Rams Have Signed the Fewest Free Agents/NFL.com

[RamBill]

Which teams have signed the most/fewest players?

By Gregg Rosenthal
Around The NFL Editor
Published: April 3, 2015 at 02:18 p.m.
Updated: April 3, 2015 at 03:51 p.m.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...hich-teams-have-signed-the-mostfewest-players

It's no surprise that the Indianapolis Colts have signed the most players in free agency this offseason. It is a surprise that the New England Patriots have matched them in volume.

The table shows the teams that have signed the most players since Feb. 27. This includes a team re-signing their own players. We chose Feb. 27 as a starting point because that would eliminate any low-level "futures" contracts signed just after the season. Feb. 27 was also the day when the Redskins added Ricky Jean Francois in the first significant pickup of the offseason. A few thoughts on the list:

» The Colts entered the offseason knowing they weren't good enough. Indianapolis reached the Final Four, yet knew they were far away from a title because of gaping holes on their roster. General manager Ryan Grigson has relied heavily on free agency since arriving after a huge roster overhaul following the Bill Polian era. Grigson's uneven drafts the last two years after a boffo 2012 crop haven't helped.

No playoff team is more reliant on talent acquired through free agency than Indianapolis. That won't change in 2015.

» Patriots fans have complained that they didn't shell out big money for Darrelle Revis. But New England did hand out the second-highest figure of guaranteed money to any player in free agency for Devin McCourty. They picked up a nice mid-level option in Jabaal Sheard, but most of their signings here are low-risk, medium-reward variety: Alan Branch, Brandon Gibson, Bradley Fletcher, Scott Chandler and Robert McClain are prime examples. And they still have more work to do in the secondary.

» This list does not include trade acquisitions, so Miami's move to pick up Kenny Stills, for instance, is not included in their total.

» Atlanta has quietly been one of the most active teams over the last month, going for bulk signings on defense. O'Brien Schofield, Adrian Clayborn, Justin Durant and Brooks Reed are some of the names they have brought in to bolster one of the worst groups in the league. Consider it a win if the Falcons "hit" on half of these pickups.

» The Panthers are another team shopping in the bargain aisle, hoping that reclamation projections Michael Oher and Jonathan Martin add up to a usable starter.


Fewest signings

» The Rams are at the top of the list, but we like some of their low-cost moves. Nick Fairley and Akeem Ayers both have high ceilings for players who did not cost a lot to bring in.

» The Saints have been mislabeled as "rebuilding." They dramatically changed the direction of their team, but they are certainly spending money. (Just not on Jimmy Graham.) Brandon Browner and C.J. Spiller were two big free-agent pickups. Dannell Ellerbe and Max Unger came via trade, so they don't count here. The Saints now seem to change direction every 12 months or so, which is not a sign of franchise stability.

» It is no surprise to see Green Bay and Pittsburgh toward the top of this list. At one point this offseason, Julius Peppers was the only Packer on the roster that had ever played with another team. Pittsburgh is the rare NFL team with legitimate salary-cap troubles that prevent them from being too aggressive in the offseason. DeAngelo Williams is their biggest move thus far.

The Steelers and Packers both shy away from signing other teams' players, which requires a high "hit" rate from their general managers on draft day. Steelers GM Kevin Colbert has been far less consistent in recent years than early in his Pittsburgh run.

» The Eagles' offseason, in many ways, has been defined by its departures. They haven't brought in a huge number of players in bulk, but the signings have mostly been potential impact players like DeMarco Murray, Byron Maxwell, Ryan Mathews and the re-signing of Brandon Graham. There have been few low-level moves, which the Eagles will likely make after the draft.

» A change in the NFL offseason calendar could impact how free agents are signed. In previous years, unrestricted free agents signed by other teams counted toward the league's compensatory pick formula until June 1. That day has been moved to May 12, meaning a lot of veteran signings could happen right after May 12.

Fewest players signed
Team--No. of players

Rams 6

Saints

7
Steelers

8
Packers

8
Eagles

9
Texans

9
Chargers

10
Vikings

11
Jaguars

11
Lions

11
Browns

11
Bengals

11
Cardinals

11

========

Most players signed
Team --No. of players
Colts

18
Patriots

18
Ravens

17
Falcons

16
Panthers

16
Jets

15
Bears

14
Dolphins

14
Giants

14
Buccaneers

14

 

[ramfan46]

Awesome, how many times has this team been burned on FA? You gotta build through the Draft or you have nothing. You can supplement your talent base with a few veterans, but you won't find cure all guys sittin on the shelf in FA. They get locked up by their respective teams. I love this new low key approach to FA. Target a few specific guys and narrow down the shopping list til the Draft. This Draft just happens to be loaded on quality O line where the Rams are positions fill out a solid O line and build depth throughout the rest of the roster.

 

[Ballhawk]

The question should be, who signed the best free agents?

