Rams surely want to “pay the man”; the challenge is coming up with the right number/PFT

[DCH]

How many NFL contracts have you written?

No offense but you seem pretty ignorant to how things work.

Yes I am a Rams fan, what are you doing here again?

Making sense and using the quote function properly.

Edit: And frankly, you can't say that postponing a negotiation is tantamount to "disrespect" and then turn around and accuse me of being "pretty ignorant."

 

[tempests]

He can, certainly. What happens if the Rams say 'no, you have to honor your contract just like everyone else, and we're not trading you'? He sits, his career is impacted way more than the Rams' 2017 season is impacted, and nobody wins - certainly not Donald.

We can probably remove that scenario from consideration, as I don't see any reason to think Donald would sit for the 2017 season to affect a trade. The contract negotiations haven't reached that kind of impasse.

It is, nevertheless, a possibility down the road, if the Rams "leverage" their way out of a positive player/team relationship.

 

[blackbart]

Aaron Donald is a me first player now?
/QUOTE]


That's not what I posted. What I posted is that players who feel like they are disrespected because their team uses leverage in negotiations are immature and me first players.

I do not think Donald is like that and don't know why you brought it up in a thread about negotiations we and the media know nothing about except that he is having his agent handle it and the Rams are interested in working out a deal.

 

[kurtfaulk]

just to confirm, this is the thread winner. if the rams play hardball this will be the outcome.

if it gets to the stage where donald sits out 10 weeks the rams have screwed up so bad they should just give up.

i don't think it will get to that stage. just going off the conversation in this thread.

.

 

[dieterbrock]

Making sense and using the quote function properly.

Edit: And frankly, you can't say that postponing a negotiation is tantamount to "disrespect" and then turn around and accuse me of being "pretty ignorant."

Well the fact that I never said what you just wrote sort of implies the latter. Donald deserves a raise. The Rams have come to the table, have agreed he deserves one. The "disrespect" occurs if they leave the table and let him play on his rookie deal. That is total disrespect.
He deserves to paid like the top defensive player in the league, because he is. And he deserves it now.

 

[DCH]

Well the fact that I never said what you just wrote sort of implies the latter. Donald deserves a raise. The Rams have come to the table, have agreed he deserves one. The "disrespect" occurs if they leave the table and let him play on his rookie deal. That is total disrespect.
He deserves to paid like the top defensive player in the league, because he is. And he deserves it now.

You literally just said - again - what you claim not to have said, that postponing the negotiation because they can't come to a mutually beneficial agreement over his contract is "total disrespect." No it isn't. It's negotiating and running a business.

 

[dieterbrock]

You literally just said - again - what you claim not to have said, that postponing the negotiation because they can't come to a mutually beneficial agreement over his contract is "total disrespect." No it isn't. It's negotiating and running a business.

Ok, its poor negotiating and poor business.
But telling him to play for his rookie money while admitting he's worth much more than that is disrespect.
Pay the man what he's worth

Its simple. If your boss said to you, hey you are the best we got. In fact, we think you should be paid 10X what you are making.
But, we'll wait a year to pay you that while paying inferior folks significantly more than you.
You wouldn't feel disrespected?
Yeah, ok...

 

[CGI_Ram]

Pay the man what he's worth

I think the Rams, and all NFL teams would be happy to see that go both ways.

When the player on the big contract doesn't play at that level, the team should get a refund?

 

[Classic Rams]

It's time to put another clause in contracts, if not already in there. And that's "no negotiating until the last year of the contract." And then really explain it to them. The problem arises when other teams sign a player to a ridiculous amount and raises the market value of the postion. But that player may not have had a contract aligned with your star's contract. And worse, that player may not even be "as good" as your star. So then your star wants a contract to match/surpass it before his last contract year. Basically teams are forced to compete with each other on salary situations like this. Nothing really new as some of these contacts get more ridiculous every year. What should teams do to stay out of this mess? Get as good as the hated patsies to where the team isn't held for ransom by player contracts and can stay near the top in the win column. Yeah good luck to the Rams on that one.

 

[DCH]

Ok, its poor negotiating and poor business.
But telling him to play for his rookie money while admitting he's worth much more than that is disrespect.
Pay the man what he's worth

Its simple. If your boss said to you, hey you are the best we got. In fact, we think you should be paid 10X what you are making.
But, we'll wait a year to pay you that while paying inferior folks significantly more than you.
You wouldn't feel disrespected?
Yeah, ok...

