Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

    Since Linehan hired we gave several big contracts to players that just did not pan out due to injuries.

    Pace - March 2005 seven-year, $52.8 million deal. played in 2005 all 16 games and then missed 23 out of 32 games over the last two years.

    Little - 2006 Week 11 Signed 3year $19.5 million extension. Since missed 9 out of 21 games

    Pisa - 10/11/2006: Signed 5year, $25 million. Since missed 12 of 27 games.

    Bulger - July 2007 six-year, $62.5 million contract. Since missed 4 of 16 games, dealt with concussions, and did not look very sharp(injuries, OL, to many hits).

    I must say I thought they where all good at the time and seem to remember the majority of fans I talked to thought the same. This is a lot of money tied up in these guys with very little production since they signed their contracts.
    Last edited by RamsSB99; -01-15-2008, 08:30 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

    I would just say bad luck you know? Bruce is kinda the same. He got a contract extension and he hasnt been able to produce much because he has been injured quite a bit as well.

    I'm going to be upset if some of these players pull a Chillar and do great his contract year again.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

      Originally posted by RamsSB99 View Post
      Since Linehan hired we gave several big contracts to players that just did not pan out due to injuries.

      Pace - March 2005 seven-year, $52.8 million deal. played in 2005 all 16 games and then missed 23 out of 32 games over the last two years.

      Little - 2006 Week 11 Signed 3year $19.5 million extension. Since missed 9 out of 21 games

      Pisa - 10/11/2006: Signed 5year, $25 million. Since missed 12 of 27 games.

      Bulger - July 2007 six-year, $62.5 million contract. Since missed 4 of 16 games, dealt with concussions, and did not look very sharp(injuries, OL, to many hits).

      I must say I thought they where all good at the time and seem to remember the majority of fans I talked to thought the same. This is a lot of money tied up in these guys with very little production since they signed their contracts.
      It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't. I'm sure when signing a player to a new contract that injuries are not part of the equation.
      sigpic :ram::helmet:

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

        just bad luck, I agree we all liked these signings at the time they were done.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

          Pace - March 2005 seven-year, $52.8 million deal. played in 2005 all 16 games and then missed 23 out of 32 games over the last two years.

          Little - 2006 Week 11 Signed 3year $19.5 million extension. Since missed 9 out of 21 games

          Pisa - 10/11/2006: Signed 5year, $25 million. Since missed 12 of 27 games.

          Bulger - July 2007 six-year, $62.5 million contract. Since missed 4 of 16 games, dealt with concussions, and did not look very sharp(injuries, OL, to many hits).
          Wow, we signed these guys what where we thinking.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

            Originally posted by Rambos View Post
            Wow, we signed these guys what where we thinking.

            yeah, really. these are not bad moves. players get injured in the nfl just about more than any other sport. you just have to prepare for this stuff, and we really didn't.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

              If we don't resign these guys, where would it leave us? I might argue that all but Pisa's contract were on the long side, but they made sense then and injuries are part of the game. Just a lot of bad luck.
              "People with courage and character always seem sinister to the rest" Herman Hesse

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                Injuries are just part of the game. The best teams just find a way to play above them.
                The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                  I know, but the thread asked Bad luck or Bad moves? IMO, they were mostly bad luck.
                  "People with courage and character always seem sinister to the rest" Herman Hesse

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                    Originally posted by Chris58 View Post
                    I know, but the thread asked Bad luck or Bad moves? IMO, they were mostly bad luck.
                    Agreed.....probably. Which is to say, maybe an argument could be made that the injuries could have been prevented on some levels. Such as Lovie Smith experienced when he wanted his D-linemen to trim up before training camp, and that was followed by several hamstring problems. Common with quick weightloss.

                    However, I'm not sold that the injuries were anything more than bad luck. It's the reaction to the bad luck that was a bad move(s), IMO.
                    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                      ITS bad luck made from a pre-season of bad preparation brought on by bad moves by the bad coach .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                        I would have to say what happened here was bad luck more than anything else. The list does not look good at all now, but at the time each move actually looked very good to me. We couldn't have known things would pan out this way (maybe a little bit with Pisa - he had been injured quite a bit before, it wasn't entirely out of the question to expect him to get banged up again, would be nice if someone had noticed that back then near the signing). Other than that, we got hit with bad luck.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                          Injuries aside for a moment, we all know you got to make the most of what you have. Can anyone say the Rams did that in 07? That the Rams made the most of what they had available after the injuries?

                          Kinda weird you think, that despite the injuries during the DOLTS and Bolts game-questionable calls and over all bad luck, that the Chargers are now in the AFC title game. And given the whole length of 16 games the Rams cooked up 3 victories?

                          If this glaring quirk between the Bolts and the Rams isn't evidence enough to show SCOTTY the door with managements boot print on his (CENSURED), what is?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Bad Luck? or Bad Moves?

                            If they were good deals when they were signed, the injuries don't change that.

                            Were they good deals?

                            Pace - yes.
                            Little - overpriced, but necessary.
                            Pisa - questionable.
                            Bulger - absolutely.

                            Comment

                            Related Topics

                            Collapse

                            • RamWraith
                              Call off the CSI team; the Rams' problems are obvious
                              by RamWraith
                              Sports Columnist Bernie Miklasz
                              By Bernie Miklasz
                              ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
                              11/13/2008

                              The demise of the Rams is no mystery. The team's hideous 5-20 record since the start of the 2007 season is easy to explain. You don't have to bring in a team of forensic investigators to identify the problem.

                              As I wrote on a blog at STLtoday.com the other day, this roster is rotting at the core. The chance for success is being weighed down by a huge pile of deadwood. General manager Jay Zygmunt, de facto assistant GM Samir Suleiman and deposed head coaches Mike Martz and Scott Linehan destroyed any realistic hope of winning consistently by constructing a truly horrible roster.

                              Recent drafts have been a disaster. Stacks of money have been burned in appalling free-agent signings. And even when the Rams have drafted or located a few good players, they proceed to ruin it by overpaying.

                              Sure, some of this is bad luck.

                              Players get hurt unexpectedly or grow old overnight. You just can't predict some things.

                              But it's staggering to study this roster and see all of the money that's being squandered on a lengthy list of overpaid, underachieving core players.

                              The people who should be leading the team are doing just that.

                              Yeah, leading the team right into the ditch:

                              Marc Bulger: Since signing a six-year, $65 million deal in the summer of 2007, he ranks 34th among NFL quarterbacks in passer rating and in completion percentage.

                              Torry Holt: His salary cap figure for 2008 is $7.85 million. This season Holt is 48th in the NFL in receptions, 59th in receiving yards and 118th in average yards after the catch.

                              Steven Jackson: He signed a $44.8 million deal (six years) before the season. But after missing all of training camp, Jackson is injured again and ranks only 17th in the NFL in yards rushing. Since the start of the 2007 season, Jackson is 35th in the NFL in average yards per carry, and 27 NFL backs have compiled more runs that gain 10 yards or more.

                              Drew Bennett: After signing a six-year, $30 million free-agent deal, Bennett has started one game for the Rams. He has 34 catches and made one grab this year before going on injured reserve. And the Rams chased Isaac Bruce off for this?

                              The offensive line: The Rams struggle to run the ball and protect the passer. The front office has invested heavily in this group. On the left side, tackle Orlando Pace received a seven-year, $53 million contract and guard Jacob Bell was lured to St. Louis with a six-year, $36 million contract. On the right side, tackle Alex Barron has allowed five sacks and has been flagged for five penalties this season. His cap figure for '08 is $2.15 million.

                              Leonard Little: The defensive end gives his all, but he's older now, and the injuries are more frequent. His cap number...
                              -11-13-2008, 05:31 AM
                            • Nick
                              At 35, Andrew Whitworth sought security that Rams offered
                              by Nick
                              At 35, Andrew Whitworth sought security that Rams offered
                              6:41 PM ET
                              Katherine Terrell
                              ESPN Staff Writer

                              CINCINNATI -- The departure of Cincinnati Bengals left tackle Andrew Whitworth essentially came down to long-term security, according to his agent Pat Dye.

                              Whitworth agreed to a three-year deal Thursday with the Los Angeles Rams. The deal is worth $36 million with $15 million guaranteed.

                              The Bengals' best offer was a one-year deal worth $10 million, Dye said, refuting reports that the Bengals were willing to go as high as $11-12 million. The possibility of a second year was not on the table.

