View Poll Results: Would you be for/against cutting Long and drafting Clowney?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • For

    2 6.67%
  • Against

    28 93.33%
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 74 of 74
Like Tree16Likes

Thread: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

  1. #61
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,560
    Rep Power
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post

    And I never said you did. I just stated that he was the top pick in your poll as a veteran who may get cut.

    I guess it just baffles me how many posters here think Finnegan is an obvious target but Longs untouchable(made clear by our polls). Sounds biased.
    Biased? On what basis?


  2. #62
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Biased? On what basis?
    Longs been here his whole career, is a 2nd overall pick, has had success, and has been one of the few bright spots on the team in the past when we had little talent.

    Finnegan has only been here for a year. Before he came here, the majority didn't like him because of his antics.

    It would be easy and obvious to have a bias towards Long.

  3. #63
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,560
    Rep Power
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post

    Longs been here his whole career, is a 2nd overall pick, has had success, and has been one of the few bright spots on the team in the past when we had little talent.

    Finnegan has only been here for a year. Before he came here, the majority didn't like him because of his antics.

    It would be easy and obvious to have a bias towards Long.
    The "bias" is due to the fact that Long is younger, healthier, and a better player. Stop trying to manufacture an issue.

  4. #64
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,376
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    This is the most debate I've ever seen over a topic in which 95% of respondents agree.

  5. #65
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    The "bias" is due to the fact that Long is younger, healthier, and a better player. Stop trying to manufacture an issue.
    That's your opinion. But again you're cherry picking.

    Why not reply to my whole statement.

    "It just baffles me how many posters here think Finnegan is an obvious target but Longs untouchable." I think that's a fair view, all things considered. Keep in mind, I'm not saying Finnegan over Long, I'm saying they're seen worlds apart by most.

  6. #66
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    This is the most debate I've ever seen over a topic in which 95% of respondents agree.
    I am the 4 percent!

    Btw you never replied to me. I was kind of interested in getting Longs actually dead money amount, because both sites display different numbers. Like I said before, if the site you used turns out to be right, I have no argument.

  7. #67
    emuen's Avatar
    emuen is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    217
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Chris Long's contract reveals St. Louis Rams' approach


    By Brian McIntyre
    Around the League writer
    nfl.com


    The details are in on St. Louis Rams defensive end Chris Long's second NFL contract, which is similar in value to the one he signed as the No. 2 overall pick in the 2008 NFL Draft, but with a much simpler structure.


    According to Aaron Wilson of Scout.com, the four-year extension runs through the 2016 season and is worth $48.2 million. When you include the unchanged $10.3 million base salary that Long was scheduled to make in 2012, the last year of his rookie contract, he will make $58.5 million over the next five seasons.

    Long's five-year rookie contract was worth a maximum of $57.75 million and included features such as a $16.2 million option bonus, an easy-to-achieve "one-timer" incentive worth over $4 million and various and elaborate base-salary escalators in the final three seasons.

    In the new deal, the Rams are taking a "pay as you go" approach. Instead of a signing bonus, the Rams
    have guaranteed Long's base salaries in 2012 ($10.3 million) and 2013 ($13.25 million), and his 2014 base salary of $13.2 million will become fully guaranteed five days after Super Bowl XLVII.
    By not including a signing bonus, the Rams can avoid any "dead" money from the proration if Long were released for any reason in the later stages of the contract, which also includes $2 million roster bonuses due on the third day of the 2015 and 2016 league years.

    This simple approach is similar to how the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are structuring their contracts. Ramsexecutive vice president Kevin Demoff, who handles the team's contract negotiations, worked for theBuccaneers from 2005 to 2008.

  8. #68
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,376
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    Btw you never replied to me.
    I never replied to you because I had no new information to contribute to the discussion.

    I really don't see much of a reason to try and hunt down more accurate contract information, because even if there are financial benefits to be gained by releasing/trading Long, there are numerous other reasons not to do it that have already been outlined here.

    And frankly, since you seem to be the only person who is advocating for this move, I'm not really sure what more is to be gained by continuing to debate it.

  9. #69
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I never replied to you because I had no new information to contribute to the discussion.

    I really don't see much of a reason to try and hunt down more accurate contract information, because even if there are financial benefits to be gained by releasing/trading Long, there are numerous other reasons not to do it that have already been outlined here.

    And frankly, since you seem to be the only person who is advocating for this move, I'm not really sure what more is to be gained by continuing to debate it.
    Well if I'm going to argue something and potentially have a huge error in my argument, I want to set it straight. You have a lot more experience than I do of contracts and that type of stuff, I've seen your posts. That's why I wanted a reply from you. Not trying to bait you into an argument or debate. You seem to be a pretty rational guy, so I figured you'd also like to straighten it out. If not, whatever. I was just replying to your information with mine.

  10. #70
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,449
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    I highly doubt we would save anything cutting Chris. He just re-did his contract a year ago. Typically the first 2-3 years of big contracts are mostly guaranteed (from Kevin Demoff's corner) and then anything after has minimal cap repercussions. With that being said, I still wouldn't cut Chris Long. The least I'd do is trade him for a 2nd and change, and even that is debatable.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  11. #71
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,049
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    The last sentence end the debate. By the way on page one of this thread I stated what his dead money was... Dead Money $17,700,000

    Jason La Canfora
    CBS Sports NFL Insider
    December 15, 2013 10:16 am ET

    The Rams could be facing a crucial dilemma this offseason with Sam Bradford, the first-overall pick in 2010, coming off another injury and the team now possibly ending up with two top 10 picks. That's including what may be the first-overall via the RGII trade they made with Washington in 2012 (St. Louis has the Redskins' top pick).

