Did AJ Smith "win" with the way he handled Jackson? (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

The exception was already there, he doesn't have to MAKE one to pay the guy a reasonable salary (which by the way he just did with McNeill).

Only after McNeill reported. I don't know if Jackson will end up getting a long-term deal from the Chargers after he reports or not. (Kevin Acee has been saying he's not in their long-term plans, and Acee turned out to be right when he kept saying that about Merriman for the last few years. But that doesn't mean he's definitely right about Jackson.) But AJ has always preferred negotiating with players who are there rather than with players who are not there. That was his stance with Gates a few years ago, for example. Come into camp and then we'll talk. That was his stance with McNeill as well. That might be one reason why the Chargers haven't had severe holdout issues in the last few years (until now). AJ has taken care of players by extending them (in some cases too generously), but not while they are holding out.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?

Hard to say. If he tore his ACL in week 4 this year while making $3.2M, then definitely. If he made it through the 2010 season healthy and productive, then probably not.

What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

If he doesn't have a contract, he's drastically over-performed for you in the past, and he's a RFA worth a lot more than the minumum 1st round tender you can give him, then yes, you do.If none or not all of those apply to the player in question, then no, you don't.I am NOT a hold-out apologist and generally side with management on many issues. This was NOT your typical hold-out. In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it. Meanwhile other lesser receivers on the team are (and have been) making way more, and an average special teams player on the team was just given $14M over two years.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

 

[craxie]

It's a short-term versus long-term question. Over the long term, what is going to be your standard approach each season: to pay RFAs as if they were UFAs, or to pay them like RFAs? Once you make one exception, you'll be expected to do it again and again.

Don't believe it will be precedent setting for several reasons:1. Most of the time RFAs aren't worth significantly more their tender2. Those that are worth more will usually be locked up before it gets to this point. This year was a little flukey with all the CBA stuff.3. VJ apparently believed that he had a reasonable shot at being a UFA even if he sat out all year, something more akin to a draft pick than a usual RFA

 

[Hang 10]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He offered him the minimum he was required to offer and then when Jackson balked, Smith reduced the offer to 500k. Generous, right?

 

[omahabrad]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

Jackson probably lost the battle of public relations but I don't think he's worried about, he just wants to make more money. Pretty sure he'll get his big contract next year. So he has to wait a year. The Chargers on the other hand end up with a consolation prize draft pick and still will have to find a top wr next year. So, ya I think he won.

 

[Tau837]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He offered him the minimum he was required to offer and then when Jackson balked, Smith reduced the offer to 500k. Generous, right?

He didn't offer him the minimum he was required to offer. He offered him the maximum tender and the accompanying salary. He could have offered a lesser tender and thus a lesser accompanying salary.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

It's a short-term versus long-term question. Over the long term, what is going to be your standard approach each season: to pay RFAs as if they were UFAs, or to pay them like RFAs? Once you make one exception, you'll be expected to do it again and again.

Don't believe it will be precedent setting for several reasons:1. Most of the time RFAs aren't worth significantly more their tender2. Those that are worth more will usually be locked up before it gets to this point. This year was a little flukey with all the CBA stuff.3. VJ apparently believed that he had a reasonable shot at being a UFA even if he sat out all year, something more akin to a draft pick than a usual RFA

Setting a precedent for a situation that will likely never occur again doesn't really have much meaning.But MT doesn't believe the crazy 6th year RFA status should be treated any differently than any other RFA out there, and apparently that's the way AJ feels as well. It's a defendable position I guess, but it doesn't make sense to me. This really isn't like any other RFA situation there has ever been, so to lump it in with all the rest just doesn't seem right.

 

[craxie]

That doesn't follow. Outrageousness is a matter of context. Other teams didn't have his RFA rights.

The charger's can't be guaranteed of retaining them next year if he sits outThat is also part of the context

 

[Hang 10]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He offered him the minimum he was required to offer and then when Jackson balked, Smith reduced the offer to 500k. Generous, right?

