just sayin that a team has the duty to do the contrary.
Two opposing forces...compromising and working out a deal....or not.
I'm speaking of when the
"...or not" part happens. Teams have budgets allotted for certain positions etc...fiduciary constraints
that are decided upon by the subjective folks in charge. Teams will try and stick to those guidelines for positional money/value as much as possible...as is their right. Like the player and his right to maximize his financial windfall.
Both are equal...just sayin that when an impasse is had - rightly or wrongly - the team will maximize it's use of the player and minimize it's salary to the player in accordance with what their HC, GM, etc set values for the players/positions. I'm not sure the Rams low-ball players they really like...they have a budget that they want to stay in/around according to their perceived value of that player....which is smart as long as the team is doing well and the brain-trust is making the rules.
"L'audace, l'audace. Toujours l'audace!"