My Opinion: expect restructures or more cuts

[Thrawn]

As far as Bradford; it would have to be a win-win deal or why would he do it? More years at equal salary.

I mean, if Bradford was cut (not going to happen) he would get paid exactly what he is today or more. Several teams would be all over him.

He's not going to take a pay cut and neither would you - because he doesn't have to.

Well, technically the Rams have all the leverage right now. They *could* say, "We're gonna trim $5M out of your salary this year, because quite frankly, your production hasn't been commensurate with your wage." And they could do that. But here's why they won't do that.

Actually, this year the Rams have no leverage whatsoever. If they say they want to take out 5M, he just says no. Their only leverage is to cut him. Cutting him this year actually costs us almost 11M MORE against the cap, so he knows that is a completely bogus threat.

The Rams have no leverage until 2014. The only only thing they have to offer up now is MORE guaranteed money in an extension, and I don't think they should be doing that at this point, unless they can get him to do a "cheap" extension now believing he can outplay that extension over time.

By cheap, I mean cheap for a high end QB. The Rams would have to put a lot of skin (money) in the game to make an extension work.

My overall thoughts are we probably don't do anything with Bradford this year. He holds all the cards and I assume his agent is a smart guy and knows it. Better to deal with Finn, Long, or JL if we need money. Cutting Dahl is always in our back pocket too, but that should be avoided and only put on the table as a last resort (although maybe pre-Bradford restructure resort, so not quite last.)

 

[Faceplant]

As far as Bradford; it would have to be a win-win deal or why would he do it? More years at equal salary.

I mean, if Bradford was cut (not going to happen) he would get paid exactly what he is today or more. Several teams would be all over him.

He's not going to take a pay cut and neither would you - because he doesn't have to.

Well, technically the Rams have all the leverage right now. They *could* say, "We're gonna trim $5M out of your salary this year, because quite frankly, your production hasn't been commensurate with your wage." And they could do that. But here's why they won't do that.

Actually, this year the Rams have no leverage whatsoever. If they say they want to take out 5M, he just says no. Their only leverage is to cut him. Cutting him this year actually costs us almost 11M MORE against the cap, so he knows that is a completely bogus threat.

The Rams have no leverage until 2014. The only only thing they have to offer up now is MORE guaranteed money in an extension, and I don't think they should be doing that at this point, unless they can get him to do a "cheap" extension now believing he can outplay that extension over time.

By cheap, I mean cheap for a high end QB. The Rams would have to put a lot of skin (money) in the game to make an extension work.

My overall thoughts are we probably don't do anything with Bradford this year. He holds all the cards and I assume his agent is a smart guy and knows it. Better to deal with Finn, Long, or JL if we need money. Cutting Dahl is always in our back pocket too, but that should be avoided and only put on the table as a last resort (although maybe pre-Bradford restructure resort, so not quite last.)

I agree with this. I think the staff wants to see more from Bradford before they extend him (other than how the Dude mentioned) anyway, and Sam isn't about to just offer $ back. If Sam continues to play at the same level, which is good, but certainly not great, do the Rams even attempt to extend him? If so, at what cost point? Does Bradford opt to test FA for that matter? Could make 2014 very interesting.....

 

[-X-]

As far as Bradford; it would have to be a win-win deal or why would he do it? More years at equal salary.

I mean, if Bradford was cut (not going to happen) he would get paid exactly what he is today or more. Several teams would be all over him.

He's not going to take a pay cut and neither would you - because he doesn't have to.

Well, technically the Rams have all the leverage right now. They *could* say, "We're gonna trim $5M out of your salary this year, because quite frankly, your production hasn't been commensurate with your wage." And they could do that. But here's why they won't do that.

Actually, this year the Rams have no leverage whatsoever. If they say they want to take out 5M, he just says no. Their only leverage is to cut him. Cutting him this year actually costs us almost 11M MORE against the cap, so he knows that is a completely bogus threat.

