SI: Report: Rams want to restructure Sam Bradford's contract

[RamFan503]

and how can you possibly know that?

Yeah - I agree. I don't think any of us know that and I wouldn't be surprised if the idea is to find a way that he can either meet or exceed the amount he is due if they can do it through incentives. But that is still just a guess.

 

[Rmfnlt]

I don't think any GM is that stupid.

Steve Keim?

 

[FRO]

and how can you possibly know that?

I doubt the Rams want to spread what they owe Bradford out over years. They also don't want to pay him the full amount he is owed next year. I don't have info. It's just a guess.

 

[ram007]

Its 13 million and if they cut him who is going to pay him that?
The Rams have leverage, otherwise there wouldnt be any negotiation.

If I am Bradord: why accept a pay cut without any extension? If there is an extension, I win.
If I get cut, nah, not going to happen since my head coach has no decent FA option to cut me. When does that flight to Bahamas leave again?

For the record, I want Bradford to be starting QB next season. He is our best shot for a winning season.

 

[CoachO]

I think people are confusing restructuring and taking a pay cut. Ideally they will restructure so that the cap # is much less. But, I think they will re-do the contract in a way that gives him incentives to not only win the starting job but to make as much as he is today. It just will be in a different form that gives the team flexibility. You know, games played, TD's, etc. They aren't going to hand him another $16M but I would bet they'll give him every possible incentive to earn that much. And FWIW, if he earns it we will all be very happy fans.

Now if Sam says absolutely not that's another discussion. But I can't see why he wouldn't. He's a good kid and has a lot to prove.

I agree with most of what you said. But the part you are leaving out, is with an incentive laden contract, the cap hit rolls over to the next year on any $$$ earned via those incentives.

They will find a way to restructure, which will include EXTENDING him, with a "no risk" extension. Meaning they will, include roster bonuses for 2016, which are only paid, (and counted against the cap) if he is healthy. But to make it workable from both sides, there will have to be some sort of extension.

Restructuring contracts will NEVER include taking a pay cut. It's all creative accounting, but at the end of the day, if Bradford is on the field, he gets paid. And IF he stays on the field thru 2015, why wouldn't they want him back in 2016 and beyond?

All to often, it seems fans "negotiate" from their own emotional POV, without really putting themselves in the position of either the organization or the player. There isn't an agent, player or team exec who would allow themselves to have a gun put to their head, and leave themselves vulnerable in a situation like this.

To somehow think that the Rams are going to let him walk, cut him outright, or force him into taking a pay cut, without another viable option as good as Bradford would be even more foolish than bringing him back, regardless of what the fans have to say. LOL

For Bradford, he has plenty of reason to want to restructure, if he gets additional year(s) added to the deal. Again, it will be in the form of a roster bonus for 2016, and incentives for 2015. The bottom line, IMO, the Rams want him to be "the guy", but will be protected in the event he is injured again. But, if he manages to stay on the field, they will pay him his $$$. Which, in the long run, will be more than a reasonable number given the status of starting QB salaries at this point.

For those who seem to think that the $12.5M is unreasonable, its not even in the top 10 in the league for a starter. Again, if he is able to stay on the field, he is worth every penny of that.

 

[RamFan503]

For Bradford, he has plenty of reason to want to restructure, if he gets additional year(s) added to the deal. Again, it will be in the form of a roster bonus for 2016, and incentives for 2015. The bottom line, IMO, the Rams want him to be "the guy", but will be protected in the event he is injured again. But, if he manages to stay on the field, they will pay him his $$$. Which, in the long run, will be more than a reasonable number given the status of starting QB salaries at this point.

For those who seem to think that the $12.5M is unreasonable, its not even in the top 10 in the league for a starter. Again, if he is able to stay on the field, he is worth every penny of that.

This^^^

 

[dieterbrock]

If I am Bradord: why accept a pay cut without any extension? If there is an extension, I win.
If I get cut, nah, not going to happen since my head coach has no decent FA option to cut me. When does that flight to Bahamas leave again?

For the record, I want Bradford to be starting QB next season. He is our best shot for a winning season.

Not sure what you mean.
To me, it's quite simple. The Rams are on the hook for 13 mill next season. (+3.5 in dead money, but thats spent either way)
There's no way they're paying him that.
So begins the conversation of leverage.
Sam has leverage because the talent pool for which they draw from is weak
The Rams have leverage because his 13 mill is not guaranteed
So the two side will negotiate, and IMO the only way to do that is buy extending his deal, (the restructure) converting the 13 mill in to guaranteed money spread out over how many years they add
So if Sam and his team feel that they can do better on an open market, they can refuse to restructure and likely be outright released, which of course the Rams can do after pre-season if they wish
So again, the point here is that the thinking that Sam has all the leverage IMO is absolutely false

 

[drasconis]

The Rams have little to no leverage. They don't have a QB, the QB draft class is a joke, and there are plenty of QB desperate teams out there. The Rams have no other option. You think Fisher is going to risk his job(his seat will be very warm if he doesn't get past .500 again) with a rookie QB? I would be willing to bet that some team like Buffalo or Houston, that has all the parts there but no QB, would be willing to take that chance and sign him for that much. That's how stupid teams get.

Heres the trouble with that - No team is going to sign him for big bucks until they can test him physically. He is still rehabbing at this point and there are rumors that he won't be ready to go by the first preseason game or later. If you are Buf or Houston are you going to give 13mil to a QB you can't see throw the ball? That is where SB loses his leverage, no team is going to spend big bucks on a QB they aren't sure will be able to go and won't know about until it is too late to go another way.

Do I think that some team would sign him as a competition/back up plan QB in case their rookie doesn't work out yes....but you do not spend 13 mil on that, no one does.

and if the Rams cut him late,t hen he is looking at teams with littel salary room and a late start on any playbook.

The way I see it neither side has great leverage right now...

 

[CoachO]

I doubt the Rams want to spread what they owe Bradford out over years. They also don't want to pay him the full amount he is owed next year. I don't have info. It's just a guess.

I disagree with you completely.

I think they want to protect themselves in the event he cannot stay on the field. But that notwithstanding, IMO, they will have ZERO problem with paying him every penny of that contract IF he is on the field. Regardless of what we as fans may think, $12.5M is not out of line for a QB in the 6th year of his career.

As the post CBA contracts are now being up for restructuring, we are seeing those numbers be WAY higher than that figure. This deal is going to be more about protecting themselves, then it is about the $$$. Simple as this. IF he plays, he gets paid. If he doesn't he won't.

And if he plays, what would be the reason not to bring him back in 2016? Again, giving them wiggle room with roster bonuses, and such.

 

[Irish]

For those who seem to think that the $12.5M is unreasonable, its not even in the top 10 in the league for a starter. Again, if he is able to stay on the field, he is worth every penny of that.

No, its not, but to your point, the list of guys making less than Bradford in 2015 includes Alex Smith, Colin Kaepernick, Jay Cutler, Joe Flacco, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, Tom Brady, and Carson Palmer, and that doesn't include the first contract guys like Wilson, Bortles, and Carr.

I would take almost any of those guys for 12.5M over Bradford in 2015, wouldn't you?

 

[bwdenverram]

I agree with most of what you said. But the part you are leaving out, is with an incentive laden contract, the cap hit rolls over to the next year on any $$$ earned via those incentives.

They will find a way to restructure, which will include EXTENDING him, with a "no risk" extension. Meaning they will, include roster bonuses for 2016, which are only paid, (and counted against the cap) if he is healthy. But to make it workable from both sides, there will have to be some sort of extension.

Restructuring contracts will NEVER include taking a pay cut. It's all creative accounting, but at the end of the day, if Bradford is on the field, he gets paid. And IF he stays on the field thru 2015, why wouldn't they want him back in 2016 and beyond?

All to often, it seems fans "negotiate" from their own emotional POV, without really putting themselves in the position of either the organization or the player. There isn't an agent, player or team exec who would allow themselves to have a gun put to their head, and leave themselves vulnerable in a situation like this.

To somehow think that the Rams are going to let him walk, cut him outright, or force him into taking a pay cut, without another viable option as good as Bradford would be even more foolish than bringing him back, regardless of what the fans have to say. LOL

For Bradford, he has plenty of reason to want to restructure, if he gets additional year(s) added to the deal. Again, it will be in the form of a roster bonus for 2016, and incentives for 2015. The bottom line, IMO, the Rams want him to be "the guy", but will be protected in the event he is injured again. But, if he manages to stay on the field, they will pay him his $$$. Which, in the long run, will be more than a reasonable number given the status of starting QB salaries at this point.

For those who seem to think that the $12.5M is unreasonable, its not even in the top 10 in the league for a starter. Again, if he is able to stay on the field, he is worth every penny of that.

Well said Coach and thanks for clarifying. By no means am I a GM or CAP expert. I trust in Demoff and team. They know what's best and I expect a deal that works for both parties to be done. No way do I think they let him walk. I don't get to worked up either way. Everything is going to happen one way or the other and I certainly don't have any control over it

Let's hope Sam comes back 100% and we're all laughing about it in the playoffs next season.

 

[RamFan503]

There's no way they're paying him that.

Probably the only thing I disagree with in your post. I think they would love to pay him that much if it meant he stayed healthy and would be here next year (or longer) as well.

 

[CoachO]

No, its not, but to your point, the list of guys making less than Bradford in 2015 includes Alex Smith, Colin Kaepernick, Jay Cutler, Joe Flacco, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, Tom Brady, and Carson Palmer, and that doesn't include the first contract guys like Wilson, Bortles, and Carr.

I would take almost any of those guys for 12.5M over Bradford in 2015, wouldn't you?

that has nothing to do with this discussion. This is about what the Rams are going to do to ensure they are protected, and that Bradford is the QB as long as he stays healthy.

Talk to me when Wilson signs his new deal, when Luck is up for his extension. The fact is simple. At $12.5M, a healthy Bradford is a good value compared to the rest of the league. If he isn't healthy, he won't get paid.

 

[dieterbrock]

Probably the only thing I disagree with in your post. I think they would love to pay him that much if it meant he stayed healthy and would be here next year (or longer) as well.

If it were only that easy, right? I'm not a huge Bradford fan but if by paying him his full 13 mill somehow guaranteed he'd stay healthy for all 16 it would be the bargain of the century

 

[dieterbrock]

. Regardless of what we as fans may think, $12.5M is not out of line for a QB in the 6th year of his career.
.

Well, that's a little bit of apples and oranges. His salary is 13mill and his prorated signing bonus is 3.5 mill for a total comp of 16.5 mill. Being the pro-rated money is dead either way, we leave it out but it certainly is part of his comp. I'm thinking 16.5 is quite high

 

[Mojo Ram]

I say they dont because they have no viable fall back option and if hes better then everybody in draft and free agency why wouldmthey let him get away with 1 year left on his deal? As farr as money yes but as farr as needing a qb he has all the leverage which is why i think if it came to it they would pay him his salary tomkeep him

The Rams have leverage because of the other 31 teams out there that have no reason to want or pay Bradford who will still be rehabbing his twice baked knee in March when FA opens. Now if we were talking about Aaron Rodgers here, and him rehabbing a twice baked knee then yeah...he would still have good value on the open market.


That Bleacher report is ignorant. Rams have more leverage here then Sam does. Wait and see. If Sam's agent comes to Rams' negotiations and decides to pin his hopes on "well who else are you going to get to play QB?"... I'm showing him Sam's career numbers, his extensive medical log, live video of Sam in rehab and telling him to go pound sand on the open market.

The Rams will demand a fair paycut with extension and Sam will take it because he won't get squat anywhere else.

 

[RamFan503]

No, its not, but to your point, the list of guys making less than Bradford in 2015 includes Alex Smith, Colin Kaepernick, Jay Cutler, Joe Flacco, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, Tom Brady, and Carson Palmer, and that doesn't include the first contract guys like Wilson, Bortles, and Carr.

I would take almost any of those guys for 12.5M over Bradford in 2015, wouldn't you?

From what I am seeing every one of the QBs you listed has the likelihood of making more than Bradford in 2015 and Wilson likely will as well. Bortles and Carr are still on their rookie contracts so that is a moot point.

 

[RamFan503]

Well, that's a little bit of apples and oranges. His salary is 13mill and his prorated signing bonus is 3.5 mill for a total comp of 16.5 mill. Being the pro-rated money is dead either way, we leave it out but it certainly is part of his comp. I'm thinking 16.5 is quite high

Except that it is the $12.985 they will be spending to keep him or would be available to sign someone else by cutting him. So yeah - 16.5 is on the high side for his level of achievements but the cost of replacing him is likely higher.

 

[CoachO]

Well, that's a little bit of apples and oranges. His salary is 13mill and his prorated signing bonus is 3.5 mill for a total comp of 16.5 mill. Being the pro-rated money is dead either way, we leave it out but it certainly is part of his comp. I'm thinking 16.5 is quite high

You cannot count the prorated $$$ when talking about him restructuring his deal for the upcoming year. His salary due is $12,985,000 for 2015. And again, I will say that IMO, that isn't out of line. His comp has nothing to do with the prorated number for 2015. He has already been paid that $$. its NOT part of this years compensation. Its part of the cap number, nothing more.

They will restructure it to a lower base, with incentives, he will make every dime of that number if he is on the field. And by incentives, I am not talking about "performance" based, (TDs, Yards, comp %). They will all be tied to playing time...... % of offensive snaps taken, games played, etc.

IMO, they will make it very "player friendly" in terms of reaching the number. Assuming he IS ON THE FIELD.