If I agreed to a salary with a certain number of years and my boss said, "I'd like to pay you more," and I came back insisting I should get a 10x increase in salary despite being under contract, I'd have the good sense to negotiate within the constraints of reality rather than demanding a number and refusing to budge off it. If I decided that the raise they're trying to give me wasn't good enough and ended up staying at my contractually agreed upon salary, I'd be an idiot to feel disrespected because they didn't just throw tons of money they didn't have to at me.

 

[DCH]

Disrespect would be:

Boss - "I believe you should be paid $X."
Me - "OK, awesome."
Boss - "Never mind, you shouldn't."

This is more:

Boss - "I believe you should be paid more."
Me - "I want a 10x increase."
Boss - "No way, we'll give you a 5x increase. We're trying to help you out by accelerating your raise. You're not due for two years."
Me - "No way man, I'm worth 10x. In two years, I'll be able to make 10x if I go to another company, therefore I should make 10x now. Give me 10x."
Boss - "Well, we'll talk again later, because you're not getting 10x. Come back to us when you're willing to negotiate something fair for both sides."

 

[Faceplant]

It's tough to see a Pat's fan absolutely owning a Rams fan in this discussion, but its happening, lolz. I love AD as much as the next guy, but I am a Rams fan first. The RAMS need to do what's best for the team. Period. If AD can be placated by an extension of the current deal, then so be it. If he wants UFA money, tough shit. It's a business after all. All of the players know that.

 

[DCH]

It's tough to see a Pat's fan absolutely owning a Rams fan in this discussion, but its happening, lolz. I love AD as much as the next guy, but I am a Rams fan first. The RAMS need to do what's best for the team. Period. If AD can be placated by an extension of the current deal, then so be it. If he wants UFA money, tough crap. It's a business after all. All of the players know that.

We're all fans of a great game, and the business of the NFL knows no fandom.

 

[DCH]

I should point out that I believe the Rams and Donald will end up coming to an agreement wherein they buy out his two remaining rookie contract years in exchange for a lower AAV over the lifetime of the contract. He's not getting Suh money or Miller money unless he's willing to play out his remaining two years and hit the open market, or at least wait until he's got more leverage over the Rams (say, going into his final contract year next year).

 

[Prime Time]

View: https://twitter.com/NFL/status/884080051385319424

 

[dieterbrock]

I think the Rams, and all NFL teams would be happy to see that go both ways.

When the player on the big contract doesn't play at that level, the team should get a refund?

Does Aaron Donald have to pay the refund?

 

[FrantikRam]

I should point out that I believe the Rams and Donald will end up coming to an agreement wherein they buy out his two remaining rookie contract years in exchange for a lower AAV over the lifetime of the contract. He's not getting Suh money or Miller money unless he's willing to play out his remaining two years and hit the open market, or at least wait until he's got more leverage over the Rams (say, going into his final contract year next year).

I just want to respond to some of your points but only quoting this..

It's the Rams choice to negotiate with Donald, but the here are the issues as I see them:

You risk alienating Donald - your points are valid in that there's not much he could do if the Rams went the no raise/franchise/franchise tag route - but there's a reason why this tactic alienates players - they're human beings. This would assuredly upset Donald, and the most likely negative result of this is that other players will see how we're treating him and it will impact our future roster.

I am actually not opposed to trading Donald - I don't believe any team will ever win a super bowl with a defensive tackle paid like that - but the Rams HAD to know that he wouldn't want to negotiate too much - it's pretty simple if I'm Donald - make me the highest paid defensive player in NFL history.

And keep in mind that the Patriots can afford to play hardball with players because of Tom Brady and their culture. The Patriots in this situation would stand firm on a salary or trade Aaron Donald IMO for a nice draft haul and retool their team. The Rams don't have Tom Brady.

BUT, having said that - it makes sense for the Rams to pay Donald up front money since we don't have a QB at this time. Whether Goff pans out or we draft another (assuming we don't end up with Cousins next year) - we can afford to pay Donald big money while we don't have a highly paid QB on the roster.


Those are some random thoughts all in one post lol

 

[dieterbrock]

Disrespect would be:

Boss - "I believe you should be paid $X."
Me - "OK, awesome."
Boss - "Never mind, you shouldn't."