The Rams have no leverage until 2014. The only only thing they have to offer up now is MORE guaranteed money in an extension, and I don't think they should be doing that at this point, unless they can get him to do a "cheap" extension now believing he can outplay that extension over time.

By cheap, I mean cheap for a high end QB. The Rams would have to put a lot of skin (money) in the game to make an extension work.

My overall thoughts are we probably don't do anything with Bradford this year. He holds all the cards and I assume his agent is a smart guy and knows it. Better to deal with Finn, Long, or JL if we need money. Cutting Dahl is always in our back pocket too, but that should be avoided and only put on the table as a last resort (although maybe pre-Bradford restructure resort, so not quite last.)

You're right. "Leverage" probably wasn't the wisest choice of words on my part. I meant that they could cut his salary, inform him of such, and then see how he responds - knowing that they have his trust already. Obviously they'd use a little tact when doing so and convey how it's important to the progress of the team if he cooperates this time around. Trimming a few mil out of his salary would still put him at close to $8M for the year, and that's not a shabby paycheck. Plus, they already demonstrated that they feel he's the future by trading out of the chance to draft Griffin.

Of course all of that is secondary to restructuring, which is what I'm really a proponent of above all else. They could essentially flatten this current deal by tacking back on the other two years and making the hits more tolerable this year and another subsequent 5 years. Throw in a NLTBE to inflate the number a little if you have to, and give him some real incentives to reach that would reward him down the road. I mean, he has to know that his deal was record-breaking for rookies, and Bradford doesn't seem like a money-grubbing punk to me, who would take that and run - especially if he didn't feel like he was benefiting anyone else in the process.

 

[Thordaddy]

Yeah gotta make it sumpin he can abide .

 

[fastcat]

Idk but i dont think you sign a player (JL and Long) to an extension then not even a full year later ask to restruct thier contract. And to my understanding when a player is signed, the bonus or guarunteed money doesnt count against the cap... So we can restructure someones contract and give them a bonus and they could essentially have the same money as the original contract but they get most of the money upfront making less money per year, freeing up cap space, and both sides are happy..... Am I wrong?

 

[libertadrocks]

Idk but i dont think you sign a player (JL and Long) to an extension then not even a full year later ask to restruct thier contract. And to my understanding when a player is signed, the bonus or guarunteed money doesnt count against the cap... So we can restructure someones contract and give them a bonus and they could essentially have the same money as the original contract but they get most of the money upfront making less money per year, freeing up cap space, and both sides are happy..... Am I wrong?

Converting their base salary to a bonus essentially allows the team to spread the players salary over the course of their contract.

For example:

Player A: $10 million in base salary and $1 million bonus. The length of his contract is 5 more years.

Player B: $1 million in base salary and $10 million bonus. The length of his contract is 5 more years.

Both player A and player B will make $11 million this year, however their cap hits will be significantly different. Player A will count $10.2 million(the 10 million in base and 1/5th of the bonus) while player B will count $3 million against the cap(the 1 million in base and 1/5th of the bonus)

So a team can significantly lower the cap hit in a certain year by convert the base salary to a bonus. Unfortunately the team will have to count the prorated bonus against the cap in future years.

That's my understanding

 

[libertadrocks]

[tweet]317365853962268673[/tweet]

 

[bluecoconuts]

I'm sure that's what they'll do. Probably by the time camp rolls around guys will restructure a bit to even things out.





Fucking Jason Smith..... :amped:

 

[jap]

Actually, this year the Rams have no leverage whatsoever. If they say they want to take out 5M, he just says no. Their only leverage is to cut him. Cutting him this year actually costs us almost 11M MORE against the cap, so he knows that is a completely bogus threat.

The Rams have no leverage until 2014. The only only thing they have to offer up now is MORE guaranteed money in an extension, and I don't think they should be doing that at this point, unless they can get him to do a "cheap" extension now believing he can outplay that extension over time.

By cheap, I mean cheap for a high end QB. The Rams would have to put a lot of skin (money) in the game to make an extension work.

My overall thoughts are we probably don't do anything with Bradford this year. He holds all the cards and I assume his agent is a smart guy and knows it. Better to deal with Finn, Long, or JL if we need money. Cutting Dahl is always in our back pocket too, but that should be avoided and only put on the table as a last resort (although maybe pre-Bradford restructure resort, so not quite last.)

The CapMeister speaketh! All who have ears, let them hear!

 

[LosAngelesRams]

time to re-work Sammys contract :hehe:

 

[Ramhusker]

Damn I stay confused on the cap. I thought we had $3M left to sign Quintin Mikael and enough left over to pay the draft class????????????????

 

[Dagonet]

Damn I stay confused on the cap. I thought we had $3M left to sign Quintin Mikael and enough left over to pay the draft class????????????????

Husker,

This may help clear up your confusion on rookie salary cap and how it effects our overall cap. Good article and I'm still trying to figure some things out.

http://www.eagles24x7.com/columns/NFL-News-and-Notes/How-the-NFLs-Rookie-Salary-Cap-Works

Edit.. Here's another good link on rookie cap..

http://overthecap.com/explaining-the-nfl-rookie-pool-and-its-impact-on-the-salary-cap/

 

[fearsomefour]

Reading this thread....man am I glad I found this forum.
All the other ones I had stumbled on were either crawling with Whiner trolls (worst of all, bandwagon Whiner trolls), newby delusional fans (Rams are going to the Superbowl) or people that would attack you and call you names if you stated something like the illegal formation call that brought back Amendolas OT TD vs. SF was the right call (it was). There is life intelligent life on a football forum. The only question is what the heck took me so long to find it??

 

[Rabid Ram]

Reading this thread....man am I glad I found this forum.
All the other ones I had stumbled on were either crawling with Whiner trolls (worst of all, bandwagon Whiner trolls), newby delusional fans (Rams are going to the Superbowl) or people that would attack you and call you names if you stated something like the illegal formation call that brought back Amendolas OT TD vs. SF was the right call (it was). There is life intelligent life on a football forum. The only question is what the heck took me so long to find it??

Not sure but probly cause its,rare lol

 

[kurtfaulk]

As far as Bradford; it would have to be a win-win deal or why would he do it? More years at equal salary.

I mean, if Bradford was cut (not going to happen) he would get paid exactly what he is today or more. Several teams would be all over him.

He's not going to take a pay cut and neither would you - because he doesn't have to.

Well, technically the Rams have all the leverage right now. They *could* say, "We're gonna trim $5M out of your salary this year, because quite frankly, your production hasn't been commensurate with your wage." And they could do that. But here's why they won't do that.

Actually, this year the Rams have no leverage whatsoever. If they say they want to take out 5M, he just says no. Their only leverage is to cut him. Cutting him this year actually costs us almost 11M MORE against the cap, so he knows that is a completely bogus threat.

The Rams have no leverage until 2014. The only only thing they have to offer up now is MORE guaranteed money in an extension, and I don't think they should be doing that at this point, unless they can get him to do a "cheap" extension now believing he can outplay that extension over time.

By cheap, I mean cheap for a high end QB. The Rams would have to put a lot of skin (money) in the game to make an extension work.

My overall thoughts are we probably don't do anything with Bradford this year. He holds all the cards and I assume his agent is a smart guy and knows it. Better to deal with Finn, Long, or JL if we need money. Cutting Dahl is always in our back pocket too, but that should be avoided and only put on the table as a last resort (although maybe pre-Bradford restructure resort, so not quite last.)

the rams won''t be asking sam to do anything.

they restructured his deal before last season so that fisher could assess him for two seasons. all his guarenteed money runs out this season. so the rams will either extend him at the end of this season or trade him away after this season.

my guess is, after sam performs very well this season, the rams will extend his contract at the end of the season so that his cap number will be way down for the 2014 and 2015 seasons when they will be pushing for superbowl runs.

.