OT: Rams Frustrated with Stafford

[TomPatriot]

It amazes me that after his Rams contract is up, he will have made $422 Million - the most of any player in NFL history.

It tells me that Tom Condon is a great agent.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Agree but the number of big money deals and trading of high picks for players is not traditional NFL team-building.

With that said they won a SB so it worked and they've also been a fairly consistent winner since McVay joined the team.

Stafford is 35 so he will get progressively worse over the next 5 years. The Lions are getting better with a younger Goff who was improved last year. McVay landed on a stacked team, so we will see how good he is this year and next. Also fun to watch the Lions improve. Bears, Vikings, and Packers are not powerhouses in their division. Interesting to watch both the Rams and Lions.

 

[XLIX]

I’d love to see him and his agent come back with a Bobby Bonilla type contract. To this day, one of my all time favorites. Every July 1st since 2011 until 2035 this guy gets a 1.19 million dollar check from the Mets. Just for 5.9 million buyout of his contract in 2000.

While it depends on what kind of ROI you can get for your money, any decent manager will easily get you 8%-10% in the long term. As such, Bonilla was unwise to accept that deal.

(The fact that the Mets lost their money to Madoff is irrelevant; I am speaking purely from Bonilla's POV and he should have simply taken the money)

 

[h0c2000]

It amazes me that after his Rams contract is up, he will have made $422 Million - the most of any player in NFL history.

If Aaron get another deal he could exceed that

 

[Ring 6]

Stafford is 35 so he will get progressively worse over the next 5 years. The Lions are getting better with a younger Goff who was improved last year. McVay landed on a stacked team, so we will see how good he is this year and next. Also fun to watch the Lions improve. Bears, Vikings, and Packers are not powerhouses in their division. Interesting to watch both the Rams and Lions.

I’ll take 1 SB win every 10 years and not care what happens the other 9 years over and 10 years that don’t include a SB win.

The dilemma in adopting that kind of approach is you are more likely to win SBs by building a quality team that is competitive year in and year out than buying one by mortgaging the future.

 

[Wozzy]

I’ll take 1 SB win every 10 years and not care what happens the other 9 years over and 10 years that don’t include a SB win.

The dilemma in adopting that kind of approach is you are more likely to win SBs by building a quality team that is competitive year in and year out than buying one by mortgaging the future.

No you wouldn't, people were chomping at the bit to fire BB entering 2014... and they were a contender.

And that's only because you're staring at the Rams and saying "look at them."

The Chargers have paid through the nose for players, they're ranked 31st in available cap space in 2024... and guess who they haven't signed yet?

Their franchise caliber elite magical unicorn QB who was supposed to ensure they won Super Bowls as long as they spent money on surrounding players. Herbert has one playoff appearance (a loss) in his entire three year career... and he's arguably the best QB in the NFL.

For every Rams success story there are a plethora of other teams (Saints, Steelers, Dolphins, Bills, 49ers) who spent and have zero rings to show for it.

The Patriots deviated slightly from their spendthrift ways from 2014-2019, went to 4 Super Bowls and won 3 of them... and some jokers here think BB sucks at his job.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

The dilemma in adopting that kind of approach is you are more likely to win SBs by building a quality team that is competitive year in and year out than buying one by mortgaging the future.

I agree but wonder if I was an owner if I would much prefer the "building a quality team" approach. That approach may lead to a growing fan base and growing value of the team, even if the team does not win a SB. The "mortgage the future" approach seems like it would be ok for a few years but then fans would lose interest during the down years so there is no long term growth in the team's value.

 

[Wozzy]

I agree but wonder if I was an owner if I would much prefer the "building a quality team" approach. That approach may lead to a growing fan base and growing value of the team, even if the team does not win a SB. The "mortgage the future" approach seems like it would be ok for a few years but then fans would lose interest during the down years so there is no long term growth in the team's value.

I'd imagine the only thing worse than not winning for an owner, is throwing good money on top of bad and not winning.

Only one team can win it all, many teams use this approach and fail... we just don't notice them.

If it were my money, I saw the Patriots approach, I'd say do what they do.

They're not alone, the Chiefs knew what Tyreek was asking for, they made the tough decision and moved on.

 

[Sicilian]

I agree but wonder if I was an owner if I would much prefer the "building a quality team" approach. That approach may lead to a growing fan base and growing value of the team, even if the team does not win a SB. The "mortgage the future" approach seems like it would be ok for a few years but then fans would lose interest during the down years so there is no long term growth in the team's value.

