Restructuring Goff's Contact Could Save $16.8 Million and Cap Space

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
kurtfaulk said:
The minimum salary has to go way up. That's the only way. And fairest way.

How much money do the superstars have to get to be happy the greedy fucks. There's still 50 other players on the team that have to go through all the same shit as them, only worse for the bottom feeders because they can't take a week off if they're banged up. The pressure for them to stay on the team overrides everything else.

.
Click to expand...


What? These guys are underpaid for years - think about Kupp - he was a top 10 WR this year and paid basically nothing compared to his peers. Of course when they can get paid, they're going to get as much as they can get. Plus, Mahomes is probably worth more than $40 million per year when you factor in exposure, primetime games, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.
 
dieterbrock said:
Maybe the solution would be in allowing an offset to the cap based on service time & time with a team. For instance, take a Whitworth, say they had some sort of calculation of service time (14 seasons) and time with Rams (3 seasons) allows the Rams to only have to account for (14x3) 42% of his cap hit. He signs a deal elsewhere, its only the 14% service time "discount". In theory, teams would be able to keep the aging veteran who would normally be a cap casualty but leave the player in a position to gamble on himself by going elsewhere
Click to expand...

That's a pretty damn good idea. Would allow a bit more continuity and long term building for teams, but also gives the players freedom to move if they want to move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dieterbrock

OK I'll be interested to see what the Eagles will do as I follow them being local to my area. There is also a Goff-Wentz connection.


I have an interest but, no concerns on what the Eagles do. I was trying to compare Wentz's and Goff's deals that have a large difference in the 2020 cap hits on spotrac. Goff's shows $36Million while Wentz's is just over $18Million. That's a very large difference especially when their contracts are close in overall compensation.


I guess we will wait and see how much cap space the Rams will want to get from Goff's contract.

I guess the Rams could get $8M to $10M extra cap for 2020 from Goff's contract.

What do you think they could get?
 
dieterbrock said:
Therein lies the issue. The players association acts in the best interests of the players as a whole. The revenue share increase and subsequent cap increase was to be passed on to the players, and it did. Problem is that it mostly is spent on the top 10% and where it was supposed to provide some income protection for the mid level veteran, it basically made them cost obsolete.
I've always thought that the NBA was on the right track with the Larry Bird rule, allowing teams to go over the cap to re-sign their vet, but we've seen how they learned to circumnavigate that.

Maybe the solution would be in allowing an offset to the cap based on service time & time with a team. For instance, take a Whitworth, say they had some sort of calculation of service time (14 seasons) and time with Rams (3 seasons) allows the Rams to only have to account for (14x3) 42% of his cap hit. He signs a deal elsewhere, its only the 14% service time "discount". In theory, teams would be able to keep the aging veteran who would normally be a cap casualty but leave the player in a position to gamble on himself by going elsewhere
Click to expand...

Yes, some version of your proposed solution is what's needed. I personally feel the QB (who is treated differently from his red shirt during practice to the way he can avoid contact during games), can just not count against the salary cap. Period. Let the owners pay 100M to their QB, free market, meanwhile every other player counts against the cap.

Alternatively, you can set a cap per position (similar to what they already have for franchise tagging) with a 10% increase on top of highest paid player by position.

A million ways to do it, but they better do something. The way it works now is just FUBAR.
 
JackAttack85 said:
Yes, some version of your proposed solution is what's needed. I personally feel the QB (who is treated differently from his red shirt during practice to the way he can avoid contact during games), can just not count against the salary cap. Period. Let the owners pay 100M to their QB, free market, meanwhile every other player counts against the cap.

Alternatively, you can set a cap per position (similar to what they already have for franchise tagging) with a 10% increase on top of highest paid player by position.

A million ways to do it, but they better do something. The way it works now is just FUBAR.
Click to expand...

I think the better way to balance the difference between the highest and lowest salaries is to create a salary structure which allows a payment no higher than 25 times what the lowest receives. Raise the minimum wage 53 roster player to $1mil per year, then the QB can receive up to $25.mil per year. Every year has a C.O.L. allowance tied to the total CAP, building a new base, which effects every new contract. jmo.
 


Thank you, that's about what I was thinking on the Rams. They have flexibility. I'll look at Gurley and Donald later. We will see how things playout for the Rams to get more cap space to sign players. Thanks for Eagles outlook. Howie Roseman is a sharp accountant GM for the Eagles. It will be interesting to compare Goff and Wentz's contracts as they unfold.
 
Last edited:
On one hand I would ask why a player would restructure so soon after a new contract.

On the other hand, with the more level headed players, I wouldn't be surprised if contracts are signed with an unwritten agreement that if the team gets in trouble in the future, a restructure is good for all involved.
 
I'm definitely on the bottom salary bandwagon. Increase that and it will effectively redistribute money to the JAGs who make up most of the league.

Superstars will still get theirs. Just not as high a percentage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Akrasian
Paydirt said:
his deal is bad ...... but not half as bad as choker Brandin Cooks. I think getting out from under his contract and / or TG3 will be the real key
Click to expand...

Only reason why I gave you a "chill" rating is because of insulting a player. I get that Cooks is the new scapegoat, but that's still harsh. If you merely didn't include "choker", I'd be fine with your comment.
 
  • 5Like
  • High Five
Reactions: RamDino, nighttrain, 1maGoh and 3 others
Who could have predicted WR becomes Concussion prone, and RB getting arthritis the following year of new deal.
tenor.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Merlin
Well hopefully our line is so good next year that Gurley has a huge rebound season and if that happens we can get through 2020 with Cooks on fumes. Thankfully we have JRey too so if the line is good this offense will be back at or near the top of the league.
 
  • Like
  • Cheers
Reactions: nighttrain and PressureD41
Hell ya. Stuck w/ Cooks for another year then we can get out from it. Same with Gurley maybe. Lucky we got other good weapons to weather the storm. Demoff will get it figured out yesterday!
 
Memento said:
Only reason why I gave you a "chill" rating is because of insulting a player. I get that Cooks is the new scapegoat, but that's still harsh. If you merely didn't include "choker", I'd be fine with your comment.
Click to expand...
Not accurate imo to say he is a choker. Cooks has had several outstanding playoff performances where he really stepped up and consistent performances over regular seasons where he racked up lots of catches and yards. This year he was held back by concussions.
 
  • Like
  • High Five
Reactions: VeteranRamFan, Memento and nighttrain
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back