Rams considering lowest RFA offer to Atogwe, why?
by Ryan Van Bibber on Mar 4, 2010 6:22 AM CST
in 2010 St. Louis Rams offseason
Email
PrintI'm trying to make sense of the St. Louis Rams decision to make the lowest possible RFA tender offer - the first right of refusal - to FS O.J. Atogwe. He's been one of the Rams few defensive highlights over the last three seasons.
The first thing that comes to mind is the Rams poor decision making in regards to contracts in the recent past, but they've improved by leaps and bounds since Devaney came to town and brought Kevin Demoff in as the VP of Football Operations, aka the contract guru. So what gives with this report that they'll only make Atogwe the lowest FA offer?
It's worth noting that they're also believed to be in talks for a long-term contract, which indicates to me that maybe this isn't a bad faith thing so much as it is doing right by the player. The Rams and Atogwe failed to reach a deal last year, and the Rams used the franchise tag to keep him on the roster. Atogwe was supposed to be an unrestricted free agent this year, getting the opportunity to sign what would probably be the biggest contract of his career. Is it a naive read of this situation to think that if the Rams and Atogwe don't reach a deal they'll use the "lowball" matching rights offer in order to let him still taste the free agent waters? There's the chance he'll get a deal the Rams feel confident matching, in essence letting another team do the contract negotiations if the Rams can't get something worked out in time.
That would certainly be a good faith move to Atogwe, and maybe make him more apt to consider offers the Rams are making in contract talks, rather than create more bad blood by just slapping him with a high tender and making sure he doesn't get to test the market at all.
Of course, the puzzling thing about this is that it doesn't seem like a great business decision by the Rams. They have the power to retain Atogwe with an RFA tender, and if he refused to sign it, he'd have to sit out the season. However, if the use a tag, they could then try and trade him, and more than one team would certainly be interested...unless, they think the odds are too great that they won't get the kind of offer they want for Atogwe.
That the Rams are working on a long-term deal with S Craig Dahl could be telling as well. Dahl, as the primary backup safety did a pretty solid job last year, and the Spagnuolo has one of his core players on the team with SS James Butler. Perhaps they feel safety isn't as a high of a priority as a pass rusher, OLB and another CB, making Atogwe somewhat expendable.
UPDATE: The lowest RFA tender DOES NOT mean that the Rams will pay Atogwe at the lowest level (i.e. the sub-$2 million paycheck for one season) should they retain him as a free agent. For the period of March 5 through May 31, they have the right to match whatever offer another team makes. If there are no takers, and no matching offer, the Rams can keep Atogwe, but have to pay him the bump from his previous year's salary...or let him go as a free agent. That kind of makes you wonder if teams could potentially wait, thinking the Rams won't pay Togs the $7 million they'd have to if they don't get a contract done. Anyway...here's the RFA info from Pro Football Talk:
As a league source explains it, and as we've confirmed by reviewing the CBA (Article XIX, section (i)(1)), the tender applies only until June 1. At that point, the team must offer the greater of the prior tender or 110 percent of the player's 2009 salary. Otherwise, the player becomes a free agent.
So what this means is that, for a player like Atogwe, the Rams' window of opportunity would apply from March 5 until May 31. At that point, they'd have to decide whether to give Atogwe nearly $7 million -- or let him go.
As a result, the lowest-level tender has a specific shelf life when applied to a guy who made huge money in the prior year. And if means that, if Atogwe doesn't get a long-term deal by the end of May, he'll get a crack at one in June, since the Rams will most likely let him walk in lieu of offering him the kind of contract they're apparently not willing to offer him now.
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
dahl is not a free safety
he’s a HUGE liability in coverage as we saw and he’s not replacement for Atogwe’s ball hawking.
I agree Atogwe isn’t worth 6-7 mil though.
Future Redbirds! www.futureredbirds.net
Rams Gab! www.ramsgab.com
i thought he did an acceptable job filling in for Togs at the end of hte season
the problems at CB heaped onto the coverage problems and exposed Dahl and Butler.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Mar 4, 2010 8:44 AM CST up reply actions
I completely disagree with your post Van
There is no reason why a team would tag him with a low rounder only to let another team to the contract negotiations. Atogwe isn’t going to ask anything other then what he wants, regardless of whatever team it is. If the Rams can’t agree to terms with him now and another team would, why would the Rams agree on a contract they didn’t accept later on? It makes no sense.
