Rams trying to get something done with Shelton

[Merlin]

Excuse my ignorance as I truly don't know, but is there a reason why Noteboom and Rams couldn't restructure his contract in a way that would provide him his current value (very high as a back-up at multiple positions imo) and provide the Rams with a little relief given he hasn't grown into the position as was expected when he originally signed? To me, there is a win-win in there somewhere, but perhaps there is something that gets in the way of that I don't fully understand.
I would think that if he were cut, he wouldn't find suitors at his current rate. Maybe I'm wrong. But that's why I am asking.
What I do believe is that he is very valuable to have on the team in terms of insurance against the inevitable injuries we will incur.

I don't have a problem with a restructure that puts his pay at a backup level over time. But yeah I also am no cap wizard. I suppose anything can be done if there's a will to do it but no idea if it can be done and make sense when we owe him so much already.

I mean why would he agree to that. Unless he realizes they overpaid and feels a desire to help them right that. Which is not usually how players are motivated. And I wouldn't be either since after being cut I can get another payday. So good question but idk.

 

[Wisconsinram]

Merlin, I guess in my head I was thinking of a scenario where he gets "top back-up" money in lieu of leaving. Maybe he views himself as a starter somewhere else, I have no idea. But I could see a scenario where we have to cut him and he's going to get f-d and "find out" the league doesn't see him as a starter. Which is why I wonder if there is room for a discussion.

 

[Allen2McVay]

With "legal tampering" beginning this week, Rams will know what Dotson's price on the open market is within a certain amount of certitude. Gonna be interesting at the combine.

The League Year starts on March 13th.

The 48-hour negotiating window doesn't begin until March 11th.

There are almost certainly discussions going-on but that's not supposed to be the case.

 

[dieterbrock]

Excuse my ignorance as I truly don't know, but is there a reason why Noteboom and Rams couldn't restructure his contract in a way that would provide him his current value

No. Not really.
If he sticks around he gets paid 15 million.
The question is what is fair market value?

 

[WestCoastRam]

The League Year starts on March 13th.

The 48-hour negotiating window doesn't begin until March 11th.

There are almost certainly discussions going-on but that's not supposed to be the case.

It's well established that tampering begins in earnest at the combine. Everyone does it. No one gets caught. Teams know what deals for the top people start to look like.

 

[dieterbrock]

I don't have a problem with a restructure that puts his pay at a backup level over time.

They cant re-structure his deal, he's in the last year of it and already has 2 void years in '25 and '26
Only option is an extension or a release/brand new contract.

 

[Allen2McVay]

It's well established that tampering begins in earnest at the combine. Everyone does it. No one gets caught. Teams know what deals for the top people start to look like.

Yes it happens but you referred to it as "legal tampering" ... and, it's not legal at all.

The 48-hour negotiation window was essentially an acknowledgement that negotiations happen long before the official start of the League Year. It was a bad look for the NFL. The League Year would start at 3 PM, and huge contract agreements were announced at 3:01 PM.

Teams may have a good sense of a player's market but not certainty.

 

[WestCoastRam]

Yes it happens but you referred to it as "legal tampering" ... and, it's not legal at all.

The 48-hour negotiation window was essentially an acknowledgement that negotiations happen long before the official start of the League Year. It was a bad look for the NFL. The League Year would start at 3 PM, and huge contract agreements were announced at 3:01 PM.

Teams may have a good sense of a players' market but not certainty.

Can I use the semantics argument again?

 

[PARAM]

They cant re-structure his deal, he's in the last year of it and already has 2 void years in '25 and '26
Only option is an extension or a release/brand new contract.

I'll bet there's a way to convert his salary into bonus, extend him through 2026 and lower his cap hit considerably. Guarantee his remaining 2024 salary and he doesn't lose a dime. Now if they could convert his roster bonus into a signing bonus, they could do even better.

 

[OldSchool]

I'll bet there's a way to convert his salary into bonus, extend him through 2026 and lower his cap hit considerably. Guarantee his remaining 2024 salary and he doesn't lose a dime. Now if they could convert his roster bonus into a signing bonus, they could do even better.