                              Whitworth will make $7.5 million in base salary in Year 1 with a $5 million signing bonus up front, essentially giving him almost $13 million in salary in 2017. He has the opportunity to make up to $24.5 million over the first two years of the deal.

                              What interested Whitworth the most was the stability of a longer deal in what could be his last contract. At 35, Whitworth is the oldest left tackle in the league.

                              The Rams were willing to guarantee $2.5 million in the second year of his contract, giving him a much better chance of being on the team by then. By guaranteeing a portion of his 2018 salary, the Rams would have to absorb several million if they released him after only one year, including the prorated portion of his signing bonus, which would immediately accelerate into that year's cap.

                              That would mean around $5.8 million in dead money for the Rams if Whitworth is cut in 2018, which is a significant investment.

                              It was clear there was no such job security with the Bengals, who drafted two tackles in the first two rounds of the 2015 draft in preparation for Whitworth's departure. The Bengals have preferred to go year-to-year on Whitworth's contract due to his age. His last contract extension was a one-year deal signed in 2015 worth $9 million.

                              The Bengals will now move on with Cedric Ogbuehi at left tackle. The Bengals will lose a team captain who was second only to Andy Dalton in the amount of offensive snaps taken since 2012.

                              The Rams were interested in obtaining Whitworth for not only his play on the field, but for his off-the-field impact as well, seeing him as a mentor to their young offensive linemen.

                              "They really made him feel wanted," Dye said.

                              Dye said it was a difficult decision for Whitworth, who has been in Cincinnati since they selected him in the second round of the 2006 draft and has raised his family there. If the contract terms had been close to what other terms offered, Whitworth would have accepted Cincinnati's deal. However, the Rams' offer was significantly more competitive.

                              "Andrew loves it there, loves the Bengals organization, he loves [coach Marvin Lewis], the fans, the city," Dye said. "If this thing had been equal or...
                              -03-09-2017, 03:50 PM
                            • RamWraith
                              Less still is more for Long
                              by RamWraith
                              By Jim Thomas
                              ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
                              07/31/2008

                              MEQUON, WIS. There's less than meets the eye with defensive end Chris Long's contract. But the No. 2 overall pick from Virginia still is a very rich man.

                              Technically, Long's contract is worth $60 million over six years. But in truth, it will end up being a five-year, $48 million deal. That's because the sixth year of the deal voids if Long participates in 35 percent of the Rams' defensive plays this year. Or 45 percent of their defensive plays in any subsequent year (years two through five). Barring a series of injuries, Long should easily reach the playing time level. He is, after all, the Rams' starting right defensive end, and was so from the day they drafted him.

                              First-round contracts, particularly for those players drafted in the top 10, have become extremely complicated in today's NFL. In the case of Long's deal, he does not receive a traditional signing bonus.

                              But in lieu of a straight signing bonus, Long gets a whopping $22.385 million in guaranteed money. In addition, he received a $2.605 million roster bonus, just a couple of days after signing his contract. And, Long also is eligible for a one-time incentive bonus of $4.01 million if he reaches a combination of relatively easy to reach playing time, team goals, and individual incentives. So you could make the case that Long basically will receive $29 million in guaranteed money by adding the three figures above.

                              According to league sources and the NFL Players Association, the rest of the contracts in the Rams' 2008 draft class are pretty much standard fare. Second-round draft pick Donnie Avery's four-year deal includes $2.77 million in combination signing bonus and guaranteed money.

                              The team's other six contracts are all three-year deals that include straight signing bonuses plus minimum base salaries in all three years.
                              -07-31-2008, 04:20 AM
                            • Guam rammer
                              13 is bad luck
                              by Guam rammer
                              Hey when are we gonna stop scoring only 13 points? 2 games in the preseason and now another 13 in the season openner. I kinda regret predicting our team was gonna come out on top 13-10. I got that half right and i'm not very happy about the outcome! Or Maybe Warner is doing some type of VOODOO on our team.
                              -09-12-2007, 03:50 PM
                            • majorram
                              Spoons contract
                              by majorram
                              6 years $33 million... $15 million in bonus money!!!


                              steve:clanram:
                              -08-20-2006, 02:29 AM
                            Working...
                            X