What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

MJD to Holdout (1 Viewer)

Shad Khan is the Clint Eastwood of owners....man! Telling MJD the train is leaving the station and "Run! Get on it!"Ballsy
I don't know about you but this isn't the best way to negotiate a deal. Sounds like an ultimatum to me.
Reminiscent of the matter of fact method used by Steelers front office & HC Tomlin regarding Wallace contract.
Or the bengals and palmer last year.My understanding is that Khan is an experienced negotiator in the industrial setting. From his point of view its probably simple: you signed a contract, now honor it. From MJD's point of view, its probably simple too; I'm 27 and with my running style and this team makeup that doesn't look like they are going to get me anything less than 8 in a box anytime soon, I need a new deal now, because who is going to PAY a 29 year old RB with about 650 more carries than I have now?It's tough because there is reason on both sides but, at the end of the day, there was a time when the player and his agent sat down at a table and signed a contract and said "this is what we want".I
 
Khan is a businessman. A very good one at that. He just earned huge points with Goodell for agreeing to playing in london the next four years.

As a new owner, I am sure he is focused on the Jaguars as a Brand-not individual players that he has no history with. MJD is one of those players, with a contract dispute, that he has inherited. I don't think Kahn has the same affinity for MJD that the old owner Weaver would have.

And as a new owner, it's about precedent. You have to agree that other owners would be pissed if he caves. I remember hearing reports of owners up in arms when AL Davis gave Shane Lechler, the punter, a massive contract. There is some pressure from the other owners here that gets factored in.....

And as others have stated, it's his first contract dispute in the NFL. I don't agree on how he has handled this ....the last comments about the train leaving, but when you are a billionaire, are rich, and you have power, you probably don't give a rat's @$# of offending your star holdout.

It does show me some cracks here....that after a sitdown with MJD, and still holding out, Kahn is frustrated, and lost his cool first.

Count me as one that thinks MJD will be landed for a second rounder...

As for MJD, the way he carried that team last year, he has every right to ask for more money. He earned it. Especially coming off a year where he just had microfracture surgery and not 100%.....laid it on the line, and he wants to be compensated.

Companies offer incentives to top performers.....this is no different, and Khan the businessman should already know this. What'd MJD have last year, 1,601 yards IIRC?

Pay him or deal him......hopefully he lands in a better situation than JAx....

 
I have followed this situation closely and now it's a situation of pride vs money. The only player I have seen choose pride is Carson Palmer.

When MJD reports and he will becaue of the money the main question has to be whether he is laying it on thr line for the jaguars and the organization.

There is no way he will be doing that at this point.

Kahn needs to come out pubivly and apologize for his comments yesterday or I wouldn't touch MJD.

 
Hearing talk that Broncos are in the mix.
You really think there is a mix? I think we are still a ways from any serious trade talks.
:shrug: Incarcerated Bob:

**BREAKING NFL NEWS**Source: Teams have started calling Jags about the availability of MJD so far Broncos seem the most interested
ETA:
Teams are "CALLING" nobody said Jags where offering MDJ or willing to trade him yet.. Jags will listen no harm in that right now
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MJD's last contract (for review and reflection).

4/15/2009: Signed a five-year, $30.95 million contract.

The deal contains $17.5 million guaranteed, including a $9 million signing bonus and Jones-Drew's base salaries in years one and two. Another $1.8 million is available through incentives.

2012: $4.45 million

2013: $4.95 million

2014: Free Agent

I truly see both sides. He is worth more than what he gets paid this year and next but at the same time, he was given an $18M check three years ago as good faith and money up front. He could have easily been hurt or not played hard and had a lot of money for nothing so I could never say the team didn't ever treat him right.

I agree this is really about pride and MJD, to me, might be one of a very few guys, besides Palmer, that might actually choose pride over money.

Will be interesting to see this play out.

 
why negotiate with MJD? He's under contract and you're sitting on RB Jennings who's very good .... let MJD stay at home, you save millions and you've still got a very good RB and running game

the owner and team and franchise isn't losing here, MJD is

 
Jags have taken the right stance here. I've said that a few times now. I understand that MJD wants one more big payday though.

 
When he signed the new deal in 2009 you are missing one important piece of the negotiations.

In his first two years he was paid 3 Million dollars over the 1 year tender a franchise RB signed in either of those years so he was being compensated generously during those first two years of his contract.

 
I'm fully with the owner here. You signed it, now honor it, or we can talk when you have 1 yr left.

