Clayton says Bulger deal unlikely before camp

[RamWraith]

He says that Condon has about 12 picks to get signed and the Rams have to sign their top two and time has just run out. He does not seem to view it as a major problem, says there is enough good will that Bulger should report and the contract should be worked out.

[z.nrd]

I've read about what Clayton said a couple of times now, here and there. It's reassuring.

But the Clayton thing is a couple of days old. Balzer, in comparison, is now saying the Rams might just go ahead and keep him for 2 years with a combo of his present contract (4 million) and then a franchise year (12 million).

I hope Clayton is right and not Balzer.

We'll see.

If anyone wants to see a description of the Balzer view (taken from radio 1380), PM me and I'll forward a link. Maybe someone can cut and paste it. For whatever strange reason, I can't.

My bet is, there will be a lot of conflicting reports as long as this issue remains unresolved.

[Nick]

This isn't exactly surprising, given the points Clayton makes about rookies needing to be signed first. That being said, I don't expect Bulger to hold out, and as long as a deal gets done, I don't care when it happens. Let's not forget that the more recent Rams contract extension situations - Little and Tinoisamoa - weren't signed until October/November of their final years.

[jkramsfan]

I don't see a problem getting this done either,it is important to get those rookies signed and into camp.

[live4ramin]

ESPN (radio) keeps coming back and rehashing this story like it's a big deal now. It must be slow.

[z.nrd]

This isn't exactly surprising, given the points Clayton makes about rookies needing to be signed first. That being said, I don't expect Bulger to hold out, and as long as a deal gets done, I don't care when it happens. Let's not forget that the more recent Rams contract extension situations - Little and Tinoisamoa - weren't signed until October/November of their final years.

Right or not, Balzer's point is different from that.

It has nothing to do with holdouts, or how long it will take.

It has to do with the possibility that the Rams *won't* extend Bulger. As in, won't WANT to extend him. That they might be content to keep him for 2007 under contract, and then tag him in 2008. The thinking apparently being that doing that would cost about 16 million across two years, as opposed to paying out much more than that in guaranteed money if they extend him.

Again, there's a (fan produced) transcript of this if anyone wants it. Just let me know cause I can't paste it here, for whatever reason.

I don;t know who's right but Balzer is *not* saying what Clayton was saying...they are completely different reads on the situation.

[Nick]

I don;t know who's right but Balzer is *not* saying what Clayton was saying...they are completely different reads on the situation.

...right, but I never commented on what Howard said. I was responding to RW's original post about Clayton's report. My point was that it shouldn't be surprising that an extension before camp is unlikely given Clayton's comments about Condon's involvement in rookie deals.

[Rambos]

NFLN said they are going to meet face to face Tuesday, so something might get done sooner...

[ramsbruce]

Streaming audio about Bulger contract talk from ESPN radio. Click on the Bernie & Randy Show from Thursday July 19th. It starts around the 24 min mark if people want to listen themselves.

http://1380espn.com/01_07/audio_vault.htm

Balzer begins by saying until recently he thought there would be no problem with a Bulger contract. No ptoblem, they would get it done sometime in training camp. Both sides would at some point see eye to eye---won't be an issue.

Now, he says, he's kind of amending that. Now, it's at best 50/50 whether MB gets a new contract this year. Once it gets to the regular season there probably won't be negotiations. If there are negotiations in the regular season it will go down to the wire.

What's fueling this, from the Rams standpoint, is their history with Kurt Warner, and some other factors. The Rams are perfectly happy paying him 4 million this year, and then if he stays healthy and has another great year, they'll talk. If the Rams don't get a new deal then they'll just franchise him.

Bernie: do you want to franchise Bulger when someone like Jackson will be coming up soon?

Back to Howard: But SJ isn't coming up after the 2007 season. So the Rams are thinking, why give a guy 35 million in guaranteed money when you can get him for 2 years at 16 million. Or give him the money next year if there's another excellent year.

He says, he's getting a sense that this might be the way this goes.

Bernie (who can't help himself) brings up the fans (as over-reacting). He is surprised fans see this as some type of crisis that's developing. It's not a crisis; it;s a contract negotiation and the Rams control his rights. (Thanks, Bernie, no one realized any of that.)

Balzer thinks the panic atmosphere comes from the thought that Bulger might hold out. Howard doesn't think he will---Howard says he thinks Bulger will want to go in there and show em.

[prof22693]

I don't think we should be worrying, he'll do even better next year and prove his worth to the organization. He's not leaving our team, doesn't want to. I think we can see 30 TDs from him this year, remind me about this quote at the end of next season.

[z.nrd]

I don't think we should be worrying, he'll do even better next year and prove his worth to the organization. He's not leaving our team, doesn't want to. I think we can see 30 TDs from him this year, remind me about this quote at the end of next season.

It would be far better to extend him, now.

I hope Balzer's version is wrong.




...

[TekeRam]

Yes, it's better to sign him now as he'll just get more expensive. However, if somehow they think they can replace him after next year(assuming the franchise tag), then this could be their idea all along. However I think they are trying to sign him and he;ll get a deal sooner or later.

[z.nrd]

However, if somehow they think they can replace him after next year(assuming the franchise tag), then this could be their idea all along.

Well, that's the issue, isn't it. If any time a team wanted it could replace one top 6 or 7 qb with another, then, we wouldn't have the NFL we have now, which is the one where most teams keep tryng to find or develop a decent qb, let alone a top 6 one.

*IF* the Rams think they can move on without Bulger, I hope the rest of the NFC West feels the same way about their qbs. Hasselbeck in a contract year? Trade him. Smith and Leinhart finally emerge after struggling early in their careers? Dump em, sign someone else.........

[orbitram]

from what i here Buger will be signed by Friday, its all good.

[r8rh8rmike]

from what i here Buger will be signed by Friday, its all good.

Is it all good? I hope your source is right.