Good morning,
    Last week, Le’Veon Bell had an enticing comment that while he thought he would not play in the opener, he had a chance to do so in the second game.
    That is not going to happen.
     Bell simply isn’t ready, and they are not going to rush their rookie halfback into a game merely because they are desperate for a better ground game. That foot needs to heal, and he needs to then practice on it, run plays and then see how his foot feels the next day after doing so.
          We’re told it may be later rather than sooner for Bell, whose right foot was sprained in the second preseason game. While it’s possible he could return in late September, the Steelers might just decide its best for all if he sits until after their off week, which means Oct. 13, the fifth game of the season.
    Bell says his foot feels good, but he really hasn’t tested it yet and they do not want to rush him back. Short-term misery, long-term gain is how Mike Tomlin might explain it. If they rush him back and the foot gives out, it could be long-term pain.
   Here is what Tomlin said Tuesday:
“Le’Veon Bell is continuing to work his way back. I haven’t gotten an update as of yet in terms of what he is doing today, but we will be interested in seeing what he is capable of doing, particularly as the week goes on.”
    That can be taken either as a hopeful comment for those who’d like to see Bell play in Cincinnati, or merely a way of Tomlin saying he isn’t going to say what he really thinks about Bell’s prognosis.
         Onto some stuff:
   --- While the Steelers fight in court so they can add 3,000 seats and other improvement, including a second video board, to Heinz Field, those who already have tickets to seats – and pay handsomely for them – continue not to show up. Those 5,000 no-shows for the 1 p.m. season-opener on a gorgeous day at Heinz Field did not necessarily reflect the product because those fans had no idea the Steelers would put on such a poor show. There has to be other reasons.
    Yes, the Steelers game was another sellout at what they list as capacity of 65,500. But when 7.6 percent of those people who have paid good money for seats – and many with seat license fees paid long ago – it has to be a troubling sign to the owners. None of those 5,000 ghosts bought concessions, etc. And if the Steelers continue to play the way they played in the opener, that group of no-shows will grow.
       The Steelers should know precisely who did not show up, what with all the digitial counting now at the turnstiles. Maybe a survey of those 5,000 would be revealing.
---  What Kelvin Beachum did Sunday has to rank among the most versatile moments ever by an offensive lineman. He was supposed to play tight end much of the day and had not taken reps at center, but there he was, making the snaps without a fumble. He did roll one back in the shotgun that Ben Roethlisberger scooped up, but that was it.
---  A few of your questions:
--- YOU: How much of the sacks are because of Big Ben style of playing, sometimes I think that for an offensive lineman it must be frustrating that he holds the football so much (understanding that he makes amazing plays also because of this)…. I travelled all the way from Mexico City to Heinz Field for the first time with my six year old son and I saw one of the worst games ever… Nothing to cheer!!! I was so disappointed, but I really liked the city and the people!!!
ME: That used to be the case, that Roethlisberger’s style of play, extending plays, prompted more sacks. That did not look to be the case on Sunday. They were on him quickly and while he was in the pocket. Also, there were times he could not find an open receiver. It’s good that at least the city and her people put on a good show for you.
 --- YOU: It seems that the Front Office has been ‘telling’ us that the Steelers aren’t a team loaded with talent (dare we use the word ‘re-building’). We seem to have a larger number of players playing in the final year of their contract (Sanders, Clark, Keisel, Hood, Worilds, etc) and have shown confidence with long-term deals with fewer players than in the past (Ben, Timmons, Taylor, Miller, Woodley). Any truth to that numerically?
ME: They did not sign a player to a contract extension this year, which is rare. In fact, I cannot remember the last time that happened. They did sign Ramon Foster to a new contract after he became a free agent, and they did sign Steve McLendon to a new contract as a restricted free agent after he visited Green Bay. They reworked Heath Miller’s contract to create more salary cap space this year, but that was mere bookkeeping and no extension.
--- YOU: Time to bring back Russ Grimm if possible because the O-Line has been terrible since he left.
ME: I have news for you, it wasn’t that great when he was here. There’s only so much a line coach can do with the talent given him. Having said that, this line has the draft resumes; we’ll see if they perform up to them.
--- YOU: The restructuring of Heath Miller's compensation has raised a question. When such a thing is done the salary cap hit of the money tied up in the bonus is pro-rated across the length of the contract, assuming the contract is for no more than five years. But if the player is released, all the remaining salary cap hit comes due
immediately. When teams sign players the league won't OK the contract if it will put the team over the cap. But what happens if releasing a player will put a team over the cap? Are they simply prohibited from releasing a player in such a circumstance?
ME: Teams must be under the salary cap, period. If they cannot get there, the league will help them. If that means releasing players, extending contracts, going without a practice squad, so be it.

First Published: April 6, 2016, 4:14 p.m.