Turns out Robert Quinn might not be so expensive after all

0
331

A few weeks ago, I wrote an article about the salary cap implications of Robert Quinn’s monster 2013 season.

It was obviously premature speculation on my part, as I was just posting a quick piece to start a conversation rather than a thoroughly researched piece. Turns out I should’ve waited a couple weeks. NFL Network’s Albert Breer tweeted today what the 2011 rookies’ fifth-year options will be, and the number favors the Rams much more than Quinn.

As Turf Show Times points out, Quinn’s original rookie contract of five years, $9.4 million combined with his fifth-year option of $6.62 million would add up to $16 million in compensation for his first five seasons – barely one-fifth the value of quarterback Sam Bradford’s rookie contract of six years, $78 million signed in 2010, the year before the new Collective Bargaining Agreement.

As if Quinn’s five-year compensation wasn’t unfair enough, the Rams can slap the franchise tag on him in year six, which would likely come in around $12 million (if you want to know how the franchise tag is calculated, strap on your thinking cap, and follow this link.)

I still think the Rams would be wise to sign Quinn to an extension starting in year six just to avoid the animosity that sometimes forms between teams and the players they franchise, but if the team can retain him for the bargain basement price of $6.62 million in year five, why not do it?

Seems to me like this new CBA is about as unfair to first-round draft picks as the old CBA was unfair to the teams that drafted first-round picks. You would think there would be a happy medium somewhere, right?


The Rams plan to do…what…at wide receiver exactly?


cover32 Shield b
Make sure you follow @cover32_Stl and @cover32_NFL on Twitter for all the latest breaking news, columns, blogs and features from the Rams and the entire NFL.

Previous article5 best Panthers moments of the 2013 season
Next articleWait, maybe eliminating the extra point is a bad thing?