Rams Fans United - Los Angeles Rams Fan Discussion Forum

PARAM wrote:He held out with the Colts too, so there's that. A history of holdouts and contract disputes. Was he the best RB of his time? Sure. Was he a holdout waiting to happen? Absolutely.

Well, we don't know that for sure. Yes, we have his history but we don't have a situation where he was treated like the best RB in football. Had the Rams stepped up to the plate, it's possible he wouldn't have been frustrated. He was breaking records and carrying the Rams on a rookie deal back when rookie deals weren't all that great.

PARAM wrote:As far as wanting to be the highest paid whatever in any sport, I never subscribed to that line of thinking. Some dumb front office pays a lesser talented player the most so my team has to pay for that mistake? He 'earned' being well compensated. Unfortunately with some guys that only means "highest paid".

Maybe not as a rule, but we're talking a special circumstance here. ED wanted to be paid the highest of the NFL's RB's but was only making about half.
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1985/09/11 ... 495259200/

The All-Pro has two seasons remaining on a four-year, $2.2 million contract he signed before his rookie season. He is seeking a contract extension that would put him in the same class with other top runners, including Riggins, who will earn a reported $900,000 this season, and Allen, who reportedly has signed a four-year, $3.5 million deal.

PARAM wrote:In 1985 he signed a 3 year extension for 1987, 88 and 89 and forced a trade in 1987. Extension or extortion?

ED was never happy with that deal and it was supposed to just be a placeholder until something better was put together.
https://www.dailynews.com/2016/12/01/co ... dickerson/

Two seasons earlier, after he’d run for an NFL record 2,105 yards in his second year, Dickerson demanded his contract be renegotiated and held out 47 days, missing two regular-season games, to prove his point. A contract extension would be reached in December, but Dickerson remained openly unhappy with the terms.

Years later, Shaw would tell him the trade was “a mistake that should have never happened.” After decades, they finally buried the hatchet. But mostly because Shaw had admitted he was wrong.

IIRC the 3 year extension came with a 4 mil injury policy.

You say he was making "half"? Who was the highest paid RB and what was Dickerson making?

Furthermore, he "signed" a contract with which he was unhappy?

Forgive me but that sounds like "unable to satisfy" to me. And AFTER being the highest paid RB with the Colts, he held out again.

Yeah, that sounds like a guy who "only" wanted to be the highest paid....forever.

PARAM wrote:IIRC the 3 year extension came with a 4 mil injury policy.

I'm not sure why you're pointing that out?

PARAM wrote:You say he was making "half"? Who was the highest paid RB and what was Dickerson making?

Not sure officially, but the article uses Riggins and Allen as examples of guys who were making about double what ED was making on their contracts.

PARAM wrote:Furthermore, he "signed" a contract with which he was unhappy?

Apparently. He'd held out for 47 days and the Rams were fining him $1,000/day. So, he signed an extension so he could get back on the field. It was supposedly a good faith extension, which ED claims the Rams never honored.

PARAM wrote:Yeah, that sounds like a guy who "only" wanted to be the highest paid....forever.

Well, hyperbole aside, I'm talking about ED's prime years. It would not have been that difficult, nor that costly to make ED the highest paid RB in football. He had broken the rookie rushing record and then the single-season rushing record. It was perfectly reasonable to elevate him at that point.

After '85, if they'd given him a new 3-4 year deal, paid him as the top RB and not taken a hard line stance on the issue, there's every chance that he would have remained a Ram. That would have taken them through '89 and they would have THEN been able to move on, having gotten all of his prime years.

I get it. ED came off looking greedy but he wasn't a fool. He knew he was a workhorse and he knew he had a SHORT shelf life in that role. 7 years is all he got and they should have all been with the Rams, even if the Rams would have had to pay him as the top RB. But, according to ED, Shaw wouldn't even negotiate with him.

I really don't see why you're arguing against the idea that the Rams mishandled the situation and were cheap in the process. I didn't think that was a secret or controversial at all. Especially in retrospect, it seems fairly easy how the Rams could have had ED from '83 - '89 with a rookie deal and then an extension.

I'm not arguing the Rams weren't cheap. I'm simply saying he wanted to renegotiate.....often. He signed a 4 year contract and wanted it torn up halfway through. Instead he signed a 3 year extension and then forced a trade. The reason I bring up the injury insurance is this. If you don't like being the bell cow what could the reason be? Common sense says "injury". If he got injured he would have made more money than any reasonable contract for the times, he could have signed.

He was a malcontent everywhere he went. The Rams could have made him the highest paid RB and he would have wanted more. How do I know? It happened in Indy.

PARAM wrote:I'm not arguing the Rams weren't cheap. I'm simply saying he wanted to renegotiate.....often. He signed a 4 year contract and wanted it torn up halfway through. Instead he signed a 3 year extension and then forced a trade. The reason I bring up the injury insurance is this. If you don't like being the bell cow what could the reason be? Common sense says "injury". If he got injured he would have made more money than any reasonable contract for the times, he could have signed.

He was a malcontent everywhere he went. The Rams could have made him the highest paid RB and he would have wanted more. How do I know? It happened in Indy.

I guess we're on the same page, then. ED has never been shy about voicing his opinion and from the team's perspective, dealing with his ego/attitude was the downside of his greatness. I just think the Rams could have made it more of a priority to deal with him. He's not the first problem child to take more effort to deal with. I think he proved his worth, though.

