Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

RING OF HONOR

How in the World (80 Mil)

95 posts in this topic

The Steelers can tag him again next year, and the total for the 2016 and 2017 is under $32 mil, so I can see why they don't want to pay him $17 mil a season.  There is no RB in ht league that is going to move the needle either so why make long term guarantees to the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DawnOfThemBirds said:

 

 

 

That may be so, but 10 mil guaranteed on this latest deal is rather insulting.

 

 

Yeah that’s terrible. That’s basically a 1 year deal. 

DawnOfThemBirds likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ya_boi_j said:

Lol he also had just over 400 regular season touches and close to 2000 all purpose yards. Let’s not act like he’s not earning his money unlike other players in the league demanding big money

Yeah I am just saying these numbers aren't new or special.  His yards from scrimmage number for 2017 is really good, but it's the 76th highest total yards from scrimmage all time.  I think the guy wants to be paid like he's doing something nobody else has done, and he just hasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ya_boi_j said:

Lol he also had just over 400 regular season touches and close to 2000 all purpose yards. Let’s not act like he’s not earning his money unlike other players in the league demanding big money

Dual threat back too. Dude puts up nice receiving yards and he scores tds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Peyton said:

Yeah I am just saying these numbers aren't new or special.  His yards from scrimmage number for 2017 is really good, but it's the 76th highest total yards from scrimmage all time.  I think the guy wants to be paid like he's doing something nobody else has done, and he just hasn't.

But you are simply going off 2017...if you combine his numbers from the time he's been in the league....it is historic

ya_boi_j likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RING OF HONOR said:

But you are simply going off 2017...if you combine his numbers from the time he's been in the league....it is historic

What is historic about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RING OF HONOR said:

I'll get back to you...i have to find the numbers

His 2014 was fantastic.  1361 and 854.  22nd best yards from scrimmage ever.

But it wasn't anything that Marshall Faulk hadn't already done 5 times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Le'Veon Bell compares favorably to just about any running back in the NFL today, but how does he stack up against the best of all time? According to Pro Football Focus, quite well: 

No player has EVER averaged more yards from scrimmage per game during their first four NFL seasons than @L_Bell26. ?? pic.twitter.com/DWr0UP3OIO

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/Bolt/Pittsburgh-Steelers-LeVeon-Bell-yards-from-scrimmage-record-contract-53385673/Amp/

Thats 1 article...but since he's been in the league he has historic numbers.  And thats while missing time from injury and being suspended

I will hit you with a few more later.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peyton said:

Yeah I am just saying these numbers aren't new or special.  His yards from scrimmage number for 2017 is really good, but it's the 76th highest total yards from scrimmage all time.  I think the guy wants to be paid like he's doing something nobody else has done, and he just hasn't.

You simply cannot just go off of 2017

RING OF HONOR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Wardog357 said:

By the mention of 80mil for 5 years and TD should have already made a deal with JJ. But why do you care....is my statement that far fetched to cause confrontation???????? Do you feel he will play 5 more years? It's okay if you do. I was just stating my personal opinion based off the extension and 80mil clearly stated in not only the subject line, but linked to a web page as well. Hey, I'll be the first to admit I could be wrong, even stated such right out the gate.

Maybe you need to exhale. I only asked a question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2018 at 5:28 PM, PK Manley said:

They won't.  While I don't think this trade/contract was a very good idea, there's no way they do it if it means they won't be able to pay Donald.

You may be right...but, mark this they are gonna get a player whos gonna be disgruntled and less motivated.

If I were Rams....Donald would be my top priority without him they have no chance. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RING OF HONOR said:

Le'Veon Bell compares favorably to just about any running back in the NFL today, but how does he stack up against the best of all time? According to Pro Football Focus, quite well: 

No player has EVER averaged more yards from scrimmage per game during their first four NFL seasons than @L_Bell26. ?? pic.twitter.com/DWr0UP3OIO

https://247sports.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/Bolt/Pittsburgh-Steelers-LeVeon-Bell-yards-from-scrimmage-record-contract-53385673/Amp/

Thats 1 article...but since he's been in the league he has historic numbers.  And thats while missing time from injury and being suspended

I will hit you with a few more later.. 

His yards per game from scrimmage in his first 4 seasons was a tick better than Ladanian Tomlinson, he was definitely a guy they leaned on from the start.  But as you mentioned, he missed a lot of time because of injuries.  More than entire season worth of games in his first four years.

In his career, he has suffered a Lisfranc sprain to his foot, a concussion, an ACL sprain, an MCL tear, and a groin tear severe enough to require surgery.

That's probably another reason the Steelers prefer to go year to year with him rather than open the bank vault for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

Without getting too complicated......nah. 

Oh no, Larry. Let's get complicated. Splain yourself!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, saints4life25 said:

Oh no, Larry. Let's get complicated. Splain yourself!

Watkins is better. Perhaps less durable and definitely not as productive from a sheer volume standpoint. But when you watch the tape, Watkins is a much more threatening player than Cooks on a snap-to-snap basis. Dude spends a ton of time running wide open. 

I like Cooks and think hes a solid piece to have around. And maybe its worth valuing his availability over Watkins' history of health concerns. But if I'm picking between the two, its Watkins. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

Watkins is better. Perhaps less durable and definitely not as productive from a sheer volume standpoint. But when you watch the tape, Watkins is a much more threatening player than Cooks on a snap-to-snap basis. Dude spends a ton of time running wide open. 

I like Cooks and think hes a solid piece to have around. And maybe its worth valuing his availability over Watkins' history of health concerns. But if I'm picking between the two, its Watkins. 

Yeah, I just don't see that on paper. Watkins is bigger and stronger, but that's about it. Cooks has nearly 100 more catches on only 80 more targets. He's got almost 1000 more yards. 80 more targets in their careers isn't that large, and I could argue he has more targets because he's open more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, saints4life25 said:

Yeah, I just don't see that on paper. Watkins is bigger and stronger, but that's about it. Cooks has nearly 100 more catches on only 80 more targets. He's got almost 1000 more yards. 80 more targets in their careers isn't that large, and I could argue he has more targets because he's open more.

You could argue that he has more targets because he's open more but it would be a pretty bad argument. 

Cooks has unquestionably been more productive. He's also played in a lot of small ball for very good, pass-heavy offenses with two of the ~7-10 best QBs of all time. 

Watkins has played a confoundingly small amount of small ball for offenses which have been predominantly run-heavy with QB play that has ranged from "effective but limited" to "kinda bad." 

For whatever reason, Watkins' career hasnt gone all that well to this point. And it definitely hasnt been as successful as Cooks' career to date. But he's a much more dangerous player with a very very very high upside that Cooks simply doesnt have. And just to be clear: I'm not giving either one of these dudes anything approaching $16m a year. Not a chance. But if I HAD to pick between the two, I'm taking Watkins pretty much every time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites