Both sides are well represented in the negotiations, and the resulting agreement is presumed to be a fair balance between both sides’ interests. For the teams to receive the benefit of things such as a salary cap and franchise tag options, they must concede to the players on other points such as increased pension benefits and minimum spending floors.

In the above context, Bell’s “value” in an unrestricted free agent market is irrelevant – he's negotiated away the right to be an unrestricted free agency if he’s franchise tagged. And of course the Steelers will use the tag as often as they can if it’s a good deal for them. They are simply taking advantage of the rights they negotiated into the agreement. It provides the teams with a way to keep their best players if they choose to do so, and in theory it also provides the teams with a way to limit overall salary growth since the best players rarely reach unrestricted free agency. In return, the teams have conceded other things, and the players have installed protections for Bell by ensuring that the tag price is a reasonable approximation of a top salary at his position (but he won’t be setting any record salaries unless he maneuvers himself into a Kirk Cousins-type situation).

I don’t really get your complaints regarding my use of the QB position as an illustration of my points. Kirk Cousins comes to mind because it just happened this last offseason. But you could use any position – as I mentioned, Bell could have set himself up for a tag price of $21 million, which is just as crazy for a RB like Bell as $34 million would have been for a QB of Cousins' caliber. The same rationale applies regardless of position/tag price.

About the only thing I agreed with is that the current system is not as beneficial for positions with shorter lifespans such as RB. That’s true, but in my mind that’s up to the players union to address in their negotiations. You can’t blame the teams for taking advantage of the terms they’ve negotiated - in fact its unfair for you to suggest that they should.

Lastly, please explain why Bell is in a different class than Conner? I’ll admit that I know very little about their respective running styles or skills, but what I do know is that Conner has outpaced Bell’s most recent production in almost every respect – which gives rise to the question of whether this is because the Steelers’ system is RB friendly, in which case signing Bell could be a huge mistake.

Well, I need to apologize now because my post ended up long again. But I'm trying!

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

To begin with, I want you to understand that I’m not trying to be combative on this issue, and no disrespect is intended in my posts. Tone is a hard thing to capture in a cold internet post, so I feel I should say that up front. Second, I will not go too far into detail in responding to your post, since I don’t want the posting to get out of hand and irritate everyone with another long post. With these things out of the way, I’ll respond as follows:

The collective bargaining agreement is not outdated nor is it 20+ years old. It is renegotiated periodically as it expires. The last renegotiation occurred in 2011, and it is due to expire in 2020. Both sides are well represented in the negotiations, and the resulting agreement is presumed to be a fair balance between both sides’ interests. For the teams to receive the benefit of things such as a salary cap and franchise tag options, they must concede to the players on other points such as increased pension benefits and minimum spending floors.

In the above context, Bell’s “value” in an unrestricted free agent market is irrelevant – he's negotiated away the right to be an unrestricted free agency if he’s franchise tagged. And of course the Steelers will use the tag as often as they can if it’s a good deal for them. They are simply taking advantage of the rights they negotiated into the agreement. It provides the teams with a way to keep their best players if they choose to do so, and in theory it also provides the teams with a way to limit overall salary growth since the best players rarely reach unrestricted free agency. In return, the teams have conceded other things, and the players have installed protections for Bell by ensuring that the tag price is a reasonable approximation of a top salary at his position (but he won’t be setting any record salaries unless he maneuvers himself into a Kirk Cousins-type situation).

I don’t really get your complaints regarding my use of the QB position as an illustration of my points. Kirk Cousins comes to mind because it just happened this last offseason. But you could use any position – as I mentioned, Bell could have set himself up for a tag price of $21 million, which is just as crazy for a RB like Bell as $34 million would have been for a QB of Cousins' caliber. The same rationale applies regardless of position/tag price.

About the only thing I agreed with is that the current system is not as beneficial for positions with shorter lifespans such as RB. That’s true, but in my mind that’s up to the players union to address in their negotiations. You can’t blame the teams for taking advantage of the terms they’ve negotiated - in fact its unfair for you to suggest that they should.

