Tru has more INTs as a Ram than any CB they've drafted since 1997. He limited opposing QBs to a 67.1 passer rating when throwing in his direction from 2012-2015.
He's already signed and played through a team friendly deal. It's not his fault the Rams couldn't take advantage.
The rookie wage scale was and continues to be disproportionate. Jenkins and Johnson are only now getting the piece of the pie they should've been getting all along.
I've never heard of anyone thinking that the current rookie wage scale was unfair. I thought rookies making more than established veterans with years of proven play was unfair, a tragedy, and bad for business. It was unsustainable.
Plus, every contract is a gamble for the team but rookie contacts are a bigger gamble. Their isn't a reliable history to show the team how the rookie will perform. The player only has to play well enough to not get fired. The team needs the player performing up to or beyond the level of the contract. The team can waste money by paying a player that isn't performing. The player isn't really wasting anything or losing in any fashion. They get paid based on a guess of how they will perform.
What is unfair is a rookie with 0 games played against NFL talent getting paid more than players who have put in solid years. Most rookies don't outperform the rookie contact. Just like every other job in the world, if the employer isn't sure you can do the job, takes a risk in hiring you, spends their own money and time to train you to do what they want, and waits patiently months or years for you to be successful, them you will make less money than a proven performer. That's what a rookie contact is, an agreement to pay a player while they train test their performance. Those types of agreements will always pay less than a proven expert with several years of success in the industry, regardless of where you work or what industry you're in.