I think it depends on the owner and the city in question. The Rams, for example, faced an uphill battle for relevancy in the Los Angeles market. Not only is there another NFL team there, but LA in general has already shown it doesn't naturally care about football. Winning a Super Bowl was probably seen as a shortcut to popularity so they could entrench themselves in the new market. In that way, I think it was a smart move.

Now, if they go the next ten years and don't get close to another one? May not matter. LA feels volatile for a football franchise. But they wanted to make a splash and they made the biggest one possible.

 

[Nehalem]

While it depends on what kind of ROI you can get for your money, any decent manager will easily get you 8%-10% in the long term. As such, Bonilla was unwise to accept that deal.

(The fact that the Mets lost their money to Madoff is irrelevant; I am speaking purely from Bonilla's POV and he should have simply taken the money)

Bonilla got a great deal

Mets owner Fred Wilpon accepted the deal mostly because he was heavily invested with Ponzi scheme operator Bernie Madoff, and the 10 percent returns he thought he was getting on his investments with Madoff outweighed the eight percent interest the Mets would be paying on Bonilla's initial $5.9 million

He got the bottom end of what a good money manager would get. But he got it guaranteed.

The whole Mets-Madoff thing shows why that is valuable.

 

[XLIX]

Bonilla got a great deal

8% annual ROI is not a "great deal". It is, at best, a safe and conservative ROI over a long term period of time.

 

[XLIX]

If it were my money, I saw the Patriots approach, I'd say do what they do.

Stumbling ass backwards into the greatest QB in the history of the NFL is not exactly an easily repeatable strategy....

 

[Ring 6]

I agree but wonder if I was an owner if I would much prefer the "building a quality team" approach. That approach may lead to a growing fan base and growing value of the team, even if the team does not win a SB. The "mortgage the future" approach seems like it would be ok for a few years but then fans would lose interest during the down years so there is no long term growth in the team's value.

Sure, but I don’t care in the least about owners.

Owners aren’t catering to hard core fans. They have them no matter what. They focus on the fringe and additive fans that’s why the game has changed from loved for its violence to ashamed of its violence, and from a man on man battle in the trenches to high flying highlight catches.
The fringe fans don’t want football at it’s outset they want exciting plays, and teams must appear to be concerned about every person, group and issue so as to not offend a casual fan with social justice issues.
Wait until they start the NFL transgender awareness program. Owners are whores to their revenue stream. Wining is fun, but money is business.

You can see on this website the fickleness of fans (and this is theoretically the hardcore). After the greatest run in the history of the sport, the team has been average for 3 years and this board is close to mutiny that fandom. So yeah while a true hardcore fan cares about the SB, being in the hunt late in the year makes for a happier fan base.

 

[Ring 6]

8% annual ROI is not a "great deal". It is, at best, a safe and conservative ROI over a long term period of time.

Wouldn’t a safe and conservative return be what a millionaire retiring before 40 and living the rest of his life in his assets would want?

 

[h0c2000]

The Pats have given me a lifetime's worth of Super Bowl memories. If they don't win another in my lifetime I'll still be happy. I'll ***** and moan about it but that's cause I'm greedy.

However, I'd be willing to suffer through 8 years of Cam Newton or Carson Wentz for one more SB victory.

 

[Wozzy]

Stumbling ass backwards into the greatest QB in the history of the NFL is not exactly an easily repeatable strategy....

He was drafted.

 

[captain stone]

Thats disgusting

That's why the owners played hardball before the 2011 season; that stupid **** had to be stopped, immediately.

 

[bresna]

If Aaron get another deal he could exceed that

If Aaron gets another deal that would be the stupidest thing.... oh wait... he plays for the Jets now. You're right - Aaron Rogers will beat him.

 

[XLIX]

He was drafted.

No **** - in the 6th round. So don't act like selecting Brady was some sort of master strategy to turn the team around.

They got obscenely lucky, pure and simple. And, as I mentioned above, it ain't exactly a repeatable strategy.

 

[Ring 6]

No **** - in the 6th round. So don't act like selecting Brady was some sort of master strategy to turn the team around.

They got obscenely lucky, pure and simple. And, as I mentioned above, it ain't exactly a repeatable strategy.

By that definition every successful team ever was just lucky and no strategy is repeatable.