I will also say that I am in a very small camp. There are alot of comments here stating "he's worth more, he should get paid more". I obviously don't make the same amount of money that most people on this site obviously make. 4.45 million to play sports is a buttload of money to me. Just because some other idiot owner pays his RB 14mil, means that now my RB is more valuable and have to pay him more? I think the salaries of high profile players have gotten out of hand and have corrupted fans into thinking "since player x got $, and our player y ran for 100 more yds, then he should get $+" Really???

 
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.

 
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
He would have been cut by now. That is why I have no problem with players holding out in these scenarios. MJD has vastly outplayed his contract, so he wants more. On the flip side, players who vastly underplay their contracts usually get cut. It goes both ways.
 
I personally can't stand the guy. After listening to his radio show on Sirius several times, he strikes me as a pretty big jerk. That said, how perfect would he fit in Detroit. Man. That offense would reach a whole new level of scary.

 
As I said with CJ and AP, it's silly to ever pay a RB what they really "deserve". MJD is no different. Oddly, you don't normally see the less successful NFL teams take the right stance regarding RBs. The good teams generally don't give RBs big contracts, but the crappy ones usually do. Good for the Jags (assuming they hold strong).

Interesting to see what they do here.

I do love MJD as a player though (and I'm invested in keeper leagues). For those that say a trade for MJD would be good, I have 2 questions:

1. What are the chances anyone would actually trade for him? Seems pretty low to me.

2. In the unlikely event he does get traded, what are the chances he'd actually improve his situation? That seems really low to me.

Most teams with offenses good enough to open up some running lanes for MJD aren't dumb enough to focus the entire offense on one RB, like JAX did. The only 2 I can think of are all set at RB (BAL, HOU).

Likely scenario is he just goes to another bad team that'll give him bunch of carries. Even then, most have someone that would steal significant carries.

Although, it would be quite glorious if Denver decided McGahee is a little too old to rely on........

 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.

 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
Thank you.
 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming. There's no moral high ground to be debated here. There's only questions of whether or not this was wise by MJD or ownership and what is the likely fallout.Re: possibilities of a trade, at what point does it become too late in the season/pre-season? No matter how good of a player they are, they're only really useful if they know your playbook/system. If a trade was to happen, it would have to pretty much have to happen before the regular season started, no?
I think running back is considered one of the easiest positions to transition from one offense to another in. He'd probably see limited snaps for a couple of games but that's it.
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
The evidence is pretty clear on this, I think. When teams are forced with the decision to make a talented RB one of the highest paid in the league or go with a less-talented RB (or better, a couple of them) at a fraction of the cost, it pretty much always makes sense to go with the cheaper RB.The Jags might not win more game without MJD, but if they ever become an elite team, it won't be because they gave MJD the money.
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
The evidence is pretty clear on this, I think. When teams are forced with the decision to make a talented RB one of the highest paid in the league or go with a less-talented RB (or better, a couple of them) at a fraction of the cost, it pretty much always makes sense to go with the cheaper RB.The Jags might not win more game without MJD, but if they ever become an elite team, it won't be because they gave MJD the money.
Ive watched Gabbert his entire career, he isnt a NFL level QB. With a supporting cast he can Mark Sanchez his way to the playoffs.That requires not only MJD, but even more talent they dont have.
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
The evidence is pretty clear on this, I think. When teams are forced with the decision to make a talented RB one of the highest paid in the league or go with a less-talented RB (or better, a couple of them) at a fraction of the cost, it pretty much always makes sense to go with the cheaper RB.The Jags might not win more game without MJD, but if they ever become an elite team, it won't be because they gave MJD the money.
Ive watched Gabbert his entire career, he isnt a NFL level QB. With a supporting cast he can Mark Sanchez his way to the playoffs.That requires not only MJD, but even more talent they dont have.
Interesting example. Sanchez did it once with a 31 YO Thomas Jones and a rookie is now called a "plodder" and generates shockingly little fantasy interest for a guy that should be a clear lead carrier on a team with a solid O-Line and commitment to the run game.The next season, they let Jones (and his 1400 yard season) walk out the door to bring in another 31 YO (coming off an atrocious season). Sanchez did it again.Finding a good mix of RB's is pretty much easiest piece of the puzzle to solve for NFL teams. Relatively speaking, of course. None of it's easy, but finding the other pieces is far more difficult.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
The evidence is pretty clear on this, I think. When teams are forced with the decision to make a talented RB one of the highest paid in the league or go with a less-talented RB (or better, a couple of them) at a fraction of the cost, it pretty much always makes sense to go with the cheaper RB.The Jags might not win more game without MJD, but if they ever become an elite team, it won't be because they gave MJD the money.
:goodposting: If they can collect a few future picks for an aging RB, it makes absolute football sense for them to make the move--not to mention the money saved and spent on other, more important positions.But, from a financial standpoint, it may make sense to keep around the face of the franchise, although the evidence attesting to the financial impact on a franchise of keeping a recognizable player like MJD is spotty at best. As a football fan, I hope they make the smart wins-and-losses decision and collect some picks for him.
 