He didn't offer him the minimum he was required to offer. He offered him the maximum tender and the accompanying salary. He could have offered a lesser tender and thus a lesser accompanying salary.

Obviously the only reason he didn't offer a lesser tender was because another team would have signed him. Smith offered him the least possible amount he could.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it.

I totally agree that Jackson got screwed over by the CBA situation. But the Chargers didn't cause that situation anymore than Jackson did, and it's not their responsibility to make up for it. Just like it's not Jackson's responsibility to chip in to help cover payroll for the NFL teams that have spent more than what the salary cap would have been. There is no salary cap this season; and there is no unrestricted free agency for players with five accrued seasons. You can't pick and choose which consequences of an uncapped year should be honored and which should be ignored. It's an uncapped year, and Jackson is an RFA. I think the Chargers are right to treat their RFAs like RFAs. Others disagree. I doubt a few more threads will change anything, but in the meantime at least it provides an alternative to discussing anything having to do with Brett Favre.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He offered him the minimum he was required to offer and then when Jackson balked, Smith reduced the offer to 500k. Generous, right?

He didn't offer him the minimum he was required to offer. He offered him the maximum tender and the accompanying salary. He could have offered a lesser tender and thus a lesser accompanying salary.

It was the minimum he could offer and still get 1st and 3rd for compensation if somebody snagged him. Since a team would be much more likely to snag him at a lower tender value, it was essentially the lowest he could offer him if he had any intention of retaining him.On the other hand, since there was no existing contract, he could have offered him anything over that $3.2M - it's not like that number was a CAP of any kind, it was a MINIMUM value for that tender.

 

[crnerblitz]

In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it.

I totally agree that Jackson got screwed over by the CBA situation. But the Chargers didn't cause that situation anymore than Jackson did, and it's not their responsibility to make up for it. Just like it's not Jackson's responsibility to chip in to help cover payroll for the NFL teams that have spent more than what the salary cap would have been. There is no salary cap this season; and there is no unrestricted free agency for players with five accrued seasons. You can't pick and choose which consequences of an uncapped year should be honored and which should be ignored. It's an uncapped year, and Jackson is an RFA. I think the Chargers are right to treat their RFAs like RFAs. Others disagree. I doubt a few more threads will change anything, but in the meantime at least it provides an alternative to discussing anything having to do with Brett Favre.

Ah, but here is the thing. yes the Chargers get a one time windfall because of the cba expiring, but only if they so choose to play hardball. Hardball with a 6th year Probowl player who played out and out played his entire rookie contract without real complaint about being underpaid. Jackson never did any of the things that guys outpreforming their rookie contracts have to do in order to be equitably compensated, such as missing ota's and holding out of camps. No, Jackson just soldered on like a loyal employee honoring his 5 yr deal. His reward is a punch in the nose from AJ when Jackon reminded AJ that the Chargers windfall was comming on his back. No compasion or compuction about sticking it to Jackson for the very most he could get out of the windfall event.

Do you suppose this might be a lesson to other players out preforming their rookie contracts? That playing the good employee with the Chargers and not missing ota's and camp isn't really worthwhile at all because A.J. is only interested in screwing you over at every chance.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it.

I totally agree that Jackson got screwed over by the CBA situation. But the Chargers didn't cause that situation anymore than Jackson did, and it's not their responsibility to make up for it. Just like it's not Jackson's responsibility to chip in to help cover payroll for the NFL teams that have spent more than what the salary cap would have been. There is no salary cap this season; and there is no unrestricted free agency for players with five accrued seasons. You can't pick and choose which consequences of an uncapped year should be honored and which should be ignored. It's an uncapped year, and Jackson is an RFA. I think the Chargers are right to treat their RFAs like RFAs. Others disagree. I doubt a few more threads will change anything, but in the meantime at least it provides an alternative to discussing anything having to do with Brett Favre.

In 09 wasn't SD like $14M under the cap? Point being, I don't think the lack of a salary cap has had any negative consequences for SD at this point (unless they signed a bunch if guys I don't know about). I get your point that you can't pick and choose, and while it sucks for Jackson, he IS a RFA. I don't think he needed to be treated like a full-blown UFA, but there was a huge range of options available to management that they chose to ignore. Even among the "standard issue" RFAs, there are a lot of variables to deal with, and this one had way more than any before and should have been taken into consideration.I know you don't think salary comparisons past or present should have anything to do with the "negotiation" between Jackson and management, but don't you think a guy in his situation HAS to be thinking about Sproles' salary, Marshall's salary, Buster's salary, etc? It's sad, but the guy is actually getting OLD in terms of football career-span, and tacking on ANOTHER year to his already long 5 year rookie contract was probably just more than he was willing to put up with when everyone around him (many of whom aren't on his level in terms of talent and RESULTS produced for the team in question) is getting a mega-deal.

Bottom line is that there was no contract, regardless of FA status. AJ offered him a contract, and Jackson didn't think it was a fair offer for his services. I agree.

 

[basher]

worst special teams in the nfl and lost 3 games because of it.

 

[Team ROFLCOPTERS]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He was offered the minimum amount he was required to offer him.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

In general, offense has not been a big problem for the Chargers thus far.

19.5 points per game in losses is not exactly impressive. 3 points in the first half against the Rams.0 points in the first half against the Seahawks. That is a problem the Chargers have had for years: the offense starts off terrible, and then piles up tons of yards making a furious comeback, but this year, all of those yards aren't translating to enough points to win games they fall behind early in.

Unfortunately, the Chargers fumbled three times in the first half against the Seahawks. Don't see how Jackson would have changed that. Besides which, he wouldn't have played in that game.The Rams showing was definitely disappointing, but that had quite a bit to do with the OL not protecting Rivers in the first half (5 sacks IIRC) and injuries. Not sure how Jackson would have changed that.

Jackson would have increased their ability to score points by some margin, so with that in mind, Jackson would have increased their ability to come back from those mistakes.... And maybe the game plan would have been different with Jackson in the game as well... Maybe less fumbles?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Jackson would also have been better off if the Chargers had given him a lot more money. I'm not sure whether the Chargers would have been.

I suppose it depends on how much winning a game is worth to you . . .

Yes, it's a short-term vs. long-term question.

Why isn't Jackson considered a good long term investment? Forget what he was asking for, lets talk about how much the Chargers could have ended up paying him if AJ wasn't so darn bullish....

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Jackson would also have been better off if the Chargers had given him a lot more money. I'm not sure whether the Chargers would have been.

I suppose it depends on how much winning a game is worth to you . . .

Yes, it's a short-term vs. long-term question.

I thought you were just talking about paying more for this season? (Say the $6 million the Vikes supposedly offered)I guess I'm missing the long-term impact of that.

It's a short-term versus long-term question. Over the long term, what is going to be your standard approach each season: to pay RFAs as if they were UFAs, or to pay them like RFAs? Once you make one exception, you'll be expected to do it again and again.

I don't agree, each situation has it's own set of circumstances and can easily be handled differently based on those circumstances..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Again, if Jackson wasn't worth what he was asking, why not trade him?

Because he's worth more than the $206,000 they'll end up paying him this season, so it's a good deal to keep him.And anyway, Jackson might be worth a zillion dollars as an unrestricted free agent. But since he's not an unrestricted free agent, that's immaterial. As a restricted free agent, the $3.3 million offer was quite reasonable.

So they're getting a real bargain on a losing season... Guess it depends on what you consider a good deal, and what your intended outcome is...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Floyd and Jackson together is better than Floyd alone...There should be no question there...This team, no matter how well the offense has done, would be better on offense with Jackson.

Correct. The Chargers would be a better team with Vincent Jackson in the lineup. They'd also be a better team with Tamba Hali, Troy Polamalu, and Damien Woody. But that doesn't mean it would be wise to do whatever it takes to get those players. There are longer-term concerns than just putting the best possible team on the field in 2010.

Point was, that Floyd hasn't made Jackson irrelevant...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

did Jackson "win" the way he handled the situation?What's a GM supposed to do each time a player wants a raise, pay him or trade him?

That's what you think this situation was? A player demanding a raise?

He was offered a huge raise. He was demanding a huger one.

He should have been offered what he was worth.. That never happened, that's why we are where we are now... His request was no more out of line than AJ's... Jackson was willing to talk, AJ was not unless Jackson did as he was told, which didn't happen. And now AJ where's an omelet mask for Halloween...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it.

I totally agree that Jackson got screwed over by the CBA situation. But the Chargers didn't cause that situation anymore than Jackson did, and it's not their responsibility to make up for it. Just like it's not Jackson's responsibility to chip in to help cover payroll for the NFL teams that have spent more than what the salary cap would have been. There is no salary cap this season; and there is no unrestricted free agency for players with five accrued seasons. You can't pick and choose which consequences of an uncapped year should be honored and which should be ignored. It's an uncapped year, and Jackson is an RFA. I think the Chargers are right to treat their RFAs like RFAs. Others disagree. I doubt a few more threads will change anything, but in the meantime at least it provides an alternative to discussing anything having to do with Brett Favre.

Chargers didn't cause the CBA situation, but they had an opportunity to rectify it between them and Jackson and choose not to..You are right in saying they have the right to treat the RFA's the way they choose, and where that becomes a problem is when the player then exercises their own rights.. leaving the way they choose to deal with it a bad decision...

 

[Carolina Hustler]

In his 6th year, a pro-bowl WR who played out his entire undervalued 5-year rookie contract was offered a $3.2M one year deal and told to take it or leave it.

I totally agree that Jackson got screwed over by the CBA situation. But the Chargers didn't cause that situation anymore than Jackson did, and it's not their responsibility to make up for it. Just like it's not Jackson's responsibility to chip in to help cover payroll for the NFL teams that have spent more than what the salary cap would have been. There is no salary cap this season; and there is no unrestricted free agency for players with five accrued seasons. You can't pick and choose which consequences of an uncapped year should be honored and which should be ignored. It's an uncapped year, and Jackson is an RFA. I think the Chargers are right to treat their RFAs like RFAs. Others disagree. I doubt a few more threads will change anything, but in the meantime at least it provides an alternative to discussing anything having to do with Brett Favre.

Ah, but here is the thing. yes the Chargers get a one time windfall because of the cba expiring, but only if they so choose to play hardball. Hardball with a 6th year Probowl player who played out and out played his entire rookie contract without real complaint about being underpaid. Jackson never did any of the things that guys outpreforming their rookie contracts have to do in order to be equitably compensated, such as missing ota's and holding out of camps. No, Jackson just soldered on like a loyal employee honoring his 5 yr deal. His reward is a punch in the nose from AJ when Jackon reminded AJ that the Chargers windfall was comming on his back. No compasion or compuction about sticking it to Jackson for the very most he could get out of the windfall event.

Do you suppose this might be a lesson to other players out preforming their rookie contracts? That playing the good employee with the Chargers and not missing ota's and camp isn't really worthwhile at all because A.J. is only interested in screwing you over at every chance.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I say AJ won. I think agents tell their clients "Don't worry, they'll cave eventually." AJ doesn't cave. Jackson doesn't want to sign that tender. He has to do it. He doesn't get to sit out the whole year like he probably told everyone he would do.

Sure, the team is better with Jackson. But I'm not sure the record would be any different. I don't recall watching any Chargers games and thinking "the missing piece on this team is a franchise receiver."

