Originally posted by jcs:
Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Originally posted by AlmighT49er:
Originally posted by jcs:
Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:
He's going to sign a nice great contract, that won't make up for the money he lost out on, and then proceed to get injured and his career will circle the drain
He wants a guaranteed money deal like Cousins and as a RB he will never see it.
And rightfully so.
Why? What is the problem with signing an elite running back to a 3 year guaranteed contract? Its not like its 8 years or something. Most LTCs have the first 2-3 years guaranteed anyway so I really dont see the issue.
Couple of issues. The first are his personal issues with drugs and suspensions. The second has to do with him being 27 at the start of next season and the position he plays. Also taking a year off who knows how that effects his training and ability to stay healthy.
He'll get a nice signing bonus but a guaranteed contract is going to be reserved for positions like QB.
OK, I dont disagree with any of the specific things you laid out as to why Bell himself wont get the contract.
However, that is not what I was responding to. The post was that you dont sign ANY RB to a guaranteed deal, to which I disagreed (I bolded it....maybe should have before hand). I dont see ANY issue signing an elite RB to a 3 year guaranteed deal. Especially considering a typical RB deal would be guaranteeing half or a little more than half of a contract.
So a 5 year contract typically guarantees 3. So what is the difference between a 5 year contract with 3 years guaranteed and a 3 year fully guaranteed contract?