Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 76 to 90 of 90
  1. #76
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,593
    Rep Power
    145

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

    Why is there a fault to cause "blame" for anything? What has either party done wrong? The Rams are trying to field the most competitive team possible under the restraints of the current salary cap. Bruce is trying to maximize his earnings before he retires. Neither of these are wrong, they may just not be able to co-exist. If not, then so be it.

    We've allowed emotion to get the better of us. If any other 33-year-old receiver was offered a 3-year $9 mil offer to be our #3, maybe #2 receiver, I believe we could objectively call that a fair offer. However, we're not seeing a 33-year-old receiver, we're seeing Bruce.

    The emotional part is understandable, but unnecessary in a business environment like Rams Park. Curtis will provide at least the results of Bruce for half the money and for a longer time. It only makes sense to go with Curtis in this situation. As such, Bruce has to accept his status as the #3 receiver. If he were to accept the Rams offer, he would be a very well paid #3.

    Of course, there is the option of leaving town. He certainly has the right to. There are plenty of teams that would pay him to be their #2 or #1, but it would be rather foolish for the Rams to do so.

    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  2. #77
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,632
    Rep Power
    52

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Pang
    It's simple.

    If the Rams were intent on not playing fair in these negotiations on the basis that they didn't want him back (after all, why the hell else would you do it?) why on earth would they tender an offer at all?

    Save yourself the effort just cut him.

    Again, $5 mil, in absolute terms is not anywhere near being "lowball". In relative terms it's more than fair.
    If they didn't tender him an offer at all, think of how bad the Rams look. It's not worth it for the Rams to take that kind of heat. And why not tender him a low offer to see if he takes it, but years 2 and 3 of the contract are insulting to someone of the calibur of Bruce.

    You keep focusing on the 5 mil. This is not a 1 year contract. It's a three year 9 mil contract, so he gets 5 mil in the first year, but then he only gets 2 mil in the next 2. I just don't think that 2 mil for years 2 and 3 is fair.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  3. #78
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,632
    Rep Power
    52

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    It only makes sense to go with Curtis in this situation. As such, Bruce has to accept his status as the #3 receiver. If he were to accept the Rams offer, he would be a very well paid #3.
    Kevin Curtis has one decent year and he's just given the #2 slot with no competition from Bruce if he is here? I don't think so unless Bruce gives it up.

    In the overall scheme of the NFL Bruce is a #2. Sure there are a couple teams where he could be the #3, he would also be the #1 on a few teams, but overall he is a #2.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  4. #79
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,632
    Rep Power
    52

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    You forgot one:

    2005 35 Catches 525 Yards 3 TDs

    That was in 11 games (10 full games). Even if you take the per game average (based on the lower number, 10 games) and project it to a 16 game season, the totals for 2005 would still only be:

    56 Catches 840 Yards 5 TDs

    That's well below his average level of production and, more importantly, its nearly identical to the production of Kevin Curtis, who is several years younger than Bruce:

    2005 Curtis
    16 games (9 starts)
    60 Catches 801 Yards 6 TDs

    Did you forget that in 6 games that Bruce played, Bulger didn't. So in over half the games Bruce played, he played with backups and a rookie at times. When Curtis started that 5 game stretch that Bruce was out Curtis had Bulger in 3 of the 5 games. The difference between Bulger and the backups really affects the stats.

    Bruce was still hurt trying to come off of the injury so of course his production would go down, everyone could see he wasn't 100% because of the turf toe.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  5. #80
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,593
    Rep Power
    145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Kevin Curtis has one decent year and he's just given the #2 slot with no competition from Bruce if he is here? I don't think so unless Bruce gives it up.

    In the overall scheme of the NFL Bruce is a #2. Sure there are a couple teams where he could be the #3, he would also be the #1 on a few teams, but overall he is a #2.
    Yea, that's kind of the way it works. The younger guy eventually supplants the older guy.

    And we agree, on average teams Bruce would be the #2. And there are a couple of teams where he could be the #3......one of them being the Rams.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  6. #81
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,632
    Rep Power
    52

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

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    Yea, that's kind of the way it works. The younger guy eventually supplants the older guy.

    And we agree, on average teams Bruce would be the #2. And there are a couple of teams where he could be the #3......one of them being the Rams.
    Curtis hasn't done enough to just be given the #2 spot, if he can beat Bruce out for it then fine. If Bruce is 100% I don't think he loses the spot to Curtis.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  7. #82
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,519
    Rep Power
    154

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    It seems like you think there are only two options: (1) offer as much as any other team might offer, or (2) lowball.

    There's a big range of offers that are above "lowball" level.
    Okay then. Quantify the range and end the debate. Let's hear the percentages of what qualifies as a low but not lowball offer, and when an offer crosses the line into lowball.

    ...no?

    The bottom line is you can't, because that gap is subjective and depends on who you're talking to. You cannot point to one offer and universally say, "This is not a lowball offer" as you have done. In your opinion it might be, but in someone else's it might not be.

    It's all subjective, which is why this entire debate is getting rather silly, because we're all arguing opinion, which really cannot be proven. That's why this will be the last thing I say on the topic, because I have no desire to waste time arguing opinion as if it were provable fact that is indisputable. I've participated in enough of that, and it's gotten us no where. At some point, you simply have to agree to disagree.

    The big picture is this - there are those who think the offer given by the Rams was fair. Those people are more than welcome to think that. But there are also those who think the offer was low, and those people are also welcome to their opinion.

    There is not one concrete black and white right or wrong answer to this. If there was, there wouldn't be any disagreement on the issue in the first place. It all depends on how you personally value Bruce. Obviously the Rams thought their offer was fair, and took the appropriate steps. I think BOTH parties could have yielded and moved towards a more favorable compromise, and hopefully they find a way to do so before Bruce signs elsewhere.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  8. #83
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,630
    Rep Power
    167

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

    Let's do this by way of a color coded chart, of sorts, shall we?

    OVERPAYMENTFAIR-MARKET-VALUEUNDER-COMPETITIVELOWBALL

    Now, you're correct that, because of the element of subjectivity, there are no bright lines that divide each category.

    That said, there is objective data - i.e. the present market for WRs - that can allow us to characterize certain offers as fitting into one category or another.

    I think that all would agree that the salary Bruce would have received under his old contract would constitute an OVERPAYMENT for a WR of Bruce's status (33 years old/#2 or #3 WR/coming off a down season).

    I also don't doubt that a veteran minimum offer to someone of Bruce's ability, even at this stage of his career, would be considered a LOWBALL offer.

    Between these two extremes, there is a lot of real estate. Based upon the salaries of WRs in the league who are in a comparable situation to Bruce's I consider the Rams offer to be FAIR MARKET VALUE. In fact, I think its at the high end of that category.

    If another team is willing to offer more, then it could be argued that the offer the Rams made is, in fact, an UNDER-COMPETITIVE offer.

    But, unless you can show me examples of similarly-situated players who are getting paid substantially more than what the Rams are offering, I don't see how you can claim that what the Rams have offered is a LOWBALL offer.




    P.S. Won't we all feel a bit silly for debating this with such intensity if, as may happen, Bruce ends up signing with the Rams in the end?

  9. #84
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,632
    Rep Power
    52

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    Okay then. Quantify the range and end the debate. Let's hear the percentages of what qualifies as a low but not lowball offer, and when an offer crosses the line into lowball.

    ...no?

    The bottom line is you can't, because that gap is subjective and depends on who you're talking to. You cannot point to one offer and universally say, "This is not a lowball offer" as you have done. In your opinion it might be, but in someone else's it might not be.

    It's all subjective, which is why this entire debate is getting rather silly, because we're all arguing opinion, which really cannot be proven. That's why this will be the last thing I say on the topic, because I have no desire to waste time arguing opinion as if it were provable fact that is indisputable. I've participated in enough of that, and it's gotten us no where. At some point, you simply have to agree to disagree.
    The reason this part of the discussion even started was because AV decided to call my term of "lowball" nonsense, and after I said it was just my opinion then some sarcasm came out, so what comes around goes around.

    Nick is right it's just an opinion, there's no magic number that says now it's lowball or now it's not, so agree or disagree, but it's hardly nonsense.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  10. #85
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,630
    Rep Power
    167

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

    So, if a poster were to say that $10 million over three years is 20x what Bruce is worth, your reaction would be "well, I disagree, but its all subjective, so your opinion is just as valid as mine"?

  11. #86
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,468
    Rep Power
    128

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

    If anything, this has certainly been a great debate that has really energized everybody, which is a good thing. It does seem to be going around in circles though.

  12. #87
    Curly Horns's Avatar
    Curly Horns is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    1st & Goal
    Posts
    2,654
    Rep Power
    58

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    So, if a poster were to say that $10 million over three years is 20x what Bruce is worth, your reaction would be
    Well I can't speak for anyone else, but my reaction would be:


    That's a valid "lowball" opinion.




  13. #88
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,593
    Rep Power
    145

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

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike
    If anything, this has certainly been a great debate that has really energized everybody, which is a good thing. It does seem to be going around in circles though.
    Leave it to Mike to find the silver lining. :up:
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  14. #89
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,618
    Rep Power
    43

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

    what are the chances of getting him back? I think this is a really terrible decision to not make him retire as a ram. Hell, whats his face from the colts is his age, and has a six year contract for him. I mean, we gotta do something to get him back and for him to retire as a ram. Not whatever it takes, because then you'll say oh so just pay him 50 mil?? har har har, smartasses! No! You know what I mean, so whatever it takes (in a reasonable manner), get him back!


    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  15. #90
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,394
    Rep Power
    68

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

    hone: Everyone, please:

    When will we know about the RAMS / BRUCE decision? Perhaps not a definite, final one, but a reliable 'determination'?


    I believe the real deal was suppose to be resolved THIS WEEK? :clanram:

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

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
  •