If having a RB lead the league in rushing only nets you a 5-11 record I wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him even more money either. It's a bad business decision for a franchise in need of a lot of talent. I see MJD's point, he's a talented back on a bad team, but business is business. Their home attendance slipped last year, winning is the only thing that fans care about, not stats. The Jags should cut bait and move on. It's Gabbert/Blackmon's team now.
Lol and do you think they are more likely to win without MJD?Jennings not only isnt MJD, he will never be MJD... the money you "save" not paying him isnt gonna buy 1/2 the talent they lost...
The evidence is pretty clear on this, I think. When teams are forced with the decision to make a talented RB one of the highest paid in the league or go with a less-talented RB (or better, a couple of them) at a fraction of the cost, it pretty much always makes sense to go with the cheaper RB.The Jags might not win more game without MJD, but if they ever become an elite team, it won't be because they gave MJD the money.
:goodposting: If they can collect a few future picks for an aging RB, it makes absolute football sense for them to make the move--not to mention the money saved and spent on other, more important positions.But, from a financial standpoint, it may make sense to keep around the face of the franchise, although the evidence attesting to the financial impact on a franchise of keeping a recognizable player like MJD is spotty at best. As a football fan, I hope they make the smart wins-and-losses decision and collect some picks for him.
I too wish for MJD to land on a team and for the Jags to fade into non relevance until moving to LA or London.
 
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
He would have been cut or traded.
 
I personally can't stand the guy. After listening to his radio show on Sirius several times, he strikes me as a pretty big jerk. That said, how perfect would he fit in Detroit. Man. That offense would reach a whole new level of scary.
He's a really good guy. I've met him several times and know quite a few people who know him well. He's great. His radio show is complete schtick.
 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
So, you think he a guy that got fired before his contract was up should not only not receive the rest of his salary, but should give back the portion of his salary that he's already been paid? Interesting and bizarre perspective here.
 
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
He would have been cut or traded.
Right, hence the almost $18M guaranteed. Even if he got cut, he would have been rewarded handsomely. Heck, if MJD thought he would play so well and rates for RBs would be so much better, why not get franchised the first two years and then sign a better market deal after that? Why not sign a 3 year deal and be a FA now? He signed a great deal at the time and was pretty much golden that he would get paid for all 5 years barring a catastrophic injury. His deal was team friendly in years 4 and 5.He is just pissed that other (much younger) RBs are now showing him up contract wise and he wants a big deal for an aging RB and I agree with JAX's stance. As said above, Jacksonville doesn't become a playoff team again signing MJD to a fat deal. With the rookie cap in place now, their best shot is to trade him and be awful and get a great player at a decent price next year. Heck, if they play well without him, all it means is that Gabbert turned the corner, which is the single biggest thing that could turn them into a playoff contender. That or the #1 spot in the draft and some stud QB is available in the draft.
 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
So, you think he a guy that got fired before his contract was up should not only not receive the rest of his salary, but should give back the portion of his salary that he's already been paid? Interesting and bizarre perspective here.
Pretty sure he didn't say that. Pretty sure he meant that the signing bonus/guaranteed money is the risk that the team makes and is the benefit the player gets even if they way underperform the contract. Hence, it goes both ways. MJD wasn't signing a rookie deal he had to as a 6th round pick that he way outperformed, he signed a deal that paid him as well as any other RB in the league at that time.
 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug: NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
So, you think he a guy that got fired before his contract was up should not only not receive the rest of his salary, but should give back the portion of his salary that he's already been paid? Interesting and bizarre perspective here.
Pretty sure he didn't say that. Pretty sure he meant that the signing bonus/guaranteed money is the risk that the team makes and is the benefit the player gets even if they way underperform the contract. Hence, it goes both ways. MJD wasn't signing a rookie deal he had to as a 6th round pick that he way outperformed, he signed a deal that paid him as well as any other RB in the league at that time.
Actually, that's not what he said. He asked if players that are cut give back their signing bonuses. I'll even bold the relevant portions for you (see above).If he meant something other than what he wrote, he should have written that.

