Why Was Langford Cut?

[Fatbot]

The only thing we've been told is he was cut early to give him "a little extra time to find another job". This suggests an amicable parting, but we don't know why he was simply cut as opposed to having his salary cap number reworked via extension. There is no report of any extension talks, so either he didn't want to come back, the Rams didn't want him back, there was no possibility of finding a compromise number, or Bernie or his P-D buddies were just too lazy to actually find out if there were any contract talks since that would require "journalism".

We can assume assume Fisher & Co. were at least open to try to bring him back at a lesser number, but the sides seemed to give up awfully fast. And as long as Scott Wells remains on the roster I'm hesitant to make any generous assumptions.

 

[brokeu91]

The only thing we've been told is he was cut early to give him "a little extra time to find another job". This suggests an amicable parting, but we don't know why he was simply cut as opposed to having his salary cap number reworked via extension. There is no report of any extension talks, so either he didn't want to come back, the Rams didn't want him back, there was no possibility of finding a compromise number, or Bernie or his P-D buddies were just too lazy to actually find out if there were any contract talks since that would require "journalism".

We can assume assume Fisher & Co. were at least open to try to bring him back at a lesser number, but the sides seemed to give up awfully fast. And as long as Scott Wells remains on the roster I'm hesitant to make any generous assumptions.

I'm guessing if there's no extension talks it was because either Langford thought he could get more on the open market than he would from the Rams (very possible) or he wanted to be a starter and played well enough to start for many teams (which is true). Unfortunately Donald looks like he will be an All-Pro and Lanford, though playing well, was not worth the contract when he's a basically a rotational guy right now.

 

[LumberTubs]

I love Aaron Donald.

That doesn't answer the question (or maybe it does?)

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Sometimes I wonder how old people think Long is, dude's only 29...

I mean he would retire due to injury. He had injuries before he came to St. Louis and just added another. Maybe he should hang it up before his leg falls off?

 

[Dr C. Hill]

Out of all of the possible cap cuts, Lankford made the least amount of sense to me. Jake Long and Wells were total no brainers, yet they are still on the roster. Even Chris Long, (at his huge number), made more sense than Lankford. Yes he was getting starter money, but he will get that from his next team where he will be a starter. I guarantee that if Wells or the Jake Long were released they would see their paychecks dramatically sliced, if they were to even find a new team. If Chris Long were let go, he would still make a nice chunk of change, just not top 5 money.

It will be a real shame if the Rams can't add a center or guard in free agency because they decided to keep Wells and J Long on the team. Scott Wells is the worst starting player in the NFL. He is also another year older, and he is still on the roster? I understand cutting Lankford, but he should have been the 3rd or fourth to go, based on production. Freaking Scott Wells!

 

[BigRamFan]

We had too much depth at the position and they thought he was making to much.

I saw a couple of these responses in this thread so I am not picking on you @Afro Ram. Yours was just the first I came back to. But, everyone is aware that we now only have 2 DTs under contract, right? I know we often kick a DE in on obvious passing situations but to say we have "too much depth" at DT is just not accurate, IMO.

 

[Memento]

Out of all of the possible cap cuts, Lankford made the least amount of sense to me. Jake Long and Wells were total no brainers, yet they are still on the roster. Even Chris Long, (at his huge number), made more sense than Lankford. Yes he was getting starter money, but he will get that from his next team where he will be a starter. I guarantee that if Wells or the Jake Long were released they would see their paychecks dramatically sliced, if they were to even find a new team. If Chris Long were let go, he would still make a nice chunk of change, just not top 5 money.

It will be a real shame if the Rams can't add a center or guard in free agency because they decided to keep Wells and J Long on the team. Scott Wells is the worst starting player in the NFL. He is also another year older, and he is still on the roster? I understand cutting Lankford, but he should have been the 3rd or fourth to go, based on production. Freaking Scott Wells!

Way to misspell the name of the guy you're making a case for. It's Langford. With a "g."

 

[Dr C. Hill]

I stand corrected on my spelling Memento, but I hope the meat of the post is still salvageable.

Also, I am not making a case for him at all. I was simply pointing out that there at least 3 other players that were more cut worthy than Langford, with a "g".

 

[Memento]

I stand corrected on my spelling Memento, but I hope the meat of the post is still salvageable.

Also, I am not making a case for him at all. I was simply pointing out that there at least 3 other players that were more cut worthy than Langford, with a "g".

I agree. Just not with Chris Long. His contract can be restructured, and he's been more than willing to do it in the past to help this team.

Now Wells, Jake Long, Pead, and Bradford? I completely agree.

