Is there really an elephant in the room?

[MauiRam]

It appears the Rams will have a new owner next season. It would also appear Khan is the lead horse. I have read differing views on what could be going on at Rams' park with new ownership looming .. The point of this thread is not who the new owner will be, rather to what extent will the "elephant in the room" influence FA and the draft if at all.

1) Would Chip and Lucia privately ask DeSpags to limit spending until a new owner takes over?

2) If the price of the team has already been negotiated, wouldn't brother and sister stand to make a greater exiting profit if spending were to be curtailed?

3) Might the prospective new owner attempt to influence DeSpags regarding spending on FA and the draft? It has been implied before that Billy and Spags could be lame ducks. For sure they'll have a job through the 2010 season, but all bets are off for 2011.

From my perspective it would seem best for DeSpags and crew to carry on with their vision of what they're trying to build regardless of impending new ownership, but is it realistic to believe the "elephant" won't interfere?

[shower beers]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

I don't think our FO has really been hindered so far, in regards to Free Agency. We weren't looking to overpay a big name vet, as that would contradict everything we did during the previous two seasons. We were able to go out and sign a couple situational players at market value and we're clearly focusing on the draft at this point. I think that most teams have followed the same route this year, with only a handful of teams really making a big splash in the FA market in an off year for supply.

I think that all we need to do at this point is retain the players we need to, such as Little and Hall, among others. Just continue to rebuild the right way, and not worry about outside forces. Let the work speak for itself.

[Ramblin` Ram]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

i dont think the Rosenbloom`s are being cheap because they have essentially sold the franchise already.
i think Billy D and Spags have a clear vision on how to turn around the fortunes of this franchise to one which can have sustainable success and that is what they continue to do...getting a few players past their prime isnt entirely a bad idea as they can still usually offer some service..but even if Khan was the fully fledged owner i wouldnt expect big contracts to be given out to those kind of players...we have been down that road in the recent past and now we`re working our way out of that mess i`d hate to see us change direction and go back down that route.

[AvengerRam_old]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

If you were buying a car for $75,000, how much would you worry about extras that cost no more than $750-$1,500?

Proportionally, that's probably about the equivalent of the average free agent contract to the overall value of the team.

[Bralidore(RAMMODE)]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

If you were buying a car for $75,000, how much would you worry about extras that cost no more than $750-$1,500?

Proportionally, that's probably about the equivalent of the average free agent contract to the overall value of the team.

totally agree, A player's contract to the overall value and cost of a team is like a nickel to a C-Note.

"Let me get that new 70inch plasma HDTV 1080p from the top shelf (football team). Ohh, throw in that HDMI cable over there as well (players)."

[Goldenfleece]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

And yet we didn't even tender a number of our own restricted free agents. I have a hard time grasping the strategy here. If we were showing more faith in our own guys, it'd make more sense that we weren't wasting our time trying to sign or trade from other teams. Instead, we seem to be getting signals that our own guys aren't worth trying to keep, and we're not going to put much effort into bringing in new guys.

So what? We're going to try to replace the entire team through the draft? At a rate of seven draft picks a year, we won't even have drafted enough guys to fill the starting lineup after three years assuming every single draft pick pans out. Rebuilding through the draft is a good idea, but you can't rebuild exclusively through the draft.

[AvengerRam_old]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

And yet we didn't even tender a number of our own restricted free agents. I have a hard time grasping the strategy here. If we were showing more faith in our own guys, it'd make more sense that we weren't wasting our time trying to sign or trade from other teams. Instead, we seem to be getting signals that our own guys aren't worth trying to keep, and we're not going to put much effort into bringing in new guys.

So what? We're going to try to replace the entire team through the draft? At a rate of seven draft picks a year, we won't even have drafted enough guys to fill the starting lineup after three years assuming every single draft pick pans out. Rebuilding through the draft is a good idea, but you can't rebuild exclusively through the draft.

I'm not sure who you think the Rams should have tendered.

If you are referring to the "low ball" tender of Atogwe, I think you have to ask... why have no other teams rushed to sign him? Could it be that that O.J. and his agent have set the price too high?

[Ramblin` Ram]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

the FA market is changing every day..who isnt available today may be available tomorrow..3 players brought in just over the 1st week of FA aint so bad.
Dahl got an extension,also they re-signed Fells after it looked like he was gone..whose to say they wont do the same with Atogwe if he is shown any interest from other teams? after all they do atleast have the rights to match any offer made to him...interesting that nobody even tho they wouldnt have to give up a draft pick to sign him hasnt bit on him yet.
apart from him and James Hall..there isn`t really anyone of our 1-15 team worth re-signing that they havent already..Little maybe, but with his age its open to debate wether he`s worth re-signing or not.

[helorm341]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

I'm not sure who you think the Rams should have tendered.

If you are referring to the "low ball" tender of Atogwe, I think you have to ask... why have no other teams rushed to sign him? Could it be that that O.J. and his agent have set the price too high?

Exactly.. and remember how many people were crying bloody murder last season when Bartell got to free agency? Give them time...

We're gonna be spending 40-50mil GUARANTEED on the number 1 pick in a month, I doubt the ownership is worried about paying a few guys in free agency. When it's all said and done (free agency and the draft) I imagine that the Rams will be in the top 5 or so as far as spending in this off season goes.

Besides, even if Chip/Lucia wanted to go cheap to the max and Khan couldn't legally do anything about it right now, I imagine Kroenke would step in and allow some of his own money to be spent. The guy and his wife are worth around 6-7 billion combined, I doubt they'd let the team flounder.

The Rosenblooms haven't closed the checkbook one bit since they've taken control, I don't see why it'd start now

[tomahawk247]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

This was weird, because the banner advert at the top of this topic was advertising elephant.co.uk

[Goldenfleece]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

I'm not sure who you think the Rams should have tendered.

If you are referring to the "low ball" tender of Atogwe, I think you have to ask... why have no other teams rushed to sign him? Could it be that that O.J. and his agent have set the price too high?

I'm not saying that we necessarily should have signed him for that much more. What I am saying is that we low ball him and put 2nd round compensation on Barron who by default would have been a 1st and let our top 2 TEs, 2/3 of our top DEs, and a starting linebacker shop around for better offers. The message is that they're all expendable, even though at the end of the season, we already knew we wouldn't be able to fill all of our needs through the draft. In effect, we seem to be saying that we neither have talent on the team nor the ability to obtain it from elsewhere. We can't even give away our starters, but we're not doing much to upgrade.

[NJ Ramsfan1]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

The message is that they're all expendable

Which is EXACTLY the message that SHOULD be sent. No one is beyond reproach on a 1-15 football team and a club that's gone 6-42 in the last 3 seasons. I'm sure Devaney and Spags are doing their best in balancing finances while weighing the risk/reward of whether or not to keep these players or expose them to the market.

I do not find fault with the Rams' approach to this year's free agent class. You largely build through the draft. There has been no one on the FA market that stands out as a difference maker on a team that has multiple needs to address- and so signing some "name" guy at an inflated price doesn't make sense. I believe this is simply sound philosophy rather than Rosenbloom/Khan locking up the checkbook.

[txramsfan]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

I think the reasons not just necessarily the Rams but the whole league is not very active is because of the CBA or lack thereof. No one wants to sign someone to a big contract to play one year, have a lockout year the next, and then what?

[theodus69]

Re: Is there really an elephant in the room?

hey maybe the elephant will squish the owners and BOOM........no lock out. then again, who's gonna let the elephant in in the first place?