 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
So, you think he a guy that got fired before his contract was up should not only not receive the rest of his salary, but should give back the portion of his salary that he's already been paid? Interesting and bizarre perspective here.
either you get paid for performance or you don't -- you can't have it both ways.if mojo wants to get paid as a top rb every year as teh market moves up he should sign one year deals.edit: and you seem to have confused signing bonuses with salary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
He would have been cut or traded.
Right, hence the almost $18M guaranteed. Even if he got cut, he would have been rewarded handsomely. Heck, if MJD thought he would play so well and rates for RBs would be so much better, why not get franchised the first two years and then sign a better market deal after that? Why not sign a 3 year deal and be a FA now? He signed a great deal at the time and was pretty much golden that he would get paid for all 5 years barring a catastrophic injury. His deal was team friendly in years 4 and 5.He is just pissed that other (much younger) RBs are now showing him up contract wise and he wants a big deal for an aging RB and I agree with JAX's stance. As said above, Jacksonville doesn't become a playoff team again signing MJD to a fat deal. With the rookie cap in place now, their best shot is to trade him and be awful and get a great player at a decent price next year. Heck, if they play well without him, all it means is that Gabbert turned the corner, which is the single biggest thing that could turn them into a playoff contender. That or the #1 spot in the draft and some stud QB is available in the draft.
I completely understand how contract negotiation works. I'm not really sure what you're arguing here. I suppose I shouldn't have responded to the previous poster because I don't really care one way or the other. I'm generally in favor of players, particularly in the NFL which is a sport that essentially destroys a person's body, getting paid as much as they possibly can while they can, but I also can see it from the team's perspective.And, I also think the argument someone above made of, "well, I'm just an average joe and $4.5M is a boatload of money to me, so Maurice should just take it and like it," is one of the dumbest arguments fans can make. Sports and athletes (and entertainers) are unique from most of the rest of the working world in that they are not only employees, but they are the product. Of course they get paid more than the average fan. Think about it, fans pay to go watch them do their job. Does anyone pay to watch you do yours? And, the owners and the league make a ton of money off of the work these guys do and the stuff they do to their bodies for our entertainment.That being said, I don't think the Jaguars pay and they probably shouldn't. On the flip side, Maurice is a player who has entertained me for the last decade. Like most players, he's probably going to have some physical problems when he retires and the league doesn't exactly take care of these guys once they are done with them. For running backs, the window to earn money is even smaller. For his sake, I hope he gets paid and I understand why he's doing it.
 
'Matthias said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
:shrug:NFL teams routinely cut players who are underperforming.
and do those players give back the signing bonuses?pats just blew 4m on fanene and he didn't play a snap -- is he giving that money back?
So, you think he a guy that got fired before his contract was up should not only not receive the rest of his salary, but should give back the portion of his salary that he's already been paid? Interesting and bizarre perspective here.
either you get paid for performance or you don't -- you can't have it both ways.if mojo wants to get paid as a top rb every year as teh market moves up he should sign one year deals.
What are you talking about? A signing bonus is paid before you perform. Players that get cut are still performing (unless they suffer a career-ending injury). They just aren't performing at a level the team decides is worth what they are paying them.
 
He's got 4 million reasons for coming in...I doubt he holds out.

That being said, the numbers are convincing with underperformance after similar holdouts...I don't have a strong opinion either way on his ADP.

 
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting.

I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?

It's the smart thing to do. In the short term, it would be easier to just give him some more money. In the long term, it'd be a nightmare.

Hey, any other good player on the Jags!! Have a few years left on your deal, but feel you've outplayed it? Just hold out!

If the Pats, Steelers, Packers were in this position, they would do the same thing as Khan, draw a line in the sand.

Great article:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--jaguars--rookie-owner-shahid-khan-is-a-veteran-when-it-comes-to-riled-up-workers-like-mjd.html

NEW ORLEANS – The ball flashed across the middle of the opposing secondary, its destination unclear – until, in an instant, a pair of hands reached out and snatched it out of the artificially cooled air. The hands belonged to Justin Blackmon, the Jacksonville Jaguars’ high-profile rookie receiver, who was about to complete the first possession of his first NFL preseason game with a 16-yard touchdown catch.

