Rams Have Not Made Decision on Franchise Tag

[Jacobarch]

" Thanks Gentlemen, This^^ Cleared things up!!" LOL

Lol welcome to the world of the internet

 

[Dodgersrf]

If they are going to use it, I can see Watkins getting it. Joyner should be signed, not sure why there is talk about a tag with him. Doesnt make any sense to me unless I am missing something.

Also you either want Watkins or you dont. Sign him or let him walk. I can see the tag if you want to evaluate him for another year to see if he fits before giving him a long term deal.

I agree. You don't rent guys for one year with a second end pick.
It actually makes a lot sense to tag him for a year if a deal can't get done.
Watkins should be a stud in this offense.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Thanks flv! This was the kind of definitive explanation I was looking for!!

 

[Dieter the Brock]

We need to tag Jake McQuaid

 

[wolfdogg]

Transition sammy. No team will pay the 16 mil franchise amount so all the rams would do is match the best offer. Sign joyner long term.

 

[Mackeyser]

I say that would be dumb !! IMO

Why pay that ??

As Les Snead said about SammyWatkins. It would be hard to loss him for a 2nd rd pick.

Why not use the Trans tag on Sammy ? You can match an offer at a market deal , if not you get a 3rd comp pick.

It's a function of timing. If they can't work out the financing, then they don't want to lose Joyner for FA.

 

[Akrasian]

I agree. You don't rent guys for one year with a second end pick.
It actually makes a lot sense to tag him for a year if a deal can't get done.
Watkins should be a stud in this offense.

The second round pick is a sunk cost - it would be foolish for the Rams to throw more money than Watkins is worth to them in order to cover up the loss of the second round pick. If he's worth franchise money to the Rams, great - tag him. But don't do it just because they spent a 2nd on him.

Besides, if he signs elsewhere, it's likely a 3rd rounder for the Rams.

 

[nighttrain]

The second round pick is a sunk cost - it would be foolish for the Rams to throw more money than Watkins is worth to them in order to cover up the loss of the second round pick. If he's worth franchise money to the Rams, great - tag him. But don't do it just because they spent a 2nd on him.

Besides, if he signs elsewhere, it's likely a 3rd rounder for the Rams.

will you like it when he signs with the Whiners?
train

 

[Akrasian]

will you like it when he signs with the Whiners?
train

If he signs for a lot more than he's worth, sure. I'm generally happy when the Niners overpay.it

Edit: BTW, are you advocating that the Rams should swoop in and overpay for every player they think the Niners want? Personally, I want the Rams to focus on their own team, including making the hard choices of who to sign with a limited budget. That means some players they would like will go elsewhere, including to rivals.

 

[wolfdogg]

I'd be shocked if they use the franchise tag. Let Sammy make the rounds and get some offers. I'm pretty sure no one will be offering 16 mil. The rams may want to transition him or maybe just ask him to give them the chance at a final offer once he's done the tour.

 

[nighttrain]

If he signs for a lot more than he's worth, sure. I'm generally happy when the Niners overpay.it

Edit: BTW, are you advocating that the Rams should swoop in and overpay for every player they think the Niners want? Personally, I want the Rams to focus on their own team, including making the hard choices of who to sign with a limited budget. That means some players they would like will go elsewhere, including to rivals.

i mean make as offer, if we dont he will go to the whiners and we wont like it
train

 

[Akrasian]

i mean make as offer, if we dont he will go to the whiners and we wont like it
train

I expect the Rams have made an offer already, based on what they feel he's worth to them given their team needs and cap space. And as things shake out, if Watkins doesn't sign immediately with another team I would expect a revised offer. I don't want the Rams to just abandon trying to sign him - I do want the Rams to focus on what is best for the team as a whole going forward.

 

[Dodgersrf]

The second round pick is a sunk cost - it would be foolish for the Rams to throw more money than Watkins is worth to them in order to cover up the loss of the second round pick. If he's worth franchise money to the Rams, great - tag him. But don't do it just because they spent a 2nd on him.

Besides, if he signs elsewhere, it's likely a 3rd rounder for the Rams.

If he was good enough to give up a second round pick, he's good enough to tag if necessary to give him a full off season in this offense.
I think Watkins will be a very valuable piece to this team moving forward.
Weve had to many poor season with scrubs at the position. His presence alone makes Woods and Cupp more productive.

 

[Akrasian]

If he was good enough to give up a second round pick, he's good enough to tag if necessary to give him a full off season in this offense.
I think Watkins will be a very valuable piece to this team moving forward.
Weve had to many poor season with scrubs at the position. His presence alone makes Woods and Cupp more productive.

The first part is a non-sequitor - it's possible that it was a mistake to send a second for him. It's possible that the Rams' situation has changed since sending a second for him, and so it doesn't make sense to spend that much for him. Would they have sent a second if they'd have known that Woods would break out, and Kupp would be an outstanding WR his rookie season?

The full off season argument is getting old. Yes, he'll pick up more (hopefully) this offseason - but it seems that he didn't particularly improve as the season went along, when he should have been learning the offense better and better. There also seems to have been times when he gave up on his routes, which doesn't seem like something a franchise tag level player would do. I'm not sure how McVay sees his learning the system, and whether he feels that Watkins gave up on routes. McVay knows far more about it than any of us. I suspect that while he wants Watkins' talents, given limited resources he may not want to spend $16 million for another year of him.

I do agree that the 2017 Rams' offense was better for having Watkins. I'm not sure that between the likely improved production from TEs, and the improvement of young WRs already on the team, and the possible addition of someone to replace Watkins, that Sammy is going to be more valuable to the team than an upgrade to other positions made possible with the extra cap space.

I'm sure the Rams are negotiating with Watkins and would like to keep him. I'm much less confident that the Rams feel he is worth the franchise tag. It may be the case that Sammy is valuable to the Rams, but is just worth more to another team.

 

[Dodgersrf]

The first part is a non-sequitor - it's possible that it was a mistake to send a second for him. It's possible that the Rams' situation has changed since sending a second for him, and so it doesn't make sense to spend that much for him. Would they have sent a second if they'd have known that Woods would break out, and Kupp would be an outstanding WR his rookie season?

The full off season argument is getting old. Yes, he'll pick up more (hopefully) this offseason - but it seems that he didn't particularly improve as the season went along, when he should have been learning the offense better and better. There also seems to have been times when he gave up on his routes, which doesn't seem like something a franchise tag level player would do. I'm not sure how McVay sees his learning the system, and whether he feels that Watkins gave up on routes. McVay knows far more about it than any of us. I suspect that while he wants Watkins' talents, given limited resources he may not want to spend $16 million for another year of him.

I do agree that the 2017 Rams' offense was better for having Watkins. I'm not sure that between the likely improved production from TEs, and the improvement of young WRs already on the team, and the possible addition of someone to replace Watkins, that Sammy is going to be more valuable to the team than an upgrade to other positions made possible with the extra cap space.

I'm sure the Rams are negotiating with Watkins and would like to keep him. I'm much less confident that the Rams feel he is worth the franchise tag. It may be the case that Sammy is valuable to the Rams, but is just worth more to another team.

I'm not exited about the possibility of having to spend franchise tag money on him either. I would much rather get a fair deal done.

I do however feel the organization wouldn't have spent a high pick, to rent a veteran WR for 1 year.
I didn't think we would tag Tru for 2 years, but they did just that.

I think Watkins is a Ram in '18.