That's an extension.

 

[Allen2McVay]

Can I use the semantics argument again?

You can do whatever you want man. It's all good.

Just thought using the word "legal" could be miss-leading and confusing for some posters.

 

[PARAM]

That's an extension.

Yeah, I guess I gave that away when I said "extend him".

What's wrong with having a guy around a couple of more years who knows the system and can play 4 positions on the OL? The biggest bitch most fans have is his cap hit. 10% (or less) of NFL teams play the same 5 guys all season long.

 

[WestCoastRam]

You can do whatever you want man. It's all good.

Just thought using the word "legal" could be miss-leading and confusing for some posters.

But that's what the quotations marks are for!! I'm a sucker for context clues.

 

[OldSchool]

Yeah, I guess I gave that away when I said "extend him".

What's wrong with having a guy around a couple of more years who knows the system and can play 4 positions on the OL? The biggest bitch most fans have is his cap hit. 10% (or less) of NFL teams play the same 5 guys all season long.

Nothing at all

But most people are tired of him being injured too much which he is and feel that the last year of his contract is more than they want to pay him with the clubs money so they want to cut him. Dieter just keeps trying to show that it really isn't that beneficial to do that. It's been an entertaining couple of pages to read haha

 

[Allen2McVay]

But that's what the quotations marks are for!! I'm a sucker for context clues.

 

[PhillyRam]

If you cut him as a post June 1, you are also committing to pay him 5 mill of roster bonus which goes against the '24 cap

Sure, still a hit involved, just pushing more to next yr.

 

[PARAM]

Nothing at all

But most people are tired of him being injured too much which he is and feel that the last year of his contract is more than they want to pay him with the clubs money so they want to cut him. Dieter just keeps trying to show that it really isn't that beneficial to do that. It's been an entertaining couple of pages to read haha

There are positives and negatives to both outcomes. Cut him and they save 5 million dollars. But they're also blowing 15 mil in dead money. So, in effect, they're paying him 20 to play....or be ready to play....or 15 mil to go play for somebody else. To me, that doesn't make good sense. 4 positions, better play than he's ever given credit for....or let him go. My point was it doesn't have to be one or the other. They can extend him 1 year and lessen the cap hit for 2024 and the dead money if they decide to cut ties next year would probably be the same.

 

[PhillyRam]

There are positives and negatives to both outcomes. Cut him and they save 5 million dollars. But they're also blowing 15 mil in dead money. So, in effect, they're paying him 20 to play....or be ready to play....or 15 mil to go play for somebody else. To me, that doesn't make good sense. 4 positions, better play than he's ever given credit for....or let him go. My point was it doesn't have to be one or the other. They can extend him 1 year and lessen the cap hit for 2024 and the dead money if they decide to cut ties next year would probably be the same.

I think for an "all in year", he is a great asset to have... Kind of like in an emergency you break the glass and insert a high level back up into the game. Hopefully you only need him for a few games until he gets too injured to play...because he always seems to get injured to some degree and often still plays...just not for long.

 

[dieterbrock]

They can extend him 1 year and lessen the cap hit for 2024 and the dead money if they decide to cut ties next year would probably be the same.

There's another 10 mill in dead cap coming in '25 if they keep him. Essentially, keeping him for this season "costs" 30 mill

 

[dang]

I think for an "all in year", he is a great asset to have... Kind of like in an emergency you break the glass and insert a high level back up into the game. Hopefully you only need him for a few games until he gets too injured to play...because he always seems to get injured to some degree and often still plays...just not for long.

At a minimum Note will have received $43m from the Rams thru the 2024 season. All while being a very serviceable but oft injured backup. The Rams paid him starter $$ with his 2nd contract. I doubt there is any starter $$ out there for his next contract mostly due to his injury history. That said I like him as a versatile backup. So what is the best option in retaining him for 3 more years but any additional $$ being no more than 2x the vet minimum?