On the opposite side of the Mercedes-Benz Superdome, Shad (Shahid) Khan, the Jaguars’ rookie owner, broke off an interview in mid-sentence and let out a loud “Whooooooooo!” that reverberated throughout the visiting owner’s suite. He and his son, Tony, the team’s senior vice president of football technology and analytics, embraced emphatically, thrilled that the player for whom they traded up to draft with the fifth overall pick in April had made such an auspicious debut.

“He is the real thing,” Khan said of Blackmon, sporting a massive smile under his iconic mustache. “On draft night, we felt we had to have him. This is why.”

Jaguars owner Shahid Khan is thrilled with rookie Justin Blackmon, but not with Maurice Jones-Drew.

The fact that much-maligned second-year quarterback Blaine Gabbert, whose shaky pocket presence was a symbol of the 2011 Jags’ failures, had delivered the pass while absorbing a hit from Saints DE Junior Galette made the moment even sweeter. The play gave the Jags a quick lead in a preseason game Friday night that they would ultimately win by a 27-24 score, improving their exhibition record to 2-0.

If Khan was in any way bothered by the absence of the Jags’ highest-profile player, holdout halfback Maurice Jones-Drew, he did a nice job of concealing his concern in a first-quarter conversation with Y! Sports. With the reigning NFL rushing champion now more than three weeks into a training-camp boycott that has cost him more than $600,000 ($30,000 per day in fines) and no indication that he plans to report anytime soon, Khan made it clear that he has no intention of giving Jones-Drew the new deal he desires.

“He’s not here, and that’s his decision,” Khan said of Jones-Drew, who has two years remaining on the five-year, $31-million deal he signed in 2009. “Believe me, it’s not a great concern. You hope for the best, and you plan for the worst. Our goals for the season don’t change, and if he isn’t here, he isn’t here. I don’t control it. It’s his choice.”

In other words, confronted with his first conspicuous staredown since purchasing the team from Wayne Weaver late last year, Khan doesn’t plan on blinking. This was his position before training camp began and a private meeting with the player last month that lasted several hours did nothing to weaken his resolve.

To Khan, this is more than a test of his power, and more than a chance to set a precedent for players who might try to leverage him in the future. It’s also a labor dispute that evokes past experiences, many of which, in his mind, required far more gumption than he’s currently being asked to summon.

As someone who made his fortune in the auto-parts business, Khan has faced off against powerful unions and riled-up workers who weren’t subtle about driving home their displeasure.

“I’ve been involved in many kind of industrial business dealings,” Khan said. “I’ve encountered strikes and violence. And if you don’t handle that, you’re not around to see them through.”

Simply put, some of Khan’s past experiences have been far scarier than the thought of going into a football season with Rashad Jennings as his starting halfback. And unless he returns home to Illinois to find bullet holes through his windshield or similarly menacing acts of vandalism, his inclination will be to remain calm.

“Believe me,” he insisted, “on a zero-to-10 level of stress, this doesn’t even move the needle.”

In Khan’s eyes, the frontloaded deal Jones-Drew signed was a fair one, especially considering that the Jags ended up paying out more than $3 million more in 2010 and 2011 than they would have had they franchised the player for each of those seasons – while assuming the added risk associated with a long-term contract.

It’s also logical that Khan expects Jones-Drew to flinch first, given the potentially steep financial consequences that would accompany a season-long holdout. Jones-Drew, who is due to make $4.45 million in 2012 and another $4.95 million in 2013, received a $17.5-million signing bonus when he signed his extension. If he fails to honor his contract, the team could go after a prorated share of the bonus, which is roughly $3.5 million per season.

Then there is the mounting total from the daily, $30,000 fines that Jones-Drew continues to accrue. Even if he reports well before the start of the regular season, Jones-Drew is unlikely to recoup that cash. A Jags front-office source said any decision about whether to forgive the fines would be made by first-year coach Mike Mularkey, who has yet to meet Jones-Drew in person. (The two men have spoken on the phone several times.) Given their relatively undeveloped relationship, the source said, the smart money is not on Mularkey opting to give Jones-Drew his money back.

[Related: Andy Dalton shows off his thunderous right arm, brags of its unseen power]

Beyond the dispute with Jones-Drew, Khan has big plans for the franchise he purchased for a reported $760 million. He says he is deeply committed to fielding a winning team and “doing what it takes to make this work” in the Jacksonville market, perhaps the NFL’s least-fertile territory.

His first order of business is to eliminate the upper-deck tarps that in recent years have covered an estimated 10,000 of the 76,867 seats at EverBank Field. Khan, who has likened the tarps’ presence to “underachieving” , said he expects to address the problem in the very near future.

“Stay tuned, because to me, we’ve got to start taking the tarps off,” he said. “I look at that and it frankly sucks my energy. I really don’t want to subscribe to excuse-making and talk about the challenges of the market – I just want to solve the problem. And if we can take them down for two games this season, or even one game, it’s progress.

"Eventually, winning solves all of these issues. And I wouldn’t be in this business if I didn’t think we would win. I’ve lived the American Dream, and I’m blessed financially. If you’re looking for a return on your investment, this would be one of the worst-performing businesses possible. That’s not why I bought the team. It’s a competitive challenge. I want to win.”

If Khan made one thing clear Friday night, it’s that he looks forward to a season in which Blackmon’s presence theoretically makes the Jags a more explosive team than they were in 2011. Whether Jones-Drew joins him – and, if so, when, and at what cost – remains to be seen.
He made 3 mill more than the franchise number last two years, but he is underpaid?? Ha. What a joke. MJD is having the most expensive vacation in NFL history. The second bolded part explains why he isn't missing much time. He can lose future earnings as well as past. See ya week 1, Maurice.

 
What are you talking about? A signing bonus is paid before you perform.
I'm pretty sure if you paid for a good or service up front and it wasn't delivered you'd be looking to get your money back.mjd took his money up front -- kind of hard to say he 'outperformed' a 5 yr deal when he only delivered on 3 years.
 
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
 
'Run It Up said:
'massraider said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
What was the insult exactly? I don't think telling a player that his holdout is not going tyo work and he better hurry up and get on board is insulting. I think completely the opposite, by the way. I love Khan. Love him taking the tarps off, love him telling the holdout he ain't getting an extra penny. Think the Jags are on the right track. When MJD reports, and the Jags 'win' this little battler, and MJD is acting the good soldier, make sure you come back in here and say what a good owner Khan is.
 
'12punch said:
'GDogg said:
What are you talking about? A signing bonus is paid before you perform.
I'm pretty sure if you paid for a good or service up front and it wasn't delivered you'd be looking to get your money back.mjd took his money up front -- kind of hard to say he 'outperformed' a 5 yr deal when he only delivered on 3 years.
With all due respect, this smacks of naivete. This is the NFL. This isn't hiring a gardener. Teams generally do not expect to pay players for the last year or two on second and third contracts. The tools in contract disputes are hold outs (for individual players), strikes (for the entire union) and lockouts (for the owners). And, if a player is not performing as the organization likes and thinks it is worth, they can cut the player. The owners used one of their weapons last year when they locked out the players. The players have used strikes in the past and individual players hold out all the time with varying degrees of success. It's as if you just starting following the NFL and know nothing about their contracts.Maurice Drew wouldn't have signed with the Jaguars if he hadn't gotten that signing bonus. It was an inducement to sign. And, you don't think he's provided that service or performed? At worst, this is partial performance. The contract is not guaranteed. The team's remedy for Maurice Drew's failure to report is to fine him (looking to get your money back). The team could also just cut him and not pay him another dime, reducing the contract by $9M and two years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'Run It Up said:
'massraider said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
What was the insult exactly? I don't think telling a player that his holdout is not going tyo work and he better hurry up and get on board is insulting. I think completely the opposite, by the way. I love Khan. Love him taking the tarps off, love him telling the holdout he ain't getting an extra penny. Think the Jags are on the right track. When MJD reports, and the Jags 'win' this little battler, and MJD is acting the good soldier, make sure you come back in here and say what a good owner Khan is.
He insulted him on many levels. Its demeaning.He has on more than one occasion basically said you arent worth it, and if you are im still not gonna pay you. Because im the boss, and I hold all the cards.He called him out in front of everyone saying that he better do as he is told, or he wont get paid, or traded.
 
