Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

On "Pace" or not?

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

  • On "Pace" or not?

    Two questions... How may games before doughnut boy is able to make a true contribution to the team? Granted, he is an upgrade, but how many games will it take?

    and -Is OP good for the team in a larger sense and/or is it time for the Rams to go another direction??

  • #2
    Re: On "Pace" or not?

    He is an immediate upgrade from anything else we have in week one. By week two, he should be really fine.

    Meanwhile, i still dont see walter jones in seattles camp and if we have pace and they dont have jones for a while, that is a huge advantage for us. Jones will probably sign the tender and come in as well, but just pointing out that seattle is not in any better shape than we are regarding a key component to their offense.

    In my opinion, we are all upset, rightfully so, over the extended nature of the pace holdout. I for one am going to take a deep breathe and as avenger says, focus on the fact that he is now going to play, which to me, gives us a legit shot at the title if we stay healthy and can stop the run. As to the future, there are legitimate points to discuss, but until i get some perspective, i am going to wait. I continue to hope that by some miracle we can get a long term deal done.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: On "Pace" or not?

      I think we all remember the oline last year at the beginning of the season.
      Looking back at the first game should give you the answer. I wonder if the Rams have the balls to make pace only a sub the first game?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: On "Pace" or not?

        Ya - That might send bit of a message to OP. But the Poston boys will spin that into... "See OP, the Rams don't value your talent."...blah..blah...blah...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: On "Pace" or not?

          Unless i am mistaken, arizona doesnt have anyone on their roster that reminds me of michael strahan. It is a major break that week one is against arizona, not a more formidable defense, given the adjustments that will come as the oline gets its act together.

          general counsel

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: On "Pace" or not?

            "In my opinion, we are all upset, rightfully so, over the extended nature of the pace holdout. I for one am going to take a deep breathe and as avenger says, focus on the fact that he is now going to play, which to me, gives us a legit shot at the title if we stay healthy and can stop the run."

            The Rams have something far LESS than a "legit shot at the title". The defense is about as stout as a slice of SWISS CHEESE. With the VERY SUSPECT DBs and virtually ZERO indication that they have improved one iota vs the run...and lets not forget that they brought in the much coveted Larry Marmie(Rain Mans 'good buddy') who previously steered the vaunted CARDINALS DEFENSE...I dont see how anyone with any kind of objectivity can declare this team has ANY kind of 'shot at the title'. The offense has as many weapons as anyone in the league...but this D is gonna be BRUTAL to watch.
            "You people point your 'f'in' finger and say theres the bad guy....what that make you....good?" Tony Montana

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: On "Pace" or not?

              AugustaRamFan
              Great picture of Mack. Best pulling guard ever!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: On "Pace" or not?

                Sorry you feel that way Mr. Fargo. I agree we have questions on defense, but i think that you are overrated the competition. Tell me a team that doesnt have problems? In this salary cap era, everyone has weaknesses. My point is that if we stay healthy, we have as good a shot as anyone. I further agree,and have said so in dozens of posts, that stopping the run will be a key. Tell me about the vaunted seattle defense? How about the philly corners and their problems at defensive line? green bay and minny's defense? Can carolina do it again? Tell me who in the nfc scares you so much that you say that we have "no shot"

                general counsel

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: On "Pace" or not?

                  I dug this thread up from over on Page 4.

                  I did not get sufficient input on question 2. So herewe go again...

                  Is OP good for the Rams, in terms of the "team"? When should the Rams go in another direction?

                  It appears that the Franchise Tag process may begin to wear thin I (perhaps is wearing thin with OP and the Rams FO). I do agree with Avenger, at some point OP will have to sign a long term deal, just to protect his future. I do not know how much longer he can continue to sign the one year tender offers (Is there a limit as to how many years that you can tag a player?) without putting some form of long term compensation plan in place. It would seem to me that he is taking a lot of risk in terms of a potential career ending injury.

                  Again, it would appear that the Rams save $$$$ by not signing OP to a long term deal. They will pay him $7MM plus this year, maybe $8-9MM next year, and $10MM+ in 2006. All the while, no long term deal is in the making. And all the while no multi $MM signing bonus is being paid. (Maybe the Rams learned a valuable lesson w/r to Kurt Warner. As we all know KW was never the same after he signed the big payday contract.)

                  When does OP smarten up and realize he is not going to get a mega deal from the Rams, and when is the FO going to get smarter and trade the big guy?

                  How will this tale unfold??
                  Last edited by AugustaRamFan; -09-09-2004, 03:44 PM.

                  Comment

                  Related Topics

                  Collapse

                  • Guest's Avatar
                    Pace on the Open Market
                    by Guest
                    One of the themes that people keep coming back to on Pace is that he should take less to remain a ram, to make the same kind of sacrifices that others have made for the benefit of the squad.

                    Putting aside the issue of how short the careers of these guys are and the beating they take, i want to make a different point. Who says pace isnt prepared to take less, in fact considerably less, than he would get on the open market.\

                    From balzers comments, the issue appears to be mainly the structure of Walter Jones contract and how the front end money affects our cap. I believe that Pace is worth far more than what jones got, because i believe that jones was worth more than what jones got (ie jones took less to stay in seattle than he would have gotten in the open market)

                    Have you guys seen the money that above average players are getting? Does anyone doubt that if Pace were an unrestricted free agent with no compensation required he wouldnt get $20 mill or more up front from someone? Do you really believe that champ bailey, who got $17 million up front is better than Pace (corners age faster than tackles). What about the money robert gallery got and he hadnt played a down in the nfl.