Lastly, please explain why Bell is in a different class than Conner? I’ll admit that I know very little about their respective running styles or skills, but what I do know is that Conner has outpaced Bell’s most recent production in almost every respect – which gives rise to the question of whether this is because the Steelers’ system is RB friendly, in which case signing Bell could be a huge mistake.

Well, I need to apologize now because my post ended up long again. But I'm trying!

You don't need to apologize for the tone of your post. You aren't going to offend me and I don't think you are angry, I'm not. Message boards are for things like this, no one is forced to read it. They can easily scroll past it.

I did not say the collective bargaining agreement, I said the franchise tag. The concept of the tag is over 20 years old, it was created around '93 for a situation that has largely changed due to the rookie draft scale and positions settling under certain values. The strictures it uses are dated because the cap has outpaced them. No negotiation is fair and balanced, some sides have more leverage than others. That is life, and if you don't agree with that I don't know what to tell you.

The RB position was devalued for around a decade, it has evolved somewhat since then and hence become more valuable. You can see that reflected in the draft. But not all RB's are the same, the position name covers a wide range of players and their level of contribution and the scheme that uses them. QB's are largely the same, WO's are largely the same, Oline is largely the same, TE's and RB's are all over the place in terms of use and contribution. Some are much more valuable than others and I do not believe that is reflected in the franchise tag salary estimates.

You keep explaining how the system works as if by explaining it in further detail it will suddenly change my opinion. I understand how the franchise system works and whence it came. How it was negotiated. I understand the Steelers are going by the rules negotiated, I understand Bell is asserting the only leverage he has. I find it unfair and ineffective in this instance, regardless whether the player's union agreed to it in negotiations or not. They did not anticipate a situation like this, and I am sure they will look at it when they go back to the table in 2020. As I said, I think the Steelers are violating the spirit of what the tag was created for. The tag is designed to force both parties to the negotiating table and come to a conclusion. It is not working in this case. However, instead of both sides moving on, the Steelers would rather force Bell into playing for them or not playing at all. That hurts both sides but really hurts the individual player more.

Originally Posted by Chaka

In the above context, Bell’s “value” in an unrestricted free agent market is irrelevant

It is utterly relevant because that is the very heart of the matter and what is motivating his holdout. Bell has a perceived value of his contribution, the Steelers do not agree or are simply not willing to meet it. Things have ground to a halt. If Bell did not have a value attached to his services, we would not be having this conversation.

I just explained, in length, why your Cousins analogy does not work. Just because two players are tagged doesn't make their situation the same. I will ask a simple question "Are QB's and RB's paid the same amount of money and does that money impact the cap in the same way?" If they do in your mind then it is a valid comparison. I do not think it is and explained why. Yet they are held to the same strictures.

Connor has been hot and cold this year, that's it. He did little to nothing last year. Bell has done more for much longer. If Connor does the same then you can put him in that category. Skill and style wise... He is a bigger back and runs a little high. That type of running style takes a lot of hits IMO. Lot of hits doesn't usually equate to a long career.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

We don't need an elite RB to win a SB.

The Eagles did not have an elite RB last season and the Patriots have never had one.

Actually go back and look at the past 20 SB winners, and the only elite RB'S were Terrel Davis, Faulk and possibly Lynch.

In today NFL an elite RB is not the road to success. It's about building your OL and DL, having a QB and some guys that can cover and catch.

Let's go get those guys.

Colts won the Super Bowl with Addai

[YDFL Commish]

Originally Posted by JAFF

Colts won the Super Bowl with Addai

My point exactly. We had a good O-Line, and decided we could run the ball when ever we wanted to.

We also can't omit Dom Rhodes impact in the playoffs. It was a total team effort and a great coaching effort...as well as discipline by PM to commit to the running game that produced that SB.

But it never required an elite RB to do so.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

You don't need to apologize for the tone of your post. You aren't going to offend me and I don't think you are angry, I'm not. Message boards are for things like this, no one is forced to read it. They can easily scroll past it.

