The guaranteed money is the important number. Seems like they were close enough to get a deal done. Why not 38 million? Maybe, the Steelers should have traded him if they didn't want to risk the money because of his injury history and/or they know their window to win is closing fast.
At this point Bell is losing money but, not taking a beating and not getting injured. Seems like a lose situation for both sides. He will be 27 in Feb. I guess next year a team could give him what amounts to a three year deal @45 Million with 40 Million guaranteed.
Actually, it wasn't a straight guarantee.
I don't recall the structure, but it was embarrassingly bad. Like worse than the contract Kap signed which amounted to a series of one year deals.
Also, Bell's agent had a fantastic point.
He's more valuable to other teams having sat out than having had 400+ touches because teams count reps.
He won't have lost talent or speed, but he will also be basically a year fresher with less wear and tear which means a GM can feel a little more confident that he won't have a bad injury in training camp after guaranteeing a huge sum of money.
And you KNOW that the Steelers knowing that they have him for this last year and with him leaving at the end of the year would use him for everything short of selling popcorn.
As for his contract, he'll probably be looking for a front loaded 4 year deal in excess of $60M with close to $40M guaranteed and most of it up front so that if he has a couple of monster seasons and drops off, the cap hit to move on won't be bad or he'll be value in the last year.
I honestly don't understand why it's okay for everyone to be mindful and act in their perceived best interest EXCEPT for athletes who are supposed to subvert their interests for "the team" which doesn't share their interest or loyalty or risk.