From a business standpoint, it’s stupid. Why do you let a proven commodity feel out other offers at all? High tender or not, it’s the Rams responsibility to sign him. What is a slap in the face to Atogwe is the fact that the Rams are deeming him expendable; if a team sends a low/normal contract, the Rams can get Atogwe to sign for less then he wants. If a team will shoot Atogwe a high offer, the Rams can’t just smile and waive.
The House of Spears reigns supreme
i think maybe they're hoping some other team will make an offer
below the $7 million per season mark and then the Rams can get him at a lower price.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Mar 4, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions
I suppose, but I don't see Atogwe pulling a Crabtree
That’s mighty risky though.
The House of Spears reigns supreme
Could be
that by doing this they’ll pay Atogwe what other teams think he’s worth(and save a bit of money doing it), or send signals to whoever is down the line thinking they want Berry. More fuel for a trade?
THIS year's the year. I hope....
Not sure
But either way it works out for both sides. Look at Archuleta. He had coverage issues, someone wanted to pay him big bucks, we got to move on, he got paid.
Not sure whether OJ has issues bolstering the line against running backs(usually a strong safety’s job), and he’s a heck of a lot better causing fumbles than most DBs; yet our real weakness is the line right now, and having a formidable line could let us get away with a lesser safety in the backfield.
And if another team agrees to a deal for less than the somewhere near 7 million that we’d have to pay him, then we get a better gauge on his price based on the need in the league. And if he commands more, then we have to shell out the bucks or lose him. Not sure how this will all play out with no cap, but I guess we’ll see…
Not saying it’s the right choice, but it is A choice.
THIS year's the year. I hope....
You have to admit
This is a little puzzling… at times Devaney & co. make decisions that make them look like they could be either idiots OR some underlying genius reasoning.
In this case.. hmmmm
"The greatest accomplishment is not in never falling, but in rising again after you fall." - Vince Lombardi
I think it is just a good faith thing
I think that both side believe that they can get a deal done and at worst some other team makes an offer and we match it and we still have Togs.
"Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that."
by Brandon Birkhead on Mar 4, 2010 10:01 AM CST reply actions
Thoughts on Atogwe's 09 season?
He played very well for yall. I thought he was having a great season until the bears game.
The Texans are looking for an FS and I was wondering how would you grade Atogwe’s skill in coverage and run support.
Obvious trade bait...
The NYG need help in their secondary, the Rams need help at DE. Osi Umenyiora appears to be in the dog house. Just make the trade for Osi and target a FS in the draft (Morgan Burnett, Major Wright or Nate Allen). Problem solved!
HELL YEAH but we still have Dahl who is a good safety so we might not need a new one from the draft.
"Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that."
by Brandon Birkhead on Mar 4, 2010 8:45 PM CST up reply actions
The Real Problem
Yes he’s playing well now but is it a timetable issue like Jackson…
Scenario: In 2 years the Rams have improved to make a run at the playoffs… Atogwe becomes a liability due to drop off?
Same goes for SJAX.
The Cowboys saw these issues when the restructured just before their haydays.
The decision becomes, should we get what we can and do an even rebuild or sign him to a long term deal and deal with that issue later.
"The greatest accomplishment is not in never falling, but in rising again after you fall." - Vince Lombardi
The Rams and Atogwe
have been trying to work out a long term deal for two years without success. What that tells me is that Togs is asking for more than the Rams think he is worth. One logical thing to do in that situation is to allow him to explore the market to see what someone will offer him. That will give both sides a much better feel for his true market worth. If he gets an offer from someone else, both he and the Rams can decide if that offer makes sense to them. If it comes in below what Togs has been asking, he may decide he has been asking for too much and agree to work out a deal with the Rams. If it is quite high, the Rams can decide if they think he is worth that much to them or not. Either way, both sides better understand the market for him and can make their decisions accordingly.