    Several NFL execs, when assessing that situation, believe it could lead to Bradford's departure, while team sources have indicated the organization remains very comfortable with Bradford and while “all options would be on the table” if St. Louis has the top pick, the likelihood of drafting a quarterback is more remote than most other scenarios. The dream scenario for the Rams would be other teams coveting that pick -- as the Skins did with St. Louis' second-overall selection in 2012 -- and then offering a bounty to trade down and pick up a bunch of selections, able to fill multiple holes.

    The Rams will do their due diligence on the college quarterbacks, of course, but drafting a quarterback when considering their other needs is not very likely, sources said. There could well be a tackle who makes sense if they keep the pick, but the team will explore options for trading it as well, and that approach has been favored by them with good results to this point.

    Even if the Rams don't get the first overall pick -- let's say it's second overall -- and it ends up there are two consensus best-of-breed quarterbacks, they could find themselves in a similar situation to where they were in 2012. There are no shortage of teams who will be drafting quarterbacks -- Houston, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Oakland, and Minnesota will be taking one high -- and only so many of them will end up picking before the Rams.

    However, it is also not lost on the organization that the Rams no longer owe Bradford any guaranteed money, having paid him $50 million already, and they owe him $14M for 2014 and $13M for 2015. And a quarterback taken with the first overall pick in 2014 would earn roughly that same $27M over the first five years of his deal. Still, dealing or cutting Bradford is very unlikely.

    Although it must be noted that the Rams have been publicly united in their support of Bradford.

    Last week the Rams restructured the deal of Chris Long to free up some cap room.

  12. #72
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,181
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    The last sentence end the debate. By the way on page one of this thread I stated what his dead money was... Dead Money $17,700,000

    Jason La Canfora
    CBS Sports NFL Insider
    December 15, 2013 10:16 am ET

    The Rams could be facing a crucial dilemma this offseason with Sam Bradford, the first-overall pick in 2010, coming off another injury and the team now possibly ending up with two top 10 picks. That's including what may be the first-overall via the RGII trade they made with Washington in 2012 (St. Louis has the Redskins' top pick).

    Several NFL execs, when assessing that situation, believe it could lead to Bradford's departure, while team sources have indicated the organization remains very comfortable with Bradford and while “all options would be on the table” if St. Louis has the top pick, the likelihood of drafting a quarterback is more remote than most other scenarios. The dream scenario for the Rams would be other teams coveting that pick -- as the Skins did with St. Louis' second-overall selection in 2012 -- and then offering a bounty to trade down and pick up a bunch of selections, able to fill multiple holes.

    The Rams will do their due diligence on the college quarterbacks, of course, but drafting a quarterback when considering their other needs is not very likely, sources said. There could well be a tackle who makes sense if they keep the pick, but the team will explore options for trading it as well, and that approach has been favored by them with good results to this point.

    Even if the Rams don't get the first overall pick -- let's say it's second overall -- and it ends up there are two consensus best-of-breed quarterbacks, they could find themselves in a similar situation to where they were in 2012. There are no shortage of teams who will be drafting quarterbacks -- Houston, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Oakland, and Minnesota will be taking one high -- and only so many of them will end up picking before the Rams.

    However, it is also not lost on the organization that the Rams no longer owe Bradford any guaranteed money, having paid him $50 million already, and they owe him $14M for 2014 and $13M for 2015. And a quarterback taken with the first overall pick in 2014 would earn roughly that same $27M over the first five years of his deal. Still, dealing or cutting Bradford is very unlikely.

    Although it must be noted that the Rams have been publicly united in their support of Bradford.

    Last week the Rams restructured the deal of Chris Long to free up some cap room.
    Ya I just found a source to confirm the 17.7 million in dead money. That was about 14 million more than the site I first used. So, basically, cutting him at the end of the season wouldn't save us the cap room I was under the impression it would. Obviously no way he gets cut if we're not saving any cap space from it at all.

  13. #73
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,049
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    Ya I just found a source to confirm the 17.7 million in dead money. That was about 14 million more than the site I first used. So, basically, cutting him at the end of the season wouldn't save us the cap room I was under the impression it would. Obviously no way he gets cut if we're not saving any cap space from it at all.
    And it looks like we restructured his contract last week... I like your fight thought!

  14. #74
    Mikey's Avatar
    Mikey is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    748
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: BIG hypothetical move. Would you be for it?

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    Ya I just found a source to confirm the 17.7 million in dead money. That was about 14 million more than the site I first used. So, basically, cutting him at the end of the season wouldn't save us the cap room I was under the impression it would. Obviously no way he gets cut if we're not saving any cap space from it at all.
    We're not cutting him regardless of his cap hit. He's the leader of the defense if not the whole team. It makes no sense to run a team by giving one of your leaders a pay raise, working with him two years in a row to move money around to free up cap space only to cut him. If the Rams were foolish enough to move on from him as the LDE they would trade him.
    Randart likes this.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Similar Threads

  1. Hypothetical FA Question: Who Would You Rather?
    By THOLTFAN81 in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: -12-12-2013, 09:28 AM
  2. The Rob Ryan Hypothetical
    By AvengerRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: -01-21-2013, 03:26 AM
  3. Hypothetical Question
    By RamFan_Til_I_Die in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -11-25-2010, 07:04 PM
  4. If you REALLY want to get hypothetical...
    By Bar-bq in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -01-14-2008, 04:29 PM
  5. Hypothetical Question....
    By Karl-Baker in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -03-13-2002, 10:24 AM

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
  •