This is more:

Boss - "I believe you should be paid more."
Me - "I want a 10x increase."
Boss - "No way, we'll give you a 5x increase. We're trying to help you out by accelerating your raise. You're not due for two years."
Me - "No way man, I'm worth 10x. In two years, I'll be able to make 10x if I go to another company, therefore I should make 10x now. Give me 10x."
Boss - "Well, we'll talk again later, because you're not getting 10x. Come back to us when you're willing to negotiate something fair for both sides."

Calling BS here....
Donald deserves to be paid amongst the highest paid defensive players in the league. Any less than that is a disrespect. And if you were as good at your job as he is at his, and as underpaid proportionally as he is you would feel as disrespected. Especially if you shared an workspace with others far overpaid
Its ludicrous to argue otherwise.

 

[DCH]

I just want to respond to some of your points but only quoting this..

It's the Rams choice to negotiate with Donald, but the here are the issues as I see them:

You risk alienating Donald - your points are valid in that there's not much he could do if the Rams went the no raise/franchise/franchise tag route - but there's a reason why this tactic alienates players - they're human beings. This would assuredly upset Donald, and the most likely negative result of this is that other players will see how we're treating him and it will impact our future roster.

NFL players, by and large, realize that this is a business. For what it's worth, the no raise/franchise/franchise option is leverage and shouldn't be considered a realistic actual outcome - it almost never happens, Cousins notwithstanding. But it cannot be off the table in a negotiation; the Rams have leverage, their goal is to extend Donald at a rate that is both rewarding to him and in the best financial interests of the team, so it has to remain an option.

I am actually not opposed to trading Donald - I don't believe any team will ever win a super bowl with a defensive tackle paid like that - but the Rams HAD to know that he wouldn't want to negotiate too much - it's pretty simple if I'm Donald - make me the highest paid defensive player in NFL history.

If that's Donald's desire, then he is not going to get an extension, IMO. He's not in the driver's seat unless he's actually on the cusp of being a UFA. Hardball by a player is often met with hardball by his team, which is why I've harped on and on about the Rams having more leverage, and thus if they play it right, the ability to come to a contract that is mutually beneficial. "Highest paid defensive player ever" is not beneficial to the Rams, so if he's playing full-on hardball with that as his demand, then you're right - either a trade or the dreaded no raise/franchise/franchise may be the only logical outcome.

And keep in mind that the Patriots can afford to play hardball with players because of Tom Brady and their culture. The Patriots in this situation would stand firm on a salary or trade Aaron Donald IMO for a nice draft haul and retool their team. The Rams don't have Tom Brady.

Brady is part of that, but Belichick has run his team like this since long before Tom Brady was TOM BRADY. Ty Law, Lawyer Milloy, Mike Vrabel, Richard Seymour - no player has ever been more valuable than the team, and no amount of popularity has been enough to prevent Belichick from sending them off into the wild to find their big contract for themselves.

If anything, Tom Brady's $13 million cap number should make it easier for the Patriots to spend more money on non-QBs. Which they have, for the first time in a very long time, this offseason... it's been weird.

I advocated last season for the Rams to bring in Matt Patricia to run the team, because I think emulating the Patriots is a good idea. Now that McVay is the HC, I believe it would be smart of the Rams to let the man establish his system (offensive and defensive), find players that fit the system, and be willing to jettison players - even great ones - who make more money or cause more headaches than they're worth, even if they are superstars. McVay is a smart guy, and so is Wade Phillips. They have the wherewithal to build a cohesive team that is bigger than any one player, and while Donald should be a part of it, he shouldn't be considered a guy who cannot be "allowed" to get away.

BUT, having said that - it makes sense for the Rams to pay Donald up front money since we don't have a QB at this time. Whether Goff pans out or we draft another (assuming we don't end up with Cousins next year) - we can afford to pay Donald big money while we don't have a highly paid QB on the roster.

I agree with this. I don't think the Rams should pay Donald like a UFA - throwing away the leverage you have because you're afraid to lose one guy is, IMO, the hallmark of a bad front office - but they should front-load a nice new deal that pays him well. Give him something in the neighborhood of what Kawann Short or Fletcher Cox is making but with a higher % of guaranteed money, buy out the two years remaining at a total of $8 million in exchange for an AAV of $17-ish million (rather than chasing record-setting money), and both team and player come out ahead.

Those are some random thoughts all in one post lol

Appreciate the thoughts. This is a good conversation.