If the Rams tendered him at a higher level, they would have to pay him $6.9 million this year to keep him, and he could feel other teams wouldn’t be willing to pay his true market worth since they would have to give up draft picks. The minimum tender approach gives him a chance to explore the market without the draft pick issue hanging over the discussions. Thus it is a good faith thing in allowing him to find out what the market feels about him, and it still gives the Rams a chance to match any offer without having to worry about a salary cap. It is only a danger for the Rams if someone offers him a huge contract that they won’t match. I just don’t think that is real likely.
This sounds almost like a Win-Win to me.
Why don't we just get rid of all our talent...
who deserve big salaries ‘cause that’s how it comes across to me. My god, why can’t they work out a long-term contract with OJ afterall, he’s been more than up front with the powers that be. Look what he did last year. He showed good faith by participated during the off-season and spring training without a long-term contract offer. So, is this how Devaney & Co. reward him? Is this how they are going to treat our players who deserve big time salaries?
I’m getting a little tired of not only the Rams front office but the whole league’s. They are all greedy you-know-whats and only seem to care about lining their own pockets. In yesterday’s USAtoday Jattett Bell stated:
…the existing CBA doesn’t work for the owners. The (players) union contends that owners have proposed an 18% reduction in the players’ share of revenue.
Meantime
…the NFL generated at least $8.83 billion in revenue in 2009, owners maintain that players receive too high a share…
Well they deserve it. Just factor in short careers and broken bodies. Look at how long a pro can play football or maybe I should say how short a time. They have a very short career next to the rest of us so for most of them they need to make as much as they can in 10 to 12 years. How many of them can even play until they are 40…I would say mostly only the kickers. And after their careers how many players end up with a lot of physical problems and tough making it through their later life? I know of plenty of them. I’ve always felt they deserve the big bucks for the way many of them ‘play with pain’ week after mauling week. I know I wouldn’t do it. It was hard enough in college, I wouldn’t want to do it for a living.
There, I’ve had my say, good or bad, right or wrong.
Go Rams (and I mean the players not the front office)!
"We can't run. We can't pass. We can't stop the run. We can't stop the pass. We can't kick. Other than that, we're just not a very good football team right now." --- Bruce Coslett, New York Jets Head Coach circa 1990s
How sad is it
That we have millionaires and billionaires complaining?
Give the players their current salaries and set up a good medical program for ex-players and current players. That’s all the “profits” they need.
Keep revenue sharing, and tell all of them to shut up.
The House of Spears reigns supreme
and tell all of them to shut up
works every time! : )
I think the 60% or whatever is plenty. Just like with every major corporation, 99% of the people that work there couldn’t run the whole place if they had to. Show up to work, get rich…already ahead of the game.
+1000
Nbr1RamFan, you are my hero. I was beginning to think I was the only one that cared about the players. These owners are extremely greedy and could care less about a player. That’s why I cheer everytime a player holds out or they don’t go to OTA’s. The owners and front office are stingy and cut throat. Look at how the Jets treated Thomas Jones. This man gave his ALL last year an produced beyond expectations. How do they reward him for a gallant effort?? They cut him. That’s bullsh!t. That man deserves a big contract. It’s a lose lose situation with players. If you work hard and fight through injury, the team appreciates it, but doesn’t get you any extra money. If you sit out too much with injuries, the team thinks your a liability and they cut you.
I will be ecstatic when football goes to guaranteed contracts. Say what you want about the NBA, they have the BEST structure in terms of pay. You NEVER hear about an NBA player holding out or in a contract dispute. You know why? Because they have guaranteed contracts. Players don’t get cut in the middle of a contract and there is no reason to restructure.
So I applaud any football player that holds out and demands money up front. The team certainly isn’t going to pay you after you do the work.
On this team, we are all united in a common goal: to keep my job.
-- Lou Holtz
by RamsMan83 on Mar 4, 2010 12:37 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
18% is the Union's number. The League claims it is 9% and that the Union has accounted for it twice.
Just for the sake accuracy, there’s a clear difference between the League and the Union when it comes ot that number.
The article explaining why it’s 9 and not 18 made sense, but I couldn’t find the link for us again today. Whatever the case, there’s an agenda to all the things each side says…percents, revenue, proft margin…all of it. Only 9% difference? That’s a boat load of money when you’re talking entire NFL.
PS. You'll find the whole article here:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-03-02-salary-cap-questions-answered_N.htm
Go Rams!
