Rams surely want to “pay the man”; the challenge is coming up with the right number/PFT

[FrantikRam]

NFL players, by and large, realize that this is a business. For what it's worth, the no raise/franchise/franchise option is leverage and shouldn't be considered a realistic actual outcome - it almost never happens, Cousins notwithstanding. But it cannot be off the table in a negotiation; the Rams have leverage, their goal is to extend Donald at a rate that is both rewarding to him and in the best financial interests of the team, so it has to remain an option.


If that's Donald's desire, then he is not going to get an extension, IMO. He's not in the driver's seat unless he's actually on the cusp of being a UFA. Hardball by a player is often met with hardball by his team, which is why I've harped on and on about the Rams having more leverage, and thus if they play it right, the ability to come to a contract that is mutually beneficial. "Highest paid defensive player ever" is not beneficial to the Rams, so if he's playing full-on hardball with that as his demand, then you're right - either a trade or the dreaded no raise/franchise/franchise may be the only logical outcome.


Brady is part of that, but Belichick has run his team like this since long before Tom Brady was TOM BRADY. Ty Law, Lawyer Milloy, Mike Vrabel, Richard Seymour - no player has ever been more valuable than the team, and no amount of popularity has been enough to prevent Belichick from sending them off into the wild to find their big contract for themselves.

If anything, Tom Brady's $13 million cap number should make it easier for the Patriots to spend more money on non-QBs. Which they have, for the first time in a very long time, this offseason... it's been weird.

I advocated last season for the Rams to bring in Matt Patricia to run the team, because I think emulating the Patriots is a good idea. Now that McVay is the HC, I believe it would be smart of the Rams to let the man establish his system (offensive and defensive), find players that fit the system, and be willing to jettison players - even great ones - who make more money or cause more headaches than they're worth, even if they are superstars. McVay is a smart guy, and so is Wade Phillips. They have the wherewithal to build a cohesive team that is bigger than any one player, and while Donald should be a part of it, he shouldn't be considered a guy who cannot be "allowed" to get away.


I agree with this. I don't think the Rams should pay Donald like a UFA - throwing away the leverage you have because you're afraid to lose one guy is, IMO, the hallmark of a bad front office - but they should front-load a nice new deal that pays him well. Give him something in the neighborhood of what Kawann Short or Fletcher Cox is making but with a higher % of guaranteed money, buy out the two years remaining at a total of $8 million in exchange for an AAV of $17-ish million (rather than chasing record-setting money), and both team and player come out ahead.



Appreciate the thoughts. This is a good conversation.

So what would you do with Donald if he refused to take less than $20 million per year?

Trade him or franchise him twice?

 

[dieterbrock]

Carr was bought out of the last year of his deal - they didn't have the leverage of a 5th-year option. Same with Wilson. And Brady is a weird case, because he is willingly the 14th-highest-paid QB in the league despite being the best (or in the top 3 at least).

And part of my argument here is that Donald has not played out his contract. He needs to realize that getting paid more for this year and next constitute value beyond the raw numbers on any extension and negotiate understanding that. And in the end, I suspect he does, and you and I are just going 'round in a bout of breeze-pissing.

They had the final year to go and franchise designation. They had leverage. Didn't use it

And part of my argument here is that Donald has not played out his contract

No, he has clearly OUT-played the contract. Which is why they should tear it up and pay him correctly

 

[DCH]

So what would you do with Donald if he refused to take less than $20 million per year?

Trade him or franchise him twice?

If you're at the point of franchising him, then you can discuss $20 million a year because your two years of rookie contract control are gone. My major point is that you don't give that kind of record-setting money in a contract that erases two full years of inexpensive control. Basically, if he refuses to go less than $20 million/year right now, I put negotiations on hold and have him play under his current contract in 2017.

 

[DCH]

They had the final year to go and franchise designation. They had leverage. Didn't use it
No, he has clearly OUT-played the contract. Which is why they should tear it up and pay him correctly

How do you figure? They came to a deal that benefited both sides because nobody wants their cornerpiece player playing on the last year of a contract. Extensions entering the final year of a deal have become fairly commonplace. Furthering a precedent of extensions entering the second-to-last year of a deal is a dangerous move.

You outplay your contract, you benefit in the next contract. That's how contracts generally work. Trying to fast-forward it by multiple years defeats the purpose of contracts in general.

 

[12intheBox]

Not to state the obvious, but we are very much in the cheap seats here. Its easy to say, pay the man - but what if he is insisting on being paid twice as much as the highest paid player in NFL history? On the other hand, the Rams may be completely lowballing - overplaying their control over Donald.

More likely than either of those, this is like most other contractual situations where tens of millions of dollars are at stake and deadlines will spur action for both sides. Its not just the monetary amount of the contract either, the structure is vital to the Rams ability to work the cap.

 

[dieterbrock]

How do you figure? They came to a deal that benefited both sides because nobody wants their cornerpiece player playing on the last year of a contract. Extensions entering the final year of a deal have become fairly commonplace. Furthering a precedent of extensions entering the second-to-last year of a deal is a dangerous move.

You outplay your contract, you benefit in the next contract. That's how contracts generally work. Trying to fast-forward it by multiple years defeats the purpose of contracts in general.

Its the same thing. After 3 years you know what you have in a player.
Those teams could have "saved the money" and let the player ride out the final year. They didn't.
He's out played the contract and its time to re-do it.
Both he and the Rams agree on that

 

[DCH]

Its the same thing. After 3 years you know what you have in a player.
Those teams could have "saved the money" and let the player ride out the final year. They didn't.
He's out played the contract and its time to re-do it.
Both he and the Rams agree on that

Yes, but back to the OP, if they don't agree on how, or at what price, the Rams have the ability - the leverage - to say that Donald's demands cannot be met while maintaining a fully competitive 53-man roster and suspend negotiations.

 

[nanotech]

Crap. I've entered an infinite do loop.

 

[dieterbrock]

Crap. I've entered an infinite do loop.

My bad, I'm jumping off the merry go round

 

[Merlin]

It's tough to see a Pat's fan absolutely owning a Rams fan in this discussion, but its happening, lolz. I love AD as much as the next guy, but I am a Rams fan first. The RAMS need to do what's best for the team. Period. If AD can be placated by an extension of the current deal, then so be it. If he wants UFA money, tough crap. It's a business after all. All of the players know that.

He's a Rams fan, just in denial.

 

[Merlin]

Rams have the power here dudes. If AD plays hardball the team franchises him giving them 3x years control.

But they want AD happy. And AD ain't the holding out type. It will be done by camp IMO.

 

[OldSchool]

So much silly drama for no good reason in this thread

 

[blackbart]

Donald deserves a raise. The Rams have come to the table, have agreed he deserves one. The "disrespect" occurs if they leave the table and let him play on his rookie deal. That is total disrespect.
He deserves to paid like the top defensive player in the league, because he is. And he deserves it now.

So what if they have already offered him an excellent new contract and he has declined to sign? Does that mean he is disrespecting the organization? Is he disrespecting the organization because he is reneging on the contract he signed as a rookie? If he plays well over the next two or three years can they expect him to once again go back on his word and want even more?

Contracts and respect are a two way street. When you sign a contract you are giving your word you will stand by your side of the deal. Who gets respect by backing out on your word?

FWIW the players do not agree that he is the top defensive player in the game. In fact he is listed as the #4 defensive player and "only" 15th overall.