Jackson has baggage. That affects his bargaining power. Maybe the team, knowing him a little, didn't think it was definitely his last suspension. The team that signs him will shell out a lot of money, but will assume more risk than with a normal player.

 

[trader jake]

I fail to see how "AJ won" considering the team's current record. In the end that's all that matters.

That record has more to do with Norv Turner being the head coach that the McNeill and Jackson situations though.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

If other teams were willing to pay them, by definition they weren't outrageous.

Yeah - this one seems odd to me. VJax found multiple teams that were willing to pay him a salary he was willing to accept. AJ Smith could not find a single team willing to meet his draft pick demands as part of a trade. But somehow it's Jackson's demands that are "outrageous."

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

AJ Smith's stance on Vjax was basically we don't need you. The record certainly isn't bearing that out. He will get nothing in return for Jackson except possibly a compensatory pick which I've read Jackson is going to structure a contract to minimize this. So maybe a 5th rounder or so. This is a team that has already lost more games than last season and probably won't make the playoffs. So did he handle it properly? Is getting your way more important than wins? How does the Chargers fan base judge him? I think he royally bagged this up.

let's see.....chargers lead the league in passing yards, are far and away the leader in yds/att, and fall one short in passing td's to the colts for tops in that category.was this a joke thread?by the way, last year's chargers opened the first 5 games at 2 and 3.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I fail to see how "AJ won" considering the team's current record. In the end that's all that matters.That record has more to do with Norv Turner being the head coach that the McNeill and Jackson situations though.

It's been said here before, but there's no way to know that Jackson would have changed the record at all. I'm not convinced he would have. Even if you say he would have turned one game into a win...that's not enough to offset the precedent imo. At the very most that kind of "cost" was two wins in one season. At the least it was no wins.The lesson learned is you can't hijack the team, especially when you're a behavioral risk. I'm not saying I don't see Jackson's side-- he did play out his contract. But when push comes to shove, the players are usually the ones who get shoved. I still say AJ won. The next agent will have to take this situation into account when advising their client.

 

[geoff8695]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...

Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?

What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

 

[Sabertooth]

AJ Smith's stance on Vjax was basically we don't need you. The record certainly isn't bearing that out. He will get nothing in return for Jackson except possibly a compensatory pick which I've read Jackson is going to structure a contract to minimize this. So maybe a 5th rounder or so. This is a team that has already lost more games than last season and probably won't make the playoffs. So did he handle it properly? Is getting your way more important than wins? How does the Chargers fan base judge him? I think he royally bagged this up.

let's see.....chargers lead the league in passing yards, are far and away the leader in yds/att, and fall one short in passing td's to the colts for tops in that category.was this a joke thread?by the way, last year's chargers opened the first 5 games at 2 and 3.

This team is 2-4 so I don't understand what that has to do with last year's team. Also, while they have really nice stats, I doubt AJ Smith is in the stat compiling business. He's in the business of winning. This team has already lost more games than last year.

 

[Sabertooth]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

Apparently AJ wins no matter what according to some on here. We'll see.

 

[Please See Mine]

how many times does it need to be said? Chargers are not losing because they are missing VJ.

They certainly aren't winning without him. So that leaves losing.

1st in offense and 1st in defense. Was VJax going to be blocking on punts?

 

[yoadrian]

If other teams were willing to pay them, by definition they weren't outrageous.

Yeah - this one seems odd to me. VJax found multiple teams that were willing to pay him a salary he was willing to accept. AJ Smith could not find a single team willing to meet his draft pick demands as part of a trade. But somehow it's Jackson's demands that are "outrageous."

