Anyone that wants to bring bell on this team is a moron. It is that simple.

Sherck are you positive about this? I’m not an expert by any means but I thought the deadline for him to negotiate a new contract this season had passed. I believe whether or not he signed his tender does not matter as far as that goes. However, because he hasn’t signed his tender he technically isn’t under contract and can not currently be traded. He’ll have to sign the tender to be traded. I’ve been wrong before though.

I agree, he is a great player, but could be a selfish cancer, not worth the risk. Let the Patriots take him.

You pay it once, you have to pay it again. That alone makes it a bad idea.

That’s a little harsh. There is an argument that a multiple year all-pro running back might possibly help this offense. I don’t know the guy myself, but if he were to check out attitude wise, if you can protect the team if he does performance enhancing drugs, get him for a third and not hamstring yourself financially then I’d be that moron who thinks it’s worth a chance. We need playmakers

I’ve been researching it and I stand by my statement - Bell can’t be signed to a long term contract by anyone this year. If a team trades for him they will have no guarantee they will keep him past this year. Teams had until July 16th to reach a long term contract with franchise tagged players. After that teams can’t negotiate with them until after the last game of this season. It is true that Bell didn’t sign his tender, but that means he has no contract and can’t be traded. Only players under contract can be traded. The only contract he can sign is the franchise tender. Pittsburgh could theoretically rescind the franchise tag, but he would then become a free agent.

Bell’s talent is obvious, but he makes absolutely no sense for this Colts team. If Ballard wants him then simply sign him in the off season. The only way he won’t be a free agent is if Pittsburgh tags him again which will not happen. But the Colts don’t need to spend a high draft pick for the right to rent Bell for the remainder of the season. They aren’t in a win now mode. It would be stupid. I have confidence it isn’t in Ballard’s plans to trade for him.

If you can't sign him long term it truly makes very little sense to trade for him

Le'Veon Bell appears to want two things: money, and a certain average annual value to his contract. If the Colts are interested in trading for him, this is an idea they could approach him with before the trade is consummated. If he's uninterested, drop out. I don't think he's worth the money he wants, but the Colts are positioned uniquely with cap space to not care about that. A creative contract allows him to satisfy his ego and get most of his money upfront and the Colts to get an all-pro caliber RB for well under market value for 3 years (I wouldn't sign him past his age 30 season).

No, you don't. That's silly. Each contract negotiation is different. It would be a unique circumstance that the Colts would even be able to offer that.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

You can sign him long term, it just has to wait until January. Trading for him does give you an exclusive negotiating window, however. That said, I wouldn't trade for him or sign him long term unless he was willing to take an extremely frontloaded deal.

Do I really need to explain it to you?

I thought you were a free market type of person? Just because the Colts do a thing once doesn't mean they would have to do it again. Sure, players could ask, but a simple "no" ends it. It's not some sort of Pandora's Box.