Le'Veon Bell Wants to be a Colt

[Oldcolt]

Sometimes its is fun to be passionate about something that doesn't really matter in the least. Signing him won't influence me one iota as far as being a Colt fan. It's been 50 years and counting. It's just that Bell would take us to the next level without costing anything except money (unless Pitts transitions him, then no to spending money and draft choices to get him). And it is not my money. So hell yes spend it on the best you can find.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Sometimes its is fun to be passionate about something that doesn't really matter in the least. Signing him won't influence me one iota as far as being a Colt fan. It's been 50 years and counting. It's just that Bell would take us to the next level without costing anything except money (unless Pitts transitions him, then no to spending money and draft choices to get him). And it is not my money. So hell yes spend it on the best you can find.

The transition tag doesn't give the Steelers picks, just right of first refusal, which can be circumvented without appearing to be poison pill (though it absolutely would be) by frontloading the deal. Make the first year cap hit literally unaffordable for the Steelers, and he's yours for nothing but money.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by FatDT

I don’t get the passion on either side of this debate.

Ballard’s history says he won’t sign Bell for the money he wants.

Just about everyone agrees Bell has proven he is a great player.

We have an embarrassment of cap space.

If Ballard did sign him, it would be a departure from what Ballard has done so far.

If Ballard did sign him, he would probably excel here and be very exciting to watch.

If Ballard signs him, IMO he’s earned enough credit to get the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think he will ruin the team’s culture to sign Bell. If he thinks Bell is a good player to bring in, I’ll believe that until I have a reason to stop.

If Ballard doesn’t sign him, our offense will probably still be very exciting to watch, and will be improved next year. And we’ll have that much more money to use elsewhere.

/thread

[Maniac]

Originally Posted by FatDT

I don’t get the passion on either side of this debate.

Ballard’s history says he won’t sign Bell for the money he wants.

Just about everyone agrees Bell has proven he is a great player.

We have an embarrassment of cap space.

If Ballard did sign him, it would be a departure from what Ballard has done so far.

If Ballard did sign him, he would probably excel here and be very exciting to watch.

If Ballard signs him, IMO he’s earned enough credit to get the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think he will ruin the team’s culture to sign Bell. If he thinks Bell is a good player to bring in, I’ll believe that until I have a reason to stop.

If Ballard doesn’t sign him, our offense will probably still be very exciting to watch, and will be improved next year. And we’ll have that much more money to use elsewhere.

Ballard has also said that he has to re-evaluate his free agent spending this next offseason because he didn't expect the rebuild to be progressing this quickly. That tells me that he purposely didn't spend much previously because he thought it would be wasted if he spent too much too early in the rebuild. So now he realizes that this team is closer, and he will be willing to spend more in free agency to go along with that to fill in the voids and get talent.

In other words, I wouldn't go much on Ballard's history so far.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by JesusChrist

Ballard has also said that he has to re-evaluate his free agent spending this next offseason because he didn't expect the rebuild to be progressing this quickly. That tells me that he purposely didn't spend much previously because he thought it would be wasted if he spent too much too early in the rebuild. So now he realizes that this team is closer, and he will be willing to spend more in free agency to go along with that to fill in the voids and get talent.

In other words, I wouldn't go much on Ballard's history so far.

He was part of the front office that signed Julius Peppers to a mega deal.

[Chaka]

Reasons NOT to sign Le'Veon Bell, in my personal order of significance:

1. Not convinced that he's as effective as his reputation suggests - his last season's production has been exceeded by the replacement RBs that Pittsburgh has used (Conner, Samuels).

2. Might be on the downside of his career - RBs often peak at age 25 or younger.

3. Price - is the upgrade over Mack worth the increased price that Bell would command? I know we have lots of cap space, but I still believe its important to practice financial responsibility. Perhaps that money is better directed at our own existing players.

4. Two time substance abuse violator

5. Holdout - I continue to be concerned about his decision to holdout this season, and his late season snipes at the Steelers.

Incidentally, here's a four part series of articles from Behind the Steel Curtain which attempt to address many of these issues (among several others), and you can judge for yourself whether the arguments are convincing:

Part 1
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...umors-steelers

Part 2
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...nchise-tag-nfl

Part 3
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...-franchise-tag

Part 4
https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...nfl-free-agent

I will say its kind of funny to read the author's comment (written in April) regarding Bell's then-recent threat to sit out the season and not sign the franchise tag - "Come on folks, who actually believed this frustrated bluster? Bell’s not missing out on $900,000 per game, let alone $14.5 million for the entire season."

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

The transition tag doesn't give the Steelers picks, just right of first refusal, which can be circumvented without appearing to be poison pill (though it absolutely would be) by frontloading the deal. Make the first year cap hit literally unaffordable for the Steelers, and he's yours for nothing but money.

Which really they should do anyway because there are no huge contracts for the next couple years. By the time guys from this recruiting class are due the contract should be minimal. The money is just sitting there otherwise.

[TheMugwump]

Originally Posted by JesusChrist

Ballard has also said that he has to re-evaluate his free agent spending this next offseason because he didn't expect the rebuild to be progressing this quickly. That tells me that he purposely didn't spend much previously because he thought it would be wasted if he spent too much too early in the rebuild. So now he realizes that this team is closer, and he will be willing to spend more in free agency to go along with that to fill in the voids and get talent.

In other words, I wouldn't go much on Ballard's history so far.

Aren't you supposed to be busy elsewhere tonight?

And I agree with the above. Bless you.

[Luck4Reich]

Originally Posted by TheMugwump

Aren't you supposed to be busy elsewhere tonight?

And I agree with the above. Bless you.

I think you are mistaken him for Santa Claus. Two different people

[Brylok]

Would rather have DJ Swearinger? He's suddenly become available because the Redskins are dumb