Fact is, 1st rule of negotiating is to get what you can for a lost cause. Jackson is a lost cause, lost season. There is absolutely no reason why he could not be dealt. Now if Jackson comes back he is going to be spiteful and not play 100%. No additional picks for the Chargers..I stated before that the Chargers organization has a knack for finding talent, but also loosing it. Can you imagine what they would be with Brees, LT, VJ and instead of getting Rivers, Matthews working on they're defense?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If Im Vjax I fire my agent for a tact like that. Im gonna get paid, who cares about some random comp pick that might be a 4th or 3rd rounder? woo hoo you sure showed them Vjax.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If Im Vjax I fire my agent for a tact like that. Im gonna get paid, who cares about some random comp pick that might be a 4th or 3rd rounder? woo hoo you sure showed them Vjax.

It would definitely be petty, I'll give you that. Can you think of anyone else Vincent Jackson might think is petty at this point?I don't think it will happen mostly because the other team probably isn't going to want to play ball like that, but if it didn't hurt Jackson in any way, and he could get away with it, from his perspective why not? Be the bigger man I guess, but AJ and the team cost him a year of his career (again, strictly from Jackson's perspective), so minimizing any benefit the team might get from that maneuver would be fair game it seems to me.You can argue about the validity of his perspective (which is what we've been doing), but that's a different discussion.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If Im Vjax I fire my agent for a tact like that. Im gonna get paid, who cares about some random comp pick that might be a 4th or 3rd rounder? woo hoo you sure showed them Vjax.

If I were V.Jax, I would structure my next deal to make sure my agents got as little compensation as possible. I'd take no signing bonus and just the minimum salary. I'd take the rest in performance incentives and then I'd play really bad on purpose.Ha, stun on them!

 

[Mr. PadresLakers]

SAN DIEGO (AP) -- Vincent Jackson's agent says he's told the San Diego Chargers that the wide receiver will report next week and sign his contract tender.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/foot...d#ixzz131zJKUa1

 

[Mr. PadresLakers]

If the question is who is the biggest loser the answer is Vincent Jackson and its not even close....

- Salary has been reduced to a pathetic amount

- Forced to either play it out or risk hurting his market value by becoming a cancer and/or self diagnosed injury risk

- Watched lightly regarded WR Malcolm Floyd step into his role and reproduce his "elite" production

- Agent sold him on the idea of getting paid now and failed to deliver

 

[David Yudkin]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If there is still such a designation, the Chargers could franchise him next year.

 

[Serenity Now]

If the question is who is the biggest loser the answer is Vincent Jackson and its not even close....- Salary has been reduced to a pathetic amount- Forced to either play it out or risk hurting his market value by becoming a cancer and/or self diagnosed injury risk- Watched lightly regarded WR Malcolm Floyd step into his role and reproduce his "elite" production- Agent sold him on the idea of getting paid now and failed to deliver

How soon will he report? With both Gates and Floyd injured now, will he be ready to play the role of savior to the team? If he can make an impact, his bad PR could all go away.

 

[Gr00vus]

If the question is who is the biggest loser the answer is Vincent Jackson and its not even close....- Salary has been reduced to a pathetic amount- Forced to either play it out or risk hurting his market value by becoming a cancer and/or self diagnosed injury risk- Watched lightly regarded WR Malcolm Floyd step into his role and reproduce his "elite" production- Agent sold him on the idea of getting paid now and failed to deliver

How soon will he report? With both Gates and Floyd injured now, will he be ready to play the role of savior to the team? If he can make an impact, his bad PR could all go away.

If all goes according to plan, he'll be in the starting lineup when they play the Colts in week 12.Edited to correct the week of the Colts game.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If the question is who is the biggest loser the answer is Vincent Jackson and its not even close....- Salary has been reduced to a pathetic amount- Forced to either play it out or risk hurting his market value by becoming a cancer and/or self diagnosed injury risk- Watched lightly regarded WR Malcolm Floyd step into his role and reproduce his "elite" production- Agent sold him on the idea of getting paid now and failed to deliver

How soon will he report? With both Gates and Floyd injured now, will he be ready to play the role of savior to the team? If he can make an impact, his bad PR could all go away.

