I just don't understand why so many insist they have to redo his deal. It appears that people are under the impression that Bradford somehow owes the organization a "rebate" and "should" volunteer to take less $$$ than is contractually owed to him.
My question, how many of those who seem so strong about this position, would be willing to take a "heavy pay cut" and rework the final year on the contract, without some sort of protection (extension) if they were in Bradford's position?
It's easy to say he "has made enough" and "can afford to take a reduced amount".... But why would he? Players just don't give back money without getting some guarantees that they will make it back in more years, etc. And if the Rams play hardball with him, what contingencies would they have in place that wont' cost them a similar $$$ amount? (trade for a comparable starter?)
Let's follow that line of thought for the purpose of discussion.....
What do those who want him to "rework" his deal, think would be a fair $$$ amount?
Also, lets just say he agrees to play for $6-7M with incentives. When you factor in the prorated cap hit, his "number" would still be in the $11 - 12M range. How much are you saving? At $13M, he isn't even in the upper echelon of contracts for a starting QB.
The only way to make this doable from Bradford's perspective, would be to extend him beyond the 2016 season. Given his recent injury issues, would the Rams be willing to do that?
I guess my point is, while it makes for a good discussion, IMO, it's not a slam dunk that his contract will be reduced at all prior to next year. If he comes back and shows he is healthy and capable of being the QB that Fisher and Snead think he is, then I could see them extending him and working on his SECOND contract.