                    Bottom line. Pace's negotiating position Post Poston appears to me to be that he WILL take less than pure open market. We have cap problems due to warner, turley and other decisions we have made and i dont think that the best player on our team, which is pace, should be expected to suffer for that.

                    If we trade him, wait until you see what he signs for with another team and then you can see how much less we offered him than his actual value.

                    There is just no evidence at this point to suggest that pace is demanding full market value. Why should he get less than walter jones just because of our situation. We need to find a way to make it work.

                    Sign the Big Man.

                    general counsel
                    -03-14-2005, 07:16 AM
                  • Guest's Avatar
                    Simple question on Pace
                    by Guest
                    This topic IS worthy of beating what is hopefully not a dead horse.

                    We are an 8-8 team that won a playoff game that had MAJOR problems on our offense line last year. Our best defensive player may or may not be incarcerated by the time we start the season. Cap or no cap, exactly HOW is trading away our best offensive lineman, and one of the best in the league, a guy who even if he didnt have his best season got beat only a handful of times all year and NEVER requires double team help on the qbs blind side, going to help our chances of improving the team in 2005 and beyond. We are not a rebuilding team.

                    Furthermore, we still dont have a RIGHT tackle, let alone anyone remotely competent to replace pace. IF we get another left tackle, as avenger says, that is one thing, but the odds of getting a guy even in the same ballpark as pace for 2005 are very, very limited in my view.

                    Guys its about performance, even if he isnt willing to discount to market to stay with the team, even if he is selfish, even if he is a distraction, how exactly do you figure that we are better off without him.

                    If we spend the money we save on defense, how are we going to protect the qb.

                    How much do you think we are actually going to save under the cap. Pace costs 8.2 under the tender. What do you think its going to cost to replace him. Until you replace him, you dont know what the net savings are, and given what left tackles go for these days, i dont think we are going to save anywhere near what some people think we are going to save, and we will in all liklihood be overpaying for inferior talent.

                    Very, very sensitive subject for me, i think when people talk about the Big Three that won us the sb title and led to the great run this team has had, Pace is so often overlooked as to the critical nature of his contribution.

                    ramming speed to all

                    general counsel
                    -03-13-2005, 08:47 PM
                  • Guest's Avatar
                    Why should he take less than walter jones?
                    by Guest
                    The only thing that counts in nfl contracts is guaranteed money. We all know that, so lets not get dazzled by the overall contract offer. According to the post dispatch today, the rams offer to pace is "several million less" in guaranteed money then walter jones took.

                    Can someone please explain to me why pace should take less than walter jones? Why is pace greedy under these circumstances. Seattle has the same cap issues as we have. The circumstances are virtually identical. Same team entire career, same length of service, same health, same value to their team (we actually have more of a vertical passing offense so if anything pace is more valuable to us) and according to nearly every nfl expert you read, the two guys are about as even in terms of ability and performance as possible.

                    I believe it is very clear that walter jones took less than his free market value to stay with seattle. He got a lot of money but less than he would have if he had been a pure free agent with no compensation required. Expecting Pace to take less than what is already a discount to market is just unreasonable.

                    It is incumbent on the rams to find a way to offer the same deal that walter jones got. I have said all along and stand by my guns on this. If pace wants a penny more than jones got, someone can criticize his demands. If the rams arent willing to pay what jones took (ie a discounted price for a superstar who took less to stay home) than i blame the rams.

                    Sign the Big Man

                    general counsel
                    -03-15-2005, 02:53 AM
                  • chiguy
                    Can we talk about Pace?
                    by chiguy
                    Honestly, this guy is not playing at a Pro Bowl level. He's not horrible to be sure, but I don't think he's an elite player any more.

                    We have trouble running the ball in general, which isn't surprising with our guards. But you'd think we could at least once in a while get a push on the left side with Pace. I can't recall that happening in any game.

                    Plus, he seems to get beat a lot more than he used too. The four-man rush sack in the Seattle game came on his side and he absolutely blew his assignment on the fumble sack this week.

                    I'm frustrated with the line in general terms, but this guy is supposed to be the anchor and I don't see it. If it weren't for the false starts, I'd say Barron is our best OL right now.
                    -11-07-2006, 05:29 AM
                  • Guest's Avatar
                    Orlando Pace-the devil is in the details
                    by Guest
                    This is for sure the most spirited debate of the off season. Lets do our best not to let the two camps of view get personal with each other as in the bulgerite vs. warnerite debacle of a year ago.

                    I think that there is really no "keep him" or "trade him" answer that makes 100% sense. The devil is in the details.

                    It makes no sense to me to say keep him at any cost and it makes no sense to me to say trade him because he is a bad influence or its time to "get what we can and move on".

                    Bottom line-If we trade him, does it make us a better team than signing him for what he wants or continuing to play the tag game. The answer to that questions is THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS.

                    We need to know what are we going to get specifically and how specifically is it going to affect our cap. We then compare that to what it does to our cap and our other personnel choices if we pay him what walter jones got.

                    Here is my question for you guys as i do my best to fight through my love for orlando pace and my view of his enormously underated value to the team. If we get the #13 pick (alex barron), a starting right tackle (we need to know the cap value) a #3 pick (who will add depth, play special teams and be a potential future starter) AND save enough cap money to either sign bryce fisher or a safety or interior lineman, are the rams a better team?

                    Your views please.

                    general counsel
                    -03-15-2005, 10:06 AM
                  Working...
                  X