 

[fearsomefour]

I am fine with this approach now that there is a talent base in place.
Sure, I was at least one FA Olineman, but, I don't want the team to reach for an old or injured guy or over commit.
The more time goes by the more I am loving the Ayers signing.

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

I'd be fine with this too, but if we don't draft Oline in the first 3 rounds, we are in trouble. Or more like, Nick Foles will be, then Austin Davis, then Case Keenum, then whomever we draft.

 

[leoram]

So the Pats got Fletcher and Gibson to go with Amendola and Hoomanawanui. You look at their roster and it's filled with these kind of guys that have talent but are injury prone or just flash certain skills but never star. Philly looks to be building in similar fashion. In spite of their success, I'm leaning toward the Rams' approach.

In spite of my confidence in the personnel department (sans OLine history), it's curious to me that Stan purported liking the Patriot model of building a team but Fisher uses a different method.

I also wonder why McDaniels flourishes under Belicheat but melted down everywhere else. While I'm beginning to buy into Williams' defense, I'm waiting for offensive production and effective coaching on that side of the ball.

 

[A55VA6]

I think it's a good thing. Just keep building through the draft..

 

[tahoe]

That would be fine if the rams had more draft picks like in years past but they only have 6. How is this roster going to get filled?

 

[Stel]

That would be fine if the rams had more draft picks like in years past but they only have 6. How is this roster going to get filled?

Other than adding O line, what spot do you think the Rams need to fill? Unlike past years, we actually have a roster of NFL level talent. Can we make upgrades? Sure, but the only remaining "holes" in the roster are Oline. With depth upgrades, there is generally very little affect on the cap situation since the new player is paid about the same as the old player.

Examine our roster. As best I can tell, our current status is:

SPECIAL TEAMS: set. No changes expected. We carry 3 on the roster.

DEFENSE: Fairly set, may make some upgrades especially if the right player falls to us. We carry 25 on the roster.

DLine: 10 under contract (8 expected to have significant roles)
LB: 7 under contract (including all who had significant time last year)
DB: 12 under contract (including all from last year - assuming McLeod is back)

OFFENSE: Here is where the additions will occur. We carry 25 on the roster.
QB: 3 under contract (assuming Davis stays). Expected to use a draft pick here.
RB: 6 under contract (likely set)
TE: 6 under contract (including all major contributors from last year; likely set)
WR: 8 under contract (including all major contributors from last year; likely set)
OL: 9 under contract (including 7 who will likely be on roster; only area with gaping holes).

We have more than 60 players under contract leaving us with cap room in the $4.5 million range after setting aside the money for draft picks (before any cap saving moves). The only remaining obvious need in the roster is OL. I think we have room for at least one starting quality FA signing and the six draft picks to fill this need and make a couple of upgrades. We don't need more draft picks, we need to make 3 or 4 really good draft picks. I'm not going to worry about the roster much until May 3. At that point, we'll have a good idea of what our roster looks like.

 

[paceram]

Other than adding O line, what spot do you think the Rams need to fill? Unlike past years, we actually have a roster of NFL level talent. Can we make upgrades? Sure, but the only remaining "holes" in the roster are Oline. With depth upgrades, there is generally very little affect on the cap situation since the new player is paid about the same as the old player.

Examine our roster. As best I can tell, our current status is:

SPECIAL TEAMS: set. No changes expected. We carry 3 on the roster.

DEFENSE: Fairly set, may make some upgrades especially if the right player falls to us. We carry 25 on the roster.

DLine: 10 under contract (8 expected to have significant roles)
LB: 7 under contract (including all who had significant time last year)
DB: 12 under contract (including all from last year - assuming McLeod is back)

OFFENSE: Here is where the additions will occur. We carry 25 on the roster.
QB: 3 under contract (assuming Davis stays). Expected to use a draft pick here.
RB: 6 under contract (likely set)
TE: 6 under contract (including all major contributors from last year; likely set)
WR: 8 under contract (including all major contributors from last year; likely set)
OL: 9 under contract (including 7 who will likely be on roster; only area with gaping holes).

We have more than 60 players under contract leaving us with cap room in the $4.5 million range after setting aside the money for draft picks (before any cap saving moves). The only remaining obvious need in the roster is OL. I think we have room for at least one starting quality FA signing and the six draft picks to fill this need and make a couple of upgrades. We don't need more draft picks, we need to make 3 or 4 really good draft picks. I'm not going to worry about the roster much until May 3. At that point, we'll have a good idea of what our roster looks like.

Great Roster summary! It will be interesting to see if the Rams draft more with the BPA theory or Need theory (I am guessing a mixture of the two!)! If they go by the NEED approach I don't think we will see many Defensive Players being considered (except with the possibility of another LB and/or DB in the later rounds) and possibly see them taking two offensive linemen (Possibly even three depending on what FA OL they sign before the Draft), a QB and WR somewhere in this Draft.