I did not say the collective bargaining agreement, I said the franchise tag. The concept of the tag is over 20 years old, it was created around '93 for a situation that has largely changed due to the rookie draft scale and positions settling under certain values. The strictures it uses are dated because the cap has outpaced them. No negotiation is fair and balanced, some sides have more leverage than others. That is life, and if you don't agree with that I don't know what to tell you.

The RB position was devalued for around a decade, it has evolved somewhat since then and hence become more valuable. You can see that reflected in the draft. But not all RB's are the same, the position name covers a wide range of players and their level of contribution and the scheme that uses them. QB's are largely the same, WO's are largely the same, Oline is largely the same, TE's and RB's are all over the place in terms of use and contribution. Some are much more valuable than others and I do not believe that is reflected in the franchise tag salary estimates.

You keep explaining how the system works as if by explaining it in further detail it will suddenly change my opinion. I understand how the franchise system works and whence it came. How it was negotiated. I understand the Steelers are going by the rules negotiated, I understand Bell is asserting the only leverage he has. I find it unfair and ineffective in this instance, regardless whether the player's union agreed to it in negotiations or not. They did not anticipate a situation like this, and I am sure they will look at it when they go back to the table in 2020. As I said, I think the Steelers are violating the spirit of what the tag was created for. The tag is designed to force both parties to the negotiating table and come to a conclusion. It is not working in this case. However, instead of both sides moving on, the Steelers would rather force Bell into playing for them or not playing at all. That hurts both sides but really hurts the individual player more. It is utterly relevant because that is the very heart of the matter and what is motivating his holdout. Bell has a perceived value of his contribution, the Steelers do not agree or are simply not willing to meet it. Things have ground to a halt. If Bell did not have a value attached to his services, we would not be having this conversation.

I just explained, in length, why your Cousins analogy does not work. Just because two players are tagged doesn't make their situation the same. I will ask a simple question "Are QB's and RB's paid the same amount of money and does that money impact the cap in the same way?" If they do in your mind then it is a valid comparison. I do not think it is and explained why. Yet they are held to the same strictures.

Connor has been hot and cold this year, that's it. He did little to nothing last year. Bell has done more for much longer. If Connor does the same then you can put him in that category. Skill and style wise... He is a bigger back and runs a little high. That type of running style takes a lot of hits IMO. Lot of hits doesn't usually equate to a long career.

Well, I wasn’t really apologizing for the tone of my post – more like trying set the tone of the post at the outset because I was going to disagree with most of what you said. People with thin skin can get irritated with that, and it ends up getting in the way of a meaningful discussion because they assume that I’m trying to insult them. To your credit, you don’t seem to be that way.

As to the substance of your response, I disagree. I am resisting the urge to put together a really long – and perhaps boring – post (but it’s far too late, I sense many of you thinking), so I’ll just set out the points of my disagreement for simplicity’s sake:

1. The franchise tag is part of the collective bargaining agreement, so it has been revisited, tweaked and renegotiated as well. It is current just like the collective bargaining agreement.

2. The RB position is subject to the same market forces as the QB position, and the market currently values RB much less than QB. By the way it’s calculated, the franchise tag will naturally adjust whatever the market value of a particular position is, so it doesn’t make sense to saying that it’s been outpaced by the cap. According to this NFL.com article, the highest paid RB in 2018 is Todd Gurley at $15 million. Second highest is Davonta Freeman at just over $8 million.

http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap30...-running-backs

3. Yes, I suppose Bell is free to take his ball and go home, but I think it’s really unwise for several reasons:
a. He’s giving up a year’s salary in his prime. And that salary would be the second highest RB salary in football.
b. By staying he would have forced himself into free agency like Cousins did.
c. He alienates his former teammates, most of whom work just as hard as he does but aren’t lucky enough to earn a cap designation, so his actions will look selfish.
d. He’s basically giving the NFLPA and their negotiators the finger
e. It won’t improve his market value to other teams if he’s viewed as a malcontent.
f. I really don’t think he’ll get a better contract through free agency, but I guess we’ll see.

4. Sorry, I just don’t understand the point you are trying to make regarding the differences between the salaries paid to QBs and RBs. They are both subject to the same market forces, and the tag works the same as to both of them. If you think RBs should be paid more, the market disagrees with you.