If all goes according to plan, he'll be in the starting lineup when they play the Colts in week 11.

He'd need to report this week for that.I believe he's planning to report next week, so he'd be eligible to play in week 12.ETA: Week 12 is the Colts game.

 

[fatness]

how many times does it need to be said? Chargers are not losing because they are missing VJ.

They certainly aren't winning without him. So that leaves losing.

1st in offense and 1st in defense. Was VJax going to be blocking on punts?

There are 6 teams in the league with worse records than San Diego.There are 23 teams with better records.

 

[Ray_T]

I think AJ lost this battle. He turned it from contract negotiations into a pissing match. I believe he will feel the effects from this longer than Vincent will.I don't see how Vincent loses in this. He gave up 3 million to make 7 million. Looks like a good business decission to me.

I agree on the first point. AJ will also find that players will begin to not want to play for him due to the way he handles situations like this. This is not a good situation to be in.as for Vince, he loses too. anytime you are playing for millions of dollars per year, and have to sit out a full year, you are losing in the end.assuming the average career is 10 years long, he is giving up 10% of his lifetime earnings. That is a lot of dough.

 

[geoff8695]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If there is still such a designation, the Chargers could franchise him next year.

If the Chargers are willing to franchise him and then have to pay him top dollar for 2011, then how much more foolish does AJ look for screwing with him in 2010, and costing both the Chargers and VJ essentially a lost season?And if VJ and his agent are worried about that possibility of the Chargers derailing their efforts to obtain a long term deal in the off-season by franchising taggin him... then tell me how much more likely is that VJ refuses to play nice from week 12 on and finds creative ways to ensure that he isn't 'available' to be activated for gamedays?I don't think you will ever see VJ take the field again for the Chargers, barring AJ turning around and throwing significant $$$ at him first. It isn't in VJ's best interests to risk life and limb playing for a couple hundred thousand, when multi-millions are in his future so long as he makes it to the offseason without injury. On top of all that is the possibility you bring up, that AJ is going to continue to screw with him by franchising him in 2011, which gives VJ all the more incentive to NOT play this year so that AJ really would have to think twice about throwing a franchise tag on him going forward.Given the bad blood that AJ has created here, I will be if VJ actually takes the field at all this year.

 

[Tau837]

Next spring/fall when the Chargers are NOT getting the 2nd round pick+ that they coulda/shoulda/woulda gotten in trade for him; and VJ's agent structures his year one salary in such a way that SD gets little to no compensation after VJ finally signs his big UFA contract...Who will have won then? Will it be the Charger fans who are apparently brimming with pride for the way their GM showed Jackson who's boss?What if VJ doesn't even see the field after signing his tender, and is 'unavailable' to help the Chargers as they disappoint fans with a 3rd place divisional finish? Who wins in that potential scenario?

If there is still such a designation, the Chargers could franchise him next year.

If the Chargers are willing to franchise him and then have to pay him top dollar for 2011, then how much more foolish does AJ look for screwing with him in 2010, and costing both the Chargers and VJ essentially a lost season?And if VJ and his agent are worried about that possibility of the Chargers derailing their efforts to obtain a long term deal in the off-season by franchising taggin him... then tell me how much more likely is that VJ refuses to play nice from week 12 on and finds creative ways to ensure that he isn't 'available' to be activated for gamedays?I don't think you will ever see VJ take the field again for the Chargers, barring AJ turning around and throwing significant $$$ at him first. It isn't in VJ's best interests to risk life and limb playing for a couple hundred thousand, when multi-millions are in his future so long as he makes it to the offseason without injury. On top of all that is the possibility you bring up, that AJ is going to continue to screw with him by franchising him in 2011, which gives VJ all the more incentive to NOT play this year so that AJ really would have to think twice about throwing a franchise tag on him going forward.Given the bad blood that AJ has created here, I will be if VJ actually takes the field at all this year.