 

[Jorgeh0605]

Out of all of the possible cap cuts, Lankford made the least amount of sense to me. Jake Long and Wells were total no brainers, yet they are still on the roster. Even Chris Long, (at his huge number), made more sense than Lankford. Yes he was getting starter money, but he will get that from his next team where he will be a starter. I guarantee that if Wells or the Jake Long were released they would see their paychecks dramatically sliced, if they were to even find a new team. If Chris Long were let go, he would still make a nice chunk of change, just not top 5 money.

It will be a real shame if the Rams can't add a center or guard in free agency because they decided to keep Wells and J Long on the team. Scott Wells is the worst starting player in the NFL. He is also another year older, and he is still on the roster? I understand cutting Lankford, but he should have been the 3rd or fourth to go, based on production. Freaking Scott Wells!

why are people getting hung up on the order in which these guys get cut? As long as they do all get cut the order really doesn't matter. Now if Wells and Long aren't cut I'll be right there with you.

 

[Zaphod]

why are people getting hung up on the order in which these guys get cut? As long as they do all get cut the order really doesn't matter. Now if Wells and Long aren't cut I'll be right there with you.

I agree with your logic of remaining rational, but I'm just thinking, why aren't they cut already?

I'll begrudgingly give them Jake Long, as he could be our best option for right tackle in 2015, if he takes a cut and if he can remain healthy. Two really big ifs in my opinion and simply not worth the risk. Our 2015 season has to see improvement on the offensive line.

Ok, but Wells? Are they negotiating with him as well, and to what end? Who do we have on the roster that he can back up?

I can see spreading the depth around such that we might draft another DT if someone we really like is a great value at that position. But we're down to two tackles now, which means we will no matter what be signing a veteran like Carrington.

It just has me scratching my head is all.

 

[Afro Ram]

I saw a couple of these responses in this thread so I am not picking on you @Afro Ram. Yours was just the first I came back to. But, everyone is aware that we now only have 2 DTs under contract, right? I know we often kick a DE in on obvious passing situations but to say we have "too much depth" at DT is just not accurate, IMO.

Actually you're right. I was taking into consideration the likelihood of them resigning Carrington and I totally forgot that Conrath got picked up by the Steelers.

 

[V3]

The question I want to know is why hasn't Wells been cut?

 

[BigRamFan]

The question I want to know is why hasn't Wells been cut?

Still a very legitimate question!

 

[Dr C. Hill]

I am not advocating letting C Long go. I do believe that he is vastly overpaid, ( he is also 30 in a few weeks) and if the Rams did "cut" him, he could be had at half the price tag he is currently owed. Is that worth the gamble? I don't know, but at the very least it is time to restructure that albatross of a contract. 10 million dollars seems a little pricey for a motor/effort guy after 30 that can't stop the run. I think we can all agree that his best days are not ahead of him, and that he not a top 4 pass rusher.

I love the effort when he plays, but it is time to make a move. He is not a top 10 DE, yet he is paid as a top 4. In it's current state, his contract will pay him 11.75 million next year. This for a guy who had a grand total of 1 sack last year, and 9.5 in the last 2 seasons. Almost 23 million for an average player, (at least in the last 2 seasons, and on the decline). This problem is not going to go away.

I like Chris Long, but unless he takes a gigantic pay cut, his cap number is killing this team going forward! Again, the Rams offered him that contract, and he signed it. This is not really on Long at all. This is on the Rams. If he won't restructure, he has to go as far as I'm concerned.

 

[RamWoodie]

I stayed off from posting during the Combine...and I didn't even watch it. To many other work related things had my attention. Now that I have some free time...I'm back at it.

Why was Langford cut? The "handwriting was on the wall" with the depth the Rams have at DT. Langford has been a good player, so you give him time NOW to get with another team!

 

[BigRamFan]

I stayed off from posting during the Combine...and I didn't even watch it. To many other work related things had my attention. Now that I have some free time...I'm back at it.

Why was Langford cut? The "handwriting was on the wall" with the depth the Rams have at DT. Langford has been a good player, so you give him time NOW to get with another team!

Welcome back @RamWoodie ! I always appreciate your input.

That said, I agree he was overpaid as a rotational DT, be we don't have any depth at that position yet. We have 2 DTs under contract. I fully expect we will add a 2nd tier DT in F/A and perhaps even in the draft, but to say we have depth there is just incorrect, IMO.

 

[LACHAMP46]

I saw a couple of these responses in this thread so I am not picking on you @Afro Ram. Yours was just the first I came back to. But, everyone is aware that we now only have 2 DTs under contract, right? I know we often kick a DE in on obvious passing situations but to say we have "too much depth" at DT is just not accurate, IMO.

We have Ethan Westbrooks, Carrington, and Brockers/Donald.....I think Carrington's deal was for a couple years, no? If not, I'm positive the other 3 are still under contract....