RG3 free in 2016?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Blue and Gold

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
1,741
Name
B and G
www.profootballtalk.nbc.com

Washington has big decision to make on Griffin

Posted by Mike Florio on November 16, 2014, 7:53 PM EST
griffin5.jpg
Getty Images
With six games left in the 2014 regular season, Washington has a big decision to make regarding the player for whom they gave up three first-round picks and a second-round pick in 2012.

By May 3, 2015, only days after the three-year anniversary of the arrival of Robert Griffin IIIin Washington, the team needs to determine whether to extend his rookie contract through 2016. To activate the fifth-year option, Washington must tender Griffin a 2016 salary that, given his status as a top-10 draft pick, equals the 2015 transition tag for quarterbacks.

Based on current calculations, that’s $18.4 million. The salary would be guaranteed for injury only, which for a guy who has had a few serious injuries makes the possibility of paying him $18.4 million to not play in 2016 a more-than-negligible possibility.

If Washington decides not to extend the contract, he’ll make $3.2 million for 2015 and then, barring a new deal, become a free agent. Based on Griffin’s current level of performance, the team may be inclined not to pick up the option.

“He has a lot of improving to do, obviously,” coach Jay Gruden told reporters regarding Griffin after the game.

If Griffin doesn’t start improving quickly, it’s hard to imagine Washington rolling the dice with $18.4 million for 2016.
 

Ramrasta

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
3,116
Name
Tyler
He is done in Washington. He is continuously getting himself injured and plays worse than the backups when he isn't.
 

NJRamsFan

Please Delete
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
3,801
Didn't they give up 2 first round picks for RGIII? The first one they didn't exacly give up they exchanged a 6(?) for a 2
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
Certifiable club house cancer. Haven't like the prick since the Rams throttled his ass in his rookie year when he bitched like a child during and after the game.
 

V3

Hall of Fame
Joined
Apr 23, 2013
Messages
3,848
Didn't they give up 2 first round picks for RGIII? The first one they didn't exacly give up they exchanged a 6(?) for a 2
And their 2nd round pick that first year. Just another example of why I'm so vehemently against trading up for players/QB's in the first. They rarely ever work out and then when they don't, they REALLY hurt the franchise. The only one in recent history that I can think of that actually worked out is the Giants trade up for Manning and people could argue that Rivers would have been better.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
I'd trade a 5th for him as a back up, Fisher has experience working with rushing QBs.

Didn't they give up 2 first round picks for RGIII? The first one they didn't exacly give up they exchanged a 6(?) for a 2

3 firsts (6, 22, 2) and a second (37?) for a first (2).
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,079
....and this is the trouble with thinking problems are automatically fixed with drafting a QB with a high first round pick. The high pick reflects potential and not much more....hard to know how a guy is going to develop. With the Rams looking like they could stack up some late season wins this year giving up picks to move up to get a QB, not thanks. The group we have now, Bradford, Hill, Davis looks fine to me. Davis won't cost much as a RFA, Hill may play himself into a bigger deal somewhere else, but, the Rams should have money to resign him as the 2. The fly in that ointment may be Bradford (or his agent) wanting to redo his deal to save cap space.
 

NJRamsFan

Please Delete
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
3,801
I'd trade a 5th for him as a back up, Fisher has experience working with rushing QBs.



3 firsts (6, 22, 2) and a second (37?) for a first (2).
Isnt that still only 2? exchanging a 6 for a 2 is not giving up a first rounder its improving your own.
 

Greg Stone

Rookie
Joined
Jun 20, 2014
Messages
210
The fly in that ointment may be Bradford (or his agent) wanting to redo his deal to save cap space.

I don't follow the last sentence. First, how can you restructure a one year deal? Isn't 2015 Bradford's walk year? Second, why would Bradford be the one to insist on redoing to save cap space?
 

Robocop

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
1,933
Name
J.
too early to tell what they'll do with him. probably not extend but still got another full season to play with him then maybe resign if he steps up.
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
....and this is the trouble with thinking problems are automatically fixed with drafting a QB with a high first round pick. The high pick reflects potential and not much more....hard to know how a guy is going to develop. With the Rams looking like they could stack up some late season wins this year giving up picks to move up to get a QB, not thanks. The group we have now, Bradford, Hill, Davis looks fine to me. Davis won't cost much as a RFA, Hill may play himself into a bigger deal somewhere else, but, the Rams should have money to resign him as the 2. The fly in that ointment may be Bradford (or his agent) wanting to redo his deal to save cap space.

Yes, but you're much more likely to find your QB in the 1st than anywhere else. And I'm not sure about the long-term viability of any of those guys in the starting role due to health and performance.

I wouldn't necessarily move up for a QB unless it's Mariota. With how many wins we may very well wind up with though, I hope we'll still have a chance at Hundley.
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
The Rams have a better record than the Redskins..........bwahahahahahaha
 

Rynie

Cowboys rudeboy.
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
1,922
Name
Rynie
Trust me, you're better off drafting a QB than getting that diva. He refuses to watch negative plays of himself. How else do you learn? Coming out of college, he's never had to study a playbook. He threw the coach under the bus last year, and other teammates under the bus this year. He's a POS.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Redskins got #2 overall which they used for Griffin
Rams got three firsts and a second ,
The trade was for what each team received so yes three firsts and a second FOR the #2 overall
The Rams PROFIT was 2 firsts and a second minus 4 slots in the first from 2 to 6
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
Didn't they give up 2 first round picks for RGIII? The first one they didn't exacly give up they exchanged a 6(?) for a 2
It's one of those things that it depends on how you look at it.

From one POV, they gave up 3 1st rounders and a 2nd for 1 1st rounder.

From another, they gave up 2 1st rounders and a 2nd to move up in the 1st round.

Neither perspective is wrong.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,079
I don't follow the last sentence. First, how can you restructure a one year deal? Isn't 2015 Bradford's walk year? Second, why would Bradford be the one to insist on redoing to save cap space?
He may not redo it at all in which case it makes sense to cut him to save $12M vs the cap. I guess it depends on the amount of the pay cut. He will not have much value as a FA. It may suit his interests to take a pay cut as opposed to just getting cut.