"We can't run. We can't pass. We can't stop the run. We can't stop the pass. We can't kick. Other than that, we're just not a very good football team right now." --- Bruce Coslett, New York Jets Head Coach circa 1990s
I see nothing wrong with players sharing
in stadium construction costs. The simple fact of the matter is we the tax payers shell out the funds for the new stadiums or renovations on the old ones. The owners (and players, mind you) want new nice places to work which is fine. But when they come to the state legislature and ask for tax payer help (due to the increase in revenue to the city and state, nothing wrong with that) our taxes go up. If the players help absorb some of that cost we dont have to pay as much in tax revenue for the new stadium. They will still make millions, the owners dont get a raise and our taxes dont go up. The players can take a short term pay cut (the new stadium will bring in more revenue and lead to higher saleries in the long run) I get sick and tired of players who want nothing but a paycheck and care nothing for the city they play in or the fans who buy their jerseys. This is why I hate unions.
Ah, no, I'm sorry but
I don’t accept what you say as fact. Show me your source.
When I make a statement on my post I ALWAYS give a source where it can be checked out. You don’t give a source, then it is only your opinion. I respect everyone’s opinion but NEVER accept them as fact unless I see a source.
Go Rams!
"We can't run. We can't pass. We can't stop the run. We can't stop the pass. We can't kick. Other than that, we're just not a very good football team right now." --- Bruce Coslett, New York Jets Head Coach circa 1990s
Do you pay taxes?
Tax-money built stadiums are a commonplace in America…You don’t need a source to know this.
The House of Spears reigns supreme
And in St. Louis...?
"We can't run. We can't pass. We can't stop the run. We can't stop the pass. We can't kick. Other than that, we're just not a very good football team right now." --- Bruce Coslett, New York Jets Head Coach circa 1990s
http://football.ballparks.com/NFL/St.LouisRams/index.htm
annual debt service paid by City ($6 million from tax revenue)
State ($12 million from tax revenue)
County ($6 million from hotel/motel tax).
The House of Spears reigns supreme
scratch that- read it wrong. It's debt payments for the construction...or so it says.
The House of Spears reigns supreme
doesnt matter what you accept
it doesn’t change reality. Taxpayers help in stadium construction costs. Happens in every city that builds a new stadium for virtually any function. And since the NFL is a national organization with profit sharing I see no reason why they (the players) cant share in some of the costs to build their new work facilities. This is typical union activity, they don’t care what the bottom line is in the company or industry as long as they get what they want. The economy isnt great right now and alot of people are taking pay cuts or losing their jobs entirely. These guys should shut up take their multi-million dollar checks and roll on.
Like I have maintained for months
Don’t discount Berry for first pick through a trade down if Atogwe goes bye bye.
If Atogwe signs elsewhere, Rams get a draft choice right? Is there anyone who understands what Rams would receive AND when???
We need extra picks this year!!!!!! Not tomorrow!!!!
If Atogwe signs elsewhere
the Rams get nothing under the tender they used. Apparently they are confident enough that he won’t get the money he is asking and they will be able to match.
You guys that want the Rams to give him whatever he wants, do you have any idea how much he is asking? Do you know how it matches up with Polamalu, Reed, etc.? Togs is not one of the top five free safeties in the league. What if he is demanding that the Rams pay him like a top five guy? Do you still think they should pay it? If so, I sure don’t want you running any company I invest in.
I think there is clearly a disagreement between the Rams and Atogwe as to how much he should be paid. Rather than tender him for $7 million this year, when the tender irritated him last year, they decided to let him explore the market. If he can get $7 million per year or more from another team, they will let him go and he wins. If the best he can do is something like half that, then they will match and he will still be a Ram. They are letting him go out there with a tender than doesn’t require draft pick compentsation so he can truly test the market. I think they are doing him a favor in return for his services to date by giving him this type of tender. If he is right about how much he is worth, he’ll get it from someone and be happy. If he’s wrong, he will still be a Ram and he will have learned the truth about his value in the process. Sounds like a win-win to me.
Antrel Rolle is a FA and is worth Atogwe's money.
He probably wouldn’t want to come to a losing team though. Wonder if Dev can work his magic…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Turf Show Times
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
