View Poll Results: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bruce - he needs to be reasonable and accept what's been offered.

    14 40.00%
  • The Rams - Bruce deserves to be paid on his contract, even if he's slowed a step.

    5 14.29%
  • The system - teams should not ever have to cut long-timers like Bruce for cap reasons.

    16 45.71%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,051
    Rep Power
    172

    Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    That's what we fans do, after all... blame.


  2. #2
    psycho9985 Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Should be able to keep him regardless of the cap.Bruce is part of the franchise and should remain.
    Cut Zygmunt.

  3. #3
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,814
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    No blame yet because it's not official.
    Quote Originally Posted by ramsbruce
    Tre was running great against an awful NYG run defense. 5.8 YPC yet he only gets 13 carries. I can't wait until the Rams abandon you, Schotty.

  4. #4
    RamsFan16 Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Bruce because if he is so great he should begreat enough to help his team out. If he wants to win another superbowl he needs to take a paycut so we can get some talent in here.

  5. #5
    majorram's Avatar
    majorram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    London surrey
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,421
    Rep Power
    21

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    The Rams... they need to be fair!!!


    steve:clanram:
    "The breakfast Club"

  6. #6
    Roman18's Avatar
    Roman18 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Aloha, Or
    Age
    57
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Much as I like Bruce it's time for Kevin Curtis to take the reigns. Rams could probably re-sign him now that he knows they mean business. His value isn't anywhere near what they were going to have to pay him.
    Roman18

  7. #7
    IsaacBruceFan80 Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    I'd say the Rams right now....They are under the cap and seemingly could have worked out something here. This is a lifetime Ram who is the longest tenured Ram and only player who has been here since day 1. Oh yeah.....he is the best wr the franchis ever had and is closing out a hall of fame career. Oh...and the guy can still bring it. Ike will play several more years and will do so effectivelyHow do you not find a way to keep him here. The fans of St.Louis should be livid. I'm not saying 100 percent of the blame is on the team,but a majority of it falls squarely on them in my opinion. Apparently they have a few days to rescend the "cut" now with the extension of free agency. If they don't,I will have lost a ton of respect for the front office on this one. Just when I was getting excited about the new regime and the future of the team,my heart has just been ripped out and stomped on. DAMN DAMN DAMN how can this happen!!!!

  8. #8
    bruce_wannabe Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    all im gonna say since this is not official is that wow im sorry to all rams fans because the rams are resorting to be like the old rams of the early 90's..... frontiere that ***** is at it again!!!!!! the rams let flipper go and ellard, traded jerome bettis, let wayne gandy go, along with roman phifer..... we are resorting back to our old ways

  9. #9
    IsaacBruceFan80 Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Don't know if I'd go that far.but I am worried that we could be one of the have nots if the league goes to a no cap league. I don't think we would be the Kansas City Royals or Tampa Bay Devil Rays,but we might be the Oakland A's. :O

  10. #10
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Bruce, I'm afraid. For a guy who said "You know me, I'm easy", he hasn't been particularly easy. To point to the cap room the Rams currently have and say that they should have stumped up the cash is to miss the point a little.

    The whole reason they have the cap room in the first place is that they have shown they are willing to make the tough decisions when they have needed to and they are doing it again.

    $10 mil over three years is not chump change however you cut it. I think if Bruce was really as easy as he made out, and 100% committed to seeing out his career as a Ram this would have been ironed out.

    It still might be, but the team have shown their hand now and there is bound to be resentment on both sides. Any deal that could be done will probably be much less attractive to Isaac. I hope not.

    Curtis, after his play last year deserves a chance, and it looks like this could be it.
    Last edited by Fat Pang; -03-06-2006 at 03:02 AM.

  11. #11
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    28
    Posts
    4,927
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Its Bruce's fault. He had a high cap number last year, but the organisation didn't ask him to take a pay cut, and so paid him about $8 mill. They gave him the money last year so he would restructure this year. If Bruce had taken the pay cut it would have given the Rams an extra $7 mill to spend on defensive players and interior OL, which would have given the Rams a great shot at going all the way. But Bruce got greedy, so the team did what it had to.

    I would still have him back of course if the money was right, but i think Bruce got a bit too greedy for the teams liking

  12. #12
    moklerman Guest

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    This is still speculation until Thursday now but this is the type of decision that will help me define who the Rams are. I thought the Niners were idiots to cut Montana and Rice and Dallas for Emmitt, etc. There are certain guy's that a team shouldn't cut. I think Bruce falls into that category for the Rams. I don't think they should throw the bank at him, but if they have to pay a little more than they want then go ahead and give him a little more than market value for his YEARS of service and re-structuring. However, I won't be surprised in the least if he's a cap cut. If Jerry Rice can get the axe, then any wr or player can. That doesn't mean I buy the "it's a business" attitude that some subscribe to. Loyalty and tradition are an important part of football too and the NFL sometimes forgets it.

  13. #13
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,227
    Rep Power
    24

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    I don't really see how anyone can fault the FO here. When he signed this contract, he knew (as did management) that he wouldn't get paid the 8 million a year for every year it was written into the contract. With the emergence of Curtis and Holt's clear move to being the #1 receiver, he was simply no longer worth that kind of money ... especially when the team needs help at every defensive position, on the OL, and at TE.

    That said, I understand what Bruce and his agent are doing here. The Rams only have two receivers under contract and there is a pretty high demand for competent receivers in the NFL. This will artificially inflate the value of guys like Bruce past what their on-field production is going to be right now. Bruce should fire his agent if he didn't try to leverage extra dollars out of the situation.

    So I don't really blame anyone in this situation because no one is really making a mistake. Both the team and Bruce are doing what they should be doing, IMO. For this to work out, someone needs to pay a premium for Bruce to stay -- i.e., the team needs to pay more than he's worth or he needs to take less than he can get.

    Despite my attachments to Bruce, I just can't get mad at the team for realizing that they have a bigger set of issues to resolve.

  14. #14
    MSRamman Guest

    Unhappy Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy
    I don't really see how anyone can fault the FO here. When he signed this contract, he knew (as did management) that he wouldn't get paid the 8 million a year for every year it was written into the contract. With the emergence of Curtis and Holt's clear move to being the #1 receiver, he was simply no longer worth that kind of money ... especially when the team needs help at every defensive position, on the OL, and at TE.

    That said, I understand what Bruce and his agent are doing here. The Rams only have two receivers under contract and there is a pretty high demand for competent receivers in the NFL. This will artificially inflate the value of guys like Bruce past what their on-field production is going to be right now. Bruce should fire his agent if he didn't try to leverage extra dollars out of the situation.

    So I don't really blame anyone in this situation because no one is really making a mistake. Both the team and Bruce are doing what they should be doing, IMO. For this to work out, someone needs to pay a premium for Bruce to stay -- i.e., the team needs to pay more than he's worth or he needs to take less than he can get.

    Despite my attachments to Bruce, I just can't get mad at the team for realizing that they have a bigger set of issues to resolve.
    ...and the last sentence ofthat post is the whole situation in a nutshell...I love Ike, and it would be like walking on the moon to see him in, say, a Lions uni,
    but with the extensive needs elswhere on this team, it wouldn't be smart for the FO to pay any more than value or a little over. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we can get something done with him before another team throws major $$$ at him. I'd really be sick if he signed with a division rival and we had to see him on the opposite sideline twice a year.

  15. #15
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    28
    Posts
    4,927
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: Who do you blame for the Bruce situation?

    The thing is, it pretty much came down to keeping Ike at his current rate of pay, or cutting him and signing probably three maybe four extra players in FA. That means the possibility of signing an interior OL, a veteran DL, a couple of LBs as well as resigning Pickett and Archuleta.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •