[PARAM]

And I don't think this is MMQB'ing. It isn't like everyone loved these deals and this approach when they were signed. Many people were worried about the early signings, big guarantees, giving a RB that much, etc.

Sure it is. Absolutely MMQBing. And if they hadn't signed them and they got away, it would be the same thing......MMQBing that they didn't sign them early enough. Here's the thing. Managing an NFL cap ain't easy. Different players, different values, different contract lengths. A sure fire way to have it blow up in your face is injury. And in a game fraught with injuries, that makes it inevitable. I bet if we looked at every NFL team, everyone of them has had it "blow up in their face". Either committed dollars that were never well spent because of injury or high draft picks that got injured, therefore making that a loss of draft capital. So it's not really about that, it's about how they respond and correct things for recovery. Anybody who thinks we're toast this year doesn't think McVay and Snead can pull it off. I think they can.

[moklerman]

Sure it is. Absolutely MMQBing. And if they hadn't signed them and they got away, it would be the same thing......MMQBing that they didn't sign them early enough. Here's the thing. Managing an NFL cap ain't easy. Different players, different values, different contract lengths. A sure fire way to have it blow up in your face is injury. And in a game fraught with injuries, that makes it inevitable. I bet if we looked at every NFL team, everyone of them has had it "blow up in their face". Either committed dollars that were never well spent because of injury or high draft picks that got injured, therefore making that a loss of draft capital. So it's not really about that, it's about how they respond and correct things for recovery. Anybody who thinks we're toast this year doesn't think McVay and Snead can pull it off. I think they can.

I think you'd have to provide more before you could argue that the Rams had to do these things or they might have lost any of these guys.

But, I wonder if you have any examples of something similar from other NFL teams? How did things turn out in those cases?

[PARAM]

I think you'd have to provide more before you could argue that the Rams had to do these things or they might have lost any of these guys.

But, I wonder if you have any examples of something similar from other NFL teams? How did things turn out in those cases?

Really? You need "proof" they would have lost some of those guys had they waited until the last minute to negotiate a new deal? It happens all the fooking time in the NFL. The cap has been around since the early 90's and it has done what it was designed to do. Create lucrative free agency. As a by product it has also created lucrative contracts for players before they hit free agency. You want proof? Watch the NFL....I mean other than the games.

It's easy to MMQB these things. You can say things like "there's no proof they would have lost those guys had they not extended them early". Or, "there's no proof some other team would have paid them that kind of money". Or, "there's no proof Gurley would have taken a shot at free agency if the Rams let it go to the 11th hour on his extension".

And the nice thing about guys who like to play MMQB when it comes to contracts, extensions and guys leaving via free agency is, they can have it both ways. They can complain when the deals are made early (Goff, Gurley, Higbee) and complain when players leave via free agency (Littleton, Fowler, etc.). The best of both worlds.

[JackPMiller]

Hard to tell, this may be the weakest schedule we had in a long time. We play the NFC East & NFC East this year, the Bears are not strong on the road. They come to LA. Our record may not be an indicator on how good or bad we our. 9-7 could be the last place team in the NFC West.

[moklerman]

Really? You need "proof" they would have lost some of those guys had they waited until the last minute to negotiate a new deal? It happens all the fooking time in the NFL. The cap has been around since the early 90's and it has done what it was designed to do. Create lucrative free agency. As a by product it has also created lucrative contracts for players before they hit free agency. You want proof? Watch the NFL....I mean other than the games.

It's easy to MMQB these things. You can say things like "there's no proof they would have lost those guys had they not extended them early". Or, "there's no proof some other team would have paid them that kind of money". Or, "there's no proof Gurley would have taken a shot at free agency if the Rams let it go to the 11th hour on his extension".

And the nice thing about guys who like to play MMQB when it comes to contracts, extensions and guys leaving via free agency is, they can have it both ways. They can complain when the deals are made early (Goff, Gurley, Higbee) and complain when players leave via free agency (Littleton, Fowler, etc.). The best of both worlds.