Dude, how many times are you going to post the same stuff before Jackson is eligible to play?

 

[geoff8695]

Dude, how many times are you going to post the same stuff before Jackson is eligible to play?

I dunno, how many times are Chargers fans who are normally reasonable and well respected posters and/or staff member(s) going to try to convince me that AJ is in the right and VJ is an idiot?I think your GM totally mishandled this situation, and set your team back, yet some of you sound like he is GM of the year, and eagerly await how he is going to stick it to VJ next time around...I think if you are depending upon VJ to continue to do what he did for the first 5 years and keep his mouth shut and play nice are fooling yourselves given the ugliness that has taken place so far. I guess we'll all find out around week 12.

 

[Tau837]

Dude, how many times are you going to post the same stuff before Jackson is eligible to play?

I dunno, how many times are Chargers fans who are normally reasonable and well respected posters and/or staff member(s) going to try to convince me that AJ is in the right and VJ is an idiot?I think your GM totally mishandled this situation, and set your team back, yet some of you sound like he is GM of the year, and eagerly await how he is going to stick it to VJ next time around...I think if you are depending upon VJ to continue to do what he did for the first 5 years and keep his mouth shut and play nice are fooling yourselves given the ugliness that has taken place so far. I guess we'll all find out around week 12.

I think you are off the rails here. First off, your last two posts that were quoted in my response that you quoted here were not directly in response to any posts by Chargers fans. At least you didn't quote any. Nor did you quote anyone who was trying to convince you that A.J. is in the right and Jackson is an idiot. Furthermore, no one in this thread has portrayed A.J. as GM of the year or anything close to it, so you're just exaggerating on that point.And, yes, you must have posted at least 20 times that you expect that Jackson won't play to the best of his ability when he comes back. We get it. Really. You can stop now. In weeks 12 to 17, you will be proven right or wrong. I think wrong, but we'll see. If you turn out to be right, there must be several threads by now that you can go back to and bump to point out that you were right and A.J. is an idiot. There is no need to keep regurgitating the same thing over and over.

 

[Mr. PadresLakers]

If the Chargers are willing to franchise him and then have to pay him top dollar for 2011, then how much more foolish does AJ look for screwing with him in 2010, and costing both the Chargers and VJ essentially a lost season?And if VJ and his agent are worried about that possibility of the Chargers derailing their efforts to obtain a long term deal in the off-season by franchising taggin him... then tell me how much more likely is that VJ refuses to play nice from week 12 on and finds creative ways to ensure that he isn't 'available' to be activated for gamedays?I don't think you will ever see VJ take the field again for the Chargers, barring AJ turning around and throwing significant $$$ at him first. It isn't in VJ's best interests to risk life and limb playing for a couple hundred thousand, when multi-millions are in his future so long as he makes it to the offseason without injury. On top of all that is the possibility you bring up, that AJ is going to continue to screw with him by franchising him in 2011, which gives VJ all the more incentive to NOT play this year so that AJ really would have to think twice about throwing a franchise tag on him going forward.Given the bad blood that AJ has created here, I will be if VJ actually takes the field at all this year.

He wouldn't look foolish at all. He would be preserving trade assets for the least amount of money possible. That's the goal of every GM.If you believe A.J Smith is as petty, egotistical and diabolical as you make him out to be then what better way is there to screw over Vincent Jackson's earning power than by tagging him and denying him the financial security of a long term contract. What better way is there to punish a lowly player and agent for daring to defy him. If this is personal why wouldn't AJ Smith reward Vincent Jackson's reluctance to genuinely suit up this season by locking him into the same misery next season. If Vincent Jackson continues the charade that you believe is inevitable for another season he would have spent two full seasons in is earning prime racking up fines, negative publicity and statistical zeros. Does that sound like a recipe for a big payday when he eventually become a real unrestricted free agent?