throwback week



Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 90
  1. #31
    rampete Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    ...The Rams are not bound by the contract (And, yes, I'm aware that some people think that this is unfair, but that's how the league works....
    yes, this is how the league works...so why harp on the fact that bruce is balking at the offer of the rams FO...?

    why couldn't they offer bruce a $7 mil deal the first year plus a base veterans salary of 900k for the remaining two years, especially considering the fact that the rams are not in financial straits...yes, the rams are approx. $8 mil. under the cap...

    my guess is that zyggie doesn't see bruce playing for the rams next season and beyond...

    why must bruce bow to the club as if it is imperative on a moral level that he display a certain loyalty by agreeing to a one year $5 mil. deal, essentially...

    yes, bruce knows this is a business...this is how the league works...


  2. #32
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    Honestly, I fault both parties.

    I believe Bruce and his agent need to realize that while the Rams can afford to pay him the $8.1 million or whatever it is, it's going to hinder how competitive they can be, which is their ultimate goal. He can't expect to get every cent of that contract.

    On the flip side though, I'm still not convinced that a three-year $9 million deal with $5 million in the first year is a great offer. Bruce is due $8.1 million this year, and he's upset that he's losing $3.1 million with the Rams' contract offer. I just don't understand how the organization can't convert more of that difference into bonus spread out over the length of the deal, maybe even another roster bonus next year.

    I dunno, I think Bruce's expectations are unrealistic, but so are the Rams'. Both have ground they can give up, especially if a CBA gets done and the cap expands to $110 million or so.
    I have to agree with Nick. They both should give up a little ground to get this deal done.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  3. #33
    theodus69 Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    If he wants the league minimum for the next couple of years let him! No ne is gonna pay him close to the Rams offered. Not a smart move!

  4. #34
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,639
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by theodus69
    If he wants the league minimum for the next couple of years let him! No ne is gonna pay him close to the Rams offered. Not a smart move!
    As soon as he and his agent realize that, we'll get him back hopefully!!


    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  5. #35
    bigredman Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    Reportedly, he was offered a deal that would have paid him $5 million this year. How is that not a reasonable offer for Bruce at this stage of his career?
    I agree totally with AR. How can anyone (including Nick) say this wasn't a fair deal? Bruce is 32 years old, turning 33 during next season. He's already lost a step, and doesn't have any break away speed anymore. Bruce has one, maybe two years of semi-productive NFL level ability as a possession style receiver left, and his current ability make him the second or third receiver on the look down chart for the Rams QB. Five million was more than fair.

  6. #36
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,868
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman
    I agree totally with AR. How can anyone (including Nick) say this wasn't a fair deal? Bruce is 32 years old, turning 33 during next season. He's already lost a step, and doesn't have any break away speed anymore. Bruce has one, maybe two years of semi-productive NFL level ability as a possession style receiver left, and his current ability make him the second or third receiver on the look down chart for the Rams QB. Five million was more than fair.
    Because I completely disagree with your assessment of Bruce's skills. Look at his performances coming back after the injury and the bye week. Obviously he's still effective, and while the injury is concerning, it's not so much so to warrant that low ball offer. Your post sounds like what we were all saying about Bryce Fisher and Grant Wistrom after they left to try and make ourselves feel better about it. Five million in the first year is fine, but averaging two per year for the rest of the contract is a joke.

  7. #37
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,639
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Nick, what do you suggest we do in order to get Bruce back? What contract deal should we make exactly?


    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  8. #38
    bigredman Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    Your post sounds like what we were all saying about Bryce Fisher and Grant Wistrom after they left to try and make ourselves feel better about it. Five million in the first year is fine, but averaging two per year for the rest of the contract is a joke.
    Not at all Nick (and you know I love ya bud), but I think your heart is getting in the way of your head here. Realistically, Bruce has only one, maybe two years left in him that can be considered some what productive. Take a look at it this way, if it were some other 32 year old receiver with Bruce's "current" skills on another team, would you be saying the same thing? As for the second year and beyond, those things can always be corrected (if warranted), but if I were the Rams, I wouldn't of committed more than they offered and be held liable for under a future cap.

  9. #39
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,223
    Rep Power
    24

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    I can't believe people think Bruce is "done" as a receiver. He's not a number one anymore, but he's still a pretty good number two. The problem with Bruce isn't his skill level, it's his age and injury history -- he's a risky investment. He's banking on the fact that there aren't a lot of good receivers out there (he's right) and that he'll get a contract offer. I don't blame him for this one bit.

    But...I don't blame the FO either. Solid cap decision, especially if you are intent on re-signing Curtis and MacDonald. You've downgraded a little at WR, but you've given yourself a ton new cap room to remake the team...something that needed to happen, especially with the new staff. More of the same wasn't going to work.

    The challenge, now, is to spend the money wisely.

  10. #40
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,868
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by Varg6
    Nick, what do you suggest we do in order to get Bruce back? What contract deal should we make exactly?
    Possibly more guaranteed money in the first year and a higher payout in the final two. People keep saying Bruce turned down $5 million for 2006, and they make it sound like a one year deal, ignoring the $2 million per year in the final two. You can't just look at one year and say the deal was fair. You have to look at the WHOLE deal, and the whole deal isn't a good one. I don't see why the Rams couldn't give Bruce a $6-7 million signing/roster bonus this year combined with a $750k vet minimum salary, so he's not taking a big pay cut. The bonus gets divided into third for the cap, so that's a significant reduction from the $10 million cap count but he's still getting some of that cash. Then you can give him a moderate salary in the final two years, maybe make it a three-year $12 million contract without a significant paycut.


    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman
    Not at all Nick (and you know I love ya bud), but I think your heart is getting in the way of your head here. Realistically, Bruce has only one, maybe two years left in him that can be considered some what productive. Take a look at it this way, if it were some other 32 year old receiver with Bruce's "current" skills on another team, would you be saying the same thing? As for the second year and beyond, those things can always be corrected (if warranted), but if I were the Rams, I wouldn't of committed more than they offered and be held liable for under a future cap.
    Heart getting in the way of my head? Not really. Again, I disagree that Bruce only has a year or two. I could see him playing for three or four, because of how he chooses not to take big hits and tends to slide or drop, as most Rams receivers have done.

    You and I just disagree about where we think Bruce is right now, so obviously we're not going to agree on what his compensation would be. I agree that if I viewed him as you do, then I'd be siding with you on what he should get. But I don't view him as a possession receiver who has lost a step with no break away speed, and I think his production after returning from injury shows that.

    Were you making these same claims when Bruce was racking up four games with 65+ yards receiving, and three games in which he had a catch of 30 or more yards in the second half of 2005? When a guy can still get long receptions like that, it tells me he can still stretch the field. Bruce didn't even have a game with a reception longer than 30 prior to injury, and after he had three.

    I'm not saying there aren't concerns about the injury, but to say he's a possession receiver who has no break away speed? I couldn't disagree more, and I point to his own performances to back it up.

  11. #41
    bigredman Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Point well taken Nick. I didn't mean the "heart getting in the way of the head" to be a crack of any kind. Like I said, I love ya bud, because your positions are mostly well thought out. Even though we disagree here, I respect where you are coming from.

  12. #42
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,868
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    And I your position as well. Either way, I think both of us can agree that if a new contract wasn't in the books for Bruce, then the front office made the right devision. The Rams simply could not carry that cap cost into 2006.

  13. #43
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    Because I completely disagree with your assessment of Bruce's skills. Look at his performances coming back after the injury and the bye week. Obviously he's still effective, and while the injury is concerning, it's not so much so to warrant that low ball offer.
    Exactly. Why do people think his skills have just dropped off to the bottom of the barrel. His numbers from 2004 were:

    89 1,292 14.5 6

    Last year that turf toe really hurt him, but he still has the skills.

    Too many fans are selling him short.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

  14. #44
    bigredman Guest

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Exactly. Why do people think his skills have just dropped off to the bottom of the barrel.
    No one is claiming Bruce's skills have dropped off to the bottom of the barrel. He's still a good receiver. Hell, I practically have a shrine to Bruce in my den. It's about money, the cap, and the other needs of the team.

  15. #45
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,812
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: As it sinks in, I'm more and more angry at Bruce (and his agent)

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman
    No one is claiming Bruce's skills have dropped off to the bottom of the barrel. He's still a good receiver. Hell, I practically have a shrine to Bruce in my den. It's about money, the cap, and the other needs of the team.
    Well why expect him to take a lowball 3 year 9 mil contract if he is still a good receiver? The Rams could do a bit better than that for him.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kudos to Jared Cook for saying what needed to be said about being outplayed and outcoached vs the Cards.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •