Quote
zn
Quote
RamBill
This contract looks like Tavon 2.0 to me.
I was hoping they were done giving these kind of highly questionable contracts....guess not.
Plus not signing Jenkins.
If you add in not being able to extend Donald and/or Tru (regardless who is responsible, the players or the team or both)...
...and it adds up, that they are iffy when it comes to the entire retention issue. It's not a strength. Just too many questions.
On the other hand, it;s entirely possible that Wade wants an athletic ILB who can rush the passer and who can make the defensive calls and values that above other things. PFF doesn't give grades on any of that stuff.
...
They're off on retention? It's not a strength? I'm not even sure what that means. Retaining guys if the cost of retention is "too high" is no strength and letting guys you want go is they're asking too much according your plans for the team as a whole and your evaluation of their relative merits is not a weakness. I have no problem with retaining Tree at that price because, possibly more than any other individual associated with the organization I trust Wade and am certain he had a major hand in the decision.
The only retention-related that necessarily would give me pause is if a lot of talent walked away from the Rams without their getting anything in return - even knowing that often getting something in return is hard. So if Donald isn't to get another contract w/the Rams I want them to get *something* for him. But, as we've discussed, it's also true that the team that would trade for Donald knows he'll be very expensive to re-sign, that is demands might be off-scale even given his quality, and they just might not want to pay a higher cost than that.
But I see little reason to believe the Rams have a retention "problem" worth that designation.