But, if you feel that he would not have responded to a more balanced offense, then I could see the argument. I have no way of knowing for sure if he'd have been content to exchange carries for wins and Everett's maturation.

My opinion is, yes the Rams were cheap. Yes, Dickerson was phenominal. And, yes, Dickerson was a malcontent.

Malcontents will always have a reason to demand attention. If it's not money, it's targets/carries/snaps. If it's not targets/carries/snaps it's "credit". If it's not "credit" it's something else. They'll always have something about which to complain.

With the Rams it was money.
With Indy it was the O line.
Etc., etc., etc.

Could the Rams have played in and perhaps won a Superbowl had Dickerson remained a Ram? Who knows, but it would have been nice to find out. If only they'd have paid him AND if only he wasn't a malcontent.

PARAM wrote:My opinion is, yes the Rams were cheap. Yes, Dickerson was phenominal. And, yes, Dickerson was a malcontent.

Malcontents will always have a reason to demand attention. If it's not money, it's targets/carries/snaps. If it's not targets/carries/snaps it's "credit". If it's not "credit" it's something else. They'll always have something about which to complain.

With the Rams it was money.
With Indy it was the O line.
Etc., etc., etc.

Could the Rams have played in and perhaps won a Superbowl had Dickerson remained a Ram? Who knows, but it would have been nice to find out. If only they'd have paid him AND if only he wasn't a malcontent.

Not only were the Rams cheap, they seemed to want to take a hard line stance with ED and make an example of him. I think that's what pissed him off the most. While I was as frustrated as anyone else with ED and wished he would just play, in retrospect, he's actually had a point with some of these things.

I can agree now that he clearly outplayed his rookie contract and had reason to renegotiate. I think the Rams really blew it by fining him $1,000 a day when he held out and then didn't follow through with the good faith deal. Not sure why he wanted a new deal with the Colts but his criticism of the OL, while ill-advised and impractical, wasn't actually wrong.

ED says that he wasn't just about the money but the evidence makes that hard to agree with. But, as much as he lost me with some of his actions on and off the field, I think his career could have been a lot different if he were handled "properly". He had two extremes during his prime. The Rams were hard lined with him and the Colts coddled him. As with so many things, he probably needed something in between. He needed respect and cash but he couldn't be allowed to just do whatever he wanted.

moklerman wrote:ED says that he wasn't just about the money but the evidence makes that hard to agree with. But, as much as he lost me with some of his actions on and off the field, I think his career could have been a lot different if he were handled "properly". He had two extremes during his prime. The Rams were hard lined with him and the Colts coddled him. As with so many things, he probably needed something in between. He needed respect and cash but he couldn't be allowed to just do whatever he wanted.

Don't you or didn't you get the impression Dickerson was never going to be "handled"? Forget about "properly". We need to call it like it is (or was). He was one of the greatest running backs in history but also a malcontent who couldn't be satisfied with money or fame. Can you imagine what he would have demanded had the Rams (or Colts) won a Superbowl with him in the backfield?

Ideally, for Ram fans, the Rams should have given him whatever he asked for and he should have just shut up and played. Neither was going to happen. And maybe neither should have happened. That's his (and the Rams) lot in history. He came into the NFL at the tail end of "you win championships by running and playing great D" and during the genesis of "points come from the passing game and therefore so do wins"

There's a reason no rookie has surpassed his 1808 and no vet his 2105 beyond how great he was in 1983 and 1984. The game is just not played that way anymore. So he'll always have that, though with a RB like ED and a halfway decent QB (like Everett), he should have a ring on his finger.

PARAM wrote:Don't you or didn't you get the impression Dickerson was never going to be "handled"? Forget about "properly". We need to call it like it is (or was). He was one of the greatest running backs in history but also a malcontent who couldn't be satisfied with money or fame. Can you imagine what he would have demanded had the Rams (or Colts) won a Superbowl with him in the backfield?

Ideally, for Ram fans, the Rams should have given him whatever he asked for and he should have just shut up and played. Neither was going to happen. And maybe neither should have happened. That's his (and the Rams) lot in history. He came into the NFL at the tail end of "you win championships by running and playing great D" and during the genesis of "points come from the passing game and therefore so do wins"

There's a reason no rookie has surpassed his 1808 and no vet his 2105 beyond how great he was in 1983 and 1984. The game is just not played that way anymore. So he'll always have that, though with a RB like ED and a halfway decent QB (like Everett), he should have a ring on his finger.

I honestly don't know. I mean, I know that his personality left a lot to be desired at times but I have got to the point that I can't just dismiss his POV as just diva antics. He has been right on many of these subjects so I'm not sure if his stands on principle are just words or if he was sincere.

At the time, I was furious with ED for rocking the boat and causing the Rams so many problems. In hindsight, I'm not so sure. I've seen how Shaw treats star players over the years. Making and breaking promises. Isaac Bruce comes to mind.

So, as much as I was disappointed with how things turned out, I have had to re-examine my perspective on the situation. Shaw has apologized, the other players supported ED, ED was standing on principle...it's not as clear cut as I used to think.

Classic Frontiere messin' around like a fool.. Leroy Irvin is one solid Cat.. Leroy and Vince Ferragamo used to volunteer their personal time to help Coach up our Firemens Charity Football Team in Orange County.. Solid dudes! Also, if you don't think Georgia didn't have a hand in Caroll Rosenbloom's drowning in Mexico (expert swimmer, calm seas).. I've got some oceanfront real estate in the desert for ya.. peace out