 

[SierraRam]

WR: 8 under contract (including all major contributors from last year; likely set)

Nice Breakdown Stel! I'm a little nervous at WR though because of Quick's status. If a top WR falls to us at 10, we have to go there IMO.

DB: 12 under contract (including all from last year - assuming McLeod is back)

This is another area of concern for me because of JJ's and Tru's status next year. I'd use a high pick here - "you never have enough CB's"

Unlike past years, we actually have a roster of NFL level talent.

It's night and day! We're so close to going BPA with every pick - let the dynasty begin...

 

[Stel]

I don't disagree, Sierra. I've said all along that WR may likely be BPA at #10 and I'm all for taking him if he is. I'm also good with a CB there if he is the highest on their board. Nice to finally not be desperate in the draft.

 

[CGI_Ram]

At one point this offseason, Julius Peppers was the only Packer on the roster that had ever played with another team.

Let that ^ sink in for a moment. Wow. Part of me wonders if it's even accurate. Doesn't sound possible.

Other thoughts:

I think the method they use in this article is somewhat flawed, by including resigning own players. I get why they did, but resigning own players isn't exactly "adding something". It's more like maintaining last year's squad.

Also Stel, as it relates to cap room and the rookie pool... Any rookies that make the roster replace someone already in the cap count. So technically we have more cap room than 4.5MM, not needing to fully deduct the rookie cap.

 

[BonifayRam]

I would think that the reason of being so conservative & cautious thus far in free agency is due to the fact Fisher will have 27 current signed Rams entering free agency.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2016/st.-louis-rams/

5 DL'ers
All our QB's
3 safeties
3 WR's
3 Lb'ers
3 RB's
2 FB's
2 Ol'ers
2 CB's
Our Kicker

 

[Stel]

Also Stel, as it relates to cap room and the rookie pool... Any rookies that make the roster replace someone already in the cap count. So technically we have more cap room than 4.5MM, not needing to fully deduct the rookie cap.

Possibly, but keep in mind that after the second round pick, the cap hit for draft picks is little different from the cap hit of the veteran they replace (our 3rd round slot is a cap number of just under $600K) and the cap hit for the 1st and second round players will likely be higher than that of the veteran they replace. Don't see the cap hit for the players replaced by draft picks being that different than the cap hit of those draft picks. Only makes a significant difference if a draft pick replaces a high cap number veteran.

 

[Alan]

Stel with his take on our needs:
Other than adding O line, what spot do you think the Rams need to fill?

QB - We have nothing but question marks.

FS- We don't have one as far as I'm concerned.

WR - Who knows if Quick will continue his improvement or even recover completely from his injury and while I like Britt, I don't think he's a true #1 WR.

CB - JJ and Johnson are both FAs next year. Many are still rooting for/hoping for JJ to pull his head out and start playing team ball but he hasn't done it yet. Johnson regressed last year IMO. Joyner was unable to beat out either of them last year and has shown me nothing so far. Of course it was his first year and most of it he was injured so still plenty of time for him to shine. Roberson & McGee? They haven't shown they're starting material yet although both are still developing like Joyner. Gaines is a smurf and the question is...can he remain healthy considering he plays against giants.

DE - Long is on the wrong side of 30 and we need to develop his replacement.

MLB - JL is only average and guess who is listed as his back up, Dunbar. Enough said.

RB - While I don't consider it a hole, I also don't see anything to get excited about either.

 

[RhodyRams]

Fewest signings

» The Rams are at the top of the list...............

which is the reason behind this thread : http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/anybody-else-bored.36437/ :shades:

 

[CGI_Ram]

Possibly, but keep in mind that after the second round pick, the cap hit for draft picks is little different from the cap hit of the veteran they replace (our 3rd round slot is a cap number of just under $600K) and the cap hit for the 1st and second round players will likely be higher than that of the veteran they replace. Don't see the cap hit for the players replaced by draft picks being that different than the cap hit of those draft picks. Only makes a significant difference if a draft pick replaces a high cap number veteran.

Yes. Valid points. It's not exactly a wash as it depends who replaces who.

 

[Athos]

Well, Snisher's strong suit hasn't exactly been FA.

Maybe they're wised up finally.

FA is for depth on the roster and backups. I'm fine with one kind of splash FA every once in a while (Cook) but most for the Rams seems to fail epically, none more so than virtually every "name" o-line signing.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

I would think that the reason of being so conservative & cautious thus far in free agency is due to the fact Fisher will have 27 current signed Rams entering free agency.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2016/st.-louis-rams/

5 DL'ers
All our QB's
3 safeties
3 WR's
3 Lb'ers
3 RB's
2 FB's
2 Ol'ers
2 CB's
Our Kicker

that is quite sobering. this is clearly the downfall of having to rebuild a team from scratch....