Andrew Whitworth to return for 2019

  • 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.

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,929
To reduce that $16M+ cap hit.

Over $5 million of that is money already paid ($1.66 million from his original signing bonus, nearly $3.5 million for the restructuring last season so the Rams could raise Donald's salary for 2018). That money is not restructurable now. Since he deliberated a month about coming back, I'm not sure if he'll be amenable to tie himself down for next season and for less money this year and next. If he does, it would likely have to be with the idea that it goes to Saffold, but I doubt there would be much if any there. If there is, it would likely require a bunch of new guaranteed money for next season, for his age 39 season - and probably set up so that he could retire and not need to pay it back.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
39,168
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #23
To reduce that $16M+ cap hit.

Can’t and shouldn’t! Some of it is paid from his signing bonus already do no matter what we take that hit. Extending makes absolutely no sense at all. He’s contemplating retirement so we want to reduce this years cap hit when we don’t need to so we can take one next year when he retires? Soon that wouldn’t help us at all. We signed the contact he’s playing our cap is just fine no need to add an unnecessary hit next year for no reason.
 

wild ram

Rookie
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
131
Name
Erick
This is great. Whit is one of my favorite players on our roster. Maybe we bring the whole band back together? Saffold and Sullivan next? Or do we go with the young blood?

My take is Sullivan will be back for sure, if not then at least Saffold. No way both are gone. I
 

Rams43

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 20, 2014
Messages
4,140
Wonderful news on Whit. Our linchpin for the ‘19 OL.

Next up is Saffold, hopefully for at least a 3 year extension. If Saffold extends, then our OL options would look very, very good.

Hav is a stud at RT and we would have no shortage of starting combos at C and RG among Sully, Allen, Blythe, and Boom.

Hot Damn!
 

wild ram

Rookie
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
131
Name
Erick
Can’t and shouldn’t! Some of it is paid from his signing bonus already do no matter what we take that hit. Extending makes absolutely no sense at all. He’s contemplating retirement so we want to reduce this years cap hit when we don’t need to so we can take one next year when he retires? Soon that wouldn’t help us at all. We signed the contact he’s playing our cap is just fine no need to add an unnecessary hit next year for no reason.

Not sure I understand ?
 

TexasRam

Legend
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
7,784
Another year being the top offense and making a Super Bowl run.

f4uMS1P.gif
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
39,168
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #31
Not sure I understand ?
People want to extend him to lessen his cap hit this year. First of all we don’t need to do that our cap is just fine, especially if we cut Barron as most expect.

Secondly is why would Whitworth want to do it? His base pay this year is $10.25 million with a $500k roster bonus. His signing bonus is $1.7 million (roughly) and he has a cap hit this year of $3.5 million from us restructuring him last year. So we’re already taking multiple hits this year from his signing bonus and moving money around last year. But why would Whitworth extend to lower his cap hit? He’s thinking about retiring sowhy would he lessen his cap hit this year unless we give him more guaranteed money that he can collect next year whether he plays or not it doesn’t benefit him in any way so for Big Whit it doesn’t makes sense to.

Lastly why would the Rams do it? They did it with him, Hekker and Robert Woods among others in years past. And now we have millions less in cap space this year because of restructures. So because we manipulated things in previous years because we needed to we’re paying for it this year. We aren’t desperate for cap right now so extending him to add a cap hit next year when he’s likely to retire is just kicking the can down the road when we don’t need to do it.
 

bubbaramfan

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
6,785
Good news for the OL. Sullivan will be back, but remains the weakest link. He and Blythe got manhandled by Bears, Eagles and in the post-season. Noteboom should get playing time in place of Blythe, who I like but is just too small and should be a backup. Allen should be bulking up to around 310 or 315 if he wants to start in 2020, and should get snaps this upcoming season to rest Sully, and get some experience calling the OL. he couldn't have a better mentor than Sully.

Rams OL future looks bright,
 

wild ram

Rookie
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
131
Name
Erick
People want to extend him to lessen his cap hit this year. First of all we don’t need to do that our cap is just fine, especially if we cut Barron as most expect.