But in this conversation, we have the benefit of hindsight. It was a mistake to re-sign all 3 of those guys early and for so much. That's all there is to that.

At the time, it was very questionable. You say, well, they should have done it because they "might" have lost those guys due to free agency. While true, that anything's possible, had the Rams waited and done things conventionally, they would have been in a much more informed and clear situation.

Coming off of their '18 seasons was actually the worst possible time to negotiate a contract. Goff, Gurley & Cooks "could" have all had all-pro seasons but negotiating against hypothetical success in '19 vs. negotiating with what they actually did in '19 turned out to be a big loser in all three cases.

The Rams tried to be proactive and re-do how things are done and it is very clear that that approach is not beneficial long term. The cap "has" been around since the '90's so there really isn't any excuse for mismanaging it like this. I think their heart was truly in the right place but all the accomplished was re-enforcing how things are done, not re-inventing them.

[PARAM]

But in this conversation, we have the benefit of hindsight........That's all there is to that.


The cap "has" been around since the '90's so there really isn't any excuse for mismanaging it like this.

On the first sentence I edited to make my point.

On the second sentence teams have been mismanaging their caps for years. It's one of the reasons the cap was instituted. Rather than having a 53 man roster you had total control over, infinitely, you eventually had to manage a large turnover. Every team goes through it and when there are injuries, it's even more difficult. And the 1 team who has mastered it is the Patriots. But they're run like a sweat shop and so the answer from their players to the question "do you want to win or make money" is "win". And still they have to pare their roster regularly to avoid poisons that could ruin that mentality and they lose players who walk in free agency because they've already got those SB rings. Let's see how that works out over the next few years.

But again, I'll ask this question. When should the Rams obit be written? Now or after they fail in 2020? Or will there be no need for an obit? Of course in that case all those cap problem worriers can simply say, "they got lucky".

[moklerman]

On the first sentence I edited to make my point.

On the second sentence teams have been mismanaging their caps for years. It's one of the reasons the cap was instituted. Rather than having a 53 man roster you had total control over, infinitely, you eventually had to manage a large turnover. Every team goes through it and when there are injuries, it's even more difficult. And the 1 team who has mastered it is the Patriots. But they're run like a sweat shop and so the answer from their players to the question "do you want to win or make money" is "win". And still they have to pare their roster regularly to avoid poisons that could ruin that mentality and they lose players who walk in free agency because they've already got those SB rings. Let's see how that works out over the next few years.

But again, I'll ask this question. When should the obit be written? Now or after they fail in 2020?

Which is a long way of arguing a strawman. There is a difference between "mismanaging the cap" and "mismanaging the cap in this way".

I am not criticizing the Rams for simply mismanaging the cap. So, everything you have written doesn't apply to my post. There was plenty of evidence history for them to draw from in deciding to implement a policy of re-working contracts early and paying out large guarantees and the history suggested strongly against that. The did it anyway and the got burned. They earned their criticism.

[Neil039]

Blind faith, mismanaged, or naive? It still ended with the same results. Cap Hell for 2020 and Cap Purgatory for 2021.

[PARAM]

There was plenty of evidence history for them to draw from in deciding to implement a policy of re-working contracts early and paying out large guarantees and the history suggested strongly against that. The did it anyway and the got burned. They earned their criticism.

Which "evidence history"? Was there not plenty of "evidence history" that that was the way to go? Or was it all against taking that path? The evidence history you suggest indicates whenever a guy has been extended early, it's failed and backfired? Absurd.

[moklerman]

Which "evidence history"? Was there not plenty of "evidence history" that that was the way to go? Or was it all against taking that path? The evidence history you suggest indicates whenever a guy has been extended early, it's failed and backfired? Absurd.

Evidence "and" history. Ooooooh, you got me.