Secondly is why would Whitworth want to do it? His base pay this year is $10.25 million with a $500k roster bonus. His signing bonus is $1.7 million (roughly) and he has a cap hit this year of $3.5 million from us restructuring him last year. So we’re already taking multiple hits this year from his signing bonus and moving money around last year. But why would Whitworth extend to lower his cap hit? He’s thinking about retiring sowhy would he lessen his cap hit this year unless we give him more guaranteed money that he can collect next year whether he plays or not it doesn’t benefit him in any way so for Big Whit it doesn’t makes sense to.

Lastly why would the Rams do it? They did it with him, Hekker and Robert Woods among others in years past. And now we have millions less in cap space this year because of restructures. So because we manipulated things in previous years because we needed to we’re paying for it this year. We aren’t desperate for cap right now so extending him to add a cap hit next year when he’s likely to retire is just kicking the can down the road when we don’t need to do it.

Maybe to get Saffold done. I think they are really tight & want to play together ? McVay is a big part of this as well. He keeps the energy fresh.
He gets those veteran days off.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
39,168
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #34
Maybe to get Saffold done. I think they are really tight & want to play together ? McVay is a big part of this as well. He keeps the energy fresh.
He gets those veteran days off.
We can resign Saffold without creating dead money next year for Whitworth perhaps I wasn’t clear enough on that. Our cap is just fine to take care of Saffold.
 

dang

Legend
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Messages
7,030
Correct - there is enough cap space to pick up Saffold at market rate (say @$10m/yr) - however - I would like to see the Rams pick up an experienced EDGE (Fowler or equal), ILB (to replace Barron) and a Safety (to replace Joyner).
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,528
Can’t and shouldn’t! Some of it is paid from his signing bonus already do no matter what we take that hit. Extending makes absolutely no sense at all. He’s contemplating retirement so we want to reduce this years cap hit when we don’t need to so we can take one next year when he retires? Soon that wouldn’t help us at all. We signed the contact he’s playing our cap is just fine no need to add an unnecessary hit next year for no reason.

You don't have any idea whether our cap is fine OS. Neither do I, but I do know $16M is too much for him and Les isn't necessarily going to sit on his hands this FA period and might need additional room.

Let's wait and see how this shakes out and obviously agree to disagree.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
39,168
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #38
You don't have any idea whether our cap is fine OS. Neither do I, but I do know $16M is too much for him and Les isn't necessarily going to sit on his hands this FA period and might need additional room.

Let's wait and see how this shakes out and obviously agree to disagree.
You got it man. Also stop with the 16 million cap hit. Even if we restructure we can't adjust over 5 million of it. kthx
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,320
Name
Burger man
People want to extend him to lessen his cap hit this year. First of all we don’t need to do that our cap is just fine, especially if we cut Barron as most expect.

Secondly is why would Whitworth want to do it? His base pay this year is $10.25 million with a $500k roster bonus. His signing bonus is $1.7 million (roughly) and he has a cap hit this year of $3.5 million from us restructuring him last year. So we’re already taking multiple hits this year from his signing bonus and moving money around last year. But why would Whitworth extend to lower his cap hit? He’s thinking about retiring sowhy would he lessen his cap hit this year unless we give him more guaranteed money that he can collect next year whether he plays or not it doesn’t benefit him in any way so for Big Whit it doesn’t makes sense to.

Lastly why would the Rams do it? They did it with him, Hekker and Robert Woods among others in years past. And now we have millions less in cap space this year because of restructures. So because we manipulated things in previous years because we needed to we’re paying for it this year. We aren’t desperate for cap right now so extending him to add a cap hit next year when he’s likely to retire is just kicking the can down the road when we don’t need to do it.

I am aligned to this thinking as well.

Not to mention, with a Goff extension on the horizon, from a budget perspective... we “move Whitworth’s amount to Goff” next year and the budget sort of stays aligned.

A cheaper contract in place of Whit (Noteboom) and more expensive contract (Goff) in place of Whit. So to speak.