'12punch said:
'GDogg said:
What are you talking about? A signing bonus is paid before you perform.
I'm pretty sure if you paid for a good or service up front and it wasn't delivered you'd be looking to get your money back.mjd took his money up front -- kind of hard to say he 'outperformed' a 5 yr deal when he only delivered on 3 years.
With all due respect, this smacks of naivete. This is the NFL. This isn't hiring a gardener. Teams generally do not expect to pay players for the last year or two on second and third contracts. The tools in contract disputes are hold outs (for individual players), strikes (for the entire union) and lockouts (for the owners). And, if a player is not performing as the organization likes and thinks it is worth, they can cut the player. The owners used one of their weapons last year when they locked out the players. The players have used strikes in the past and individual players hold out all the time with varying degrees of success. It's as if you just starting following the NFL and know nothing about their contracts.
lolzapparently, the jags expect to pay him for his last year or two.since you know so much about nfl contracts I'm sure you realize that the contract is not actually guaranteeing the player a roster spot -- that is up to the player.you, like many people, seem to have this confused.the contract is only an agreement on the amount paid the player if he makes the roster in any given year.naturally, if the player can't make the roster he is cut and not paid -- excepting specifically guaranteed money, of course.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'12punch said:
'GDogg said:
What are you talking about? A signing bonus is paid before you perform.
I'm pretty sure if you paid for a good or service up front and it wasn't delivered you'd be looking to get your money back.mjd took his money up front -- kind of hard to say he 'outperformed' a 5 yr deal when he only delivered on 3 years.
With all due respect, this smacks of naivete. This is the NFL. This isn't hiring a gardener. Teams generally do not expect to pay players for the last year or two on second and third contracts. The tools in contract disputes are hold outs (for individual players), strikes (for the entire union) and lockouts (for the owners). And, if a player is not performing as the organization likes and thinks it is worth, they can cut the player. The owners used one of their weapons last year when they locked out the players. The players have used strikes in the past and individual players hold out all the time with varying degrees of success. It's as if you just starting following the NFL and know nothing about their contracts.
lolzapparently, the jags expect to pay him for his last year or two.since you know so much about nfl contracts I'm sure you realize that the contract is not actually guaranteeing the player a roster spot -- that is up to the player.you, like many people, seem to have this confused.the contract is only an agreement on the amount paid the player if he makes the roster in any given year.naturally, if the player can't make the roster he is cut and not paid -- excepting specifically guaranteed money, of course.
Umm, that's exactly what I've said over and over. The contract is not guaranteed. It's even in the post to which you are responding and you, strangely, cut out when you quoted me. Are you ok?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'Run It Up said:
'massraider said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
What was the insult exactly? I don't think telling a player that his holdout is not going tyo work and he better hurry up and get on board is insulting. I think completely the opposite, by the way. I love Khan. Love him taking the tarps off, love him telling the holdout he ain't getting an extra penny. Think the Jags are on the right track. When MJD reports, and the Jags 'win' this little battler, and MJD is acting the good soldier, make sure you come back in here and say what a good owner Khan is.
He insulted him on many levels. Its demeaning.He has on more than one occasion basically said you arent worth it, and if you are im still not gonna pay you. Because im the boss, and I hold all the cards.He called him out in front of everyone saying that he better do as he is told, or he wont get paid, or traded.
Yeah, sorry, I'm not looking for a paraphrase of what he 'basically' said. I am looking for the actual insult. Here, let me do it for you:http://www.usatoday.com/sports/story/2012-08-21/Maurice-Jones-Drew-Shad-Khan-Jaguars-holdout/57194530/1
Last week, however, Khan said MJD's absence "doesn't even move the needle" in terms of stress. Khan reiterated his stance Tuesday by saying, "This is not a team about one person."His message to Jones-Drew?"Train's leaving the station. Run, get on it," Khan said.
My lord, how can MJD recover from such a horrible verbal attack???From the same article:
When asked Tuesday whether he would trade Jones-Drew, Khan said he is "not going to get into all the theses and hypotheses." Khan added that Jones-Drew is "a great player, and we would love for him to be back."
A great player?? Where do you gt off Khan?!? :hot: Calling MJD a great player!! You dirty no-good little........So, 'train is leaving the station'? That's what we have? That's what Khan said? Not basically, but actually?How is that an insult, exactly?
 
I usually tend to agree with the player in these situations but often times it's a player on their rookie deal that's being underpaid. In this case, MJD was paid generous up front and he's performed very well...now the money is leveling off and he wants to reup...I don't blame him for trying but I don't side with him in this situation.

 
Yeah, sorry, I'm not looking for a paraphrase of what he 'basically' said. I am looking for the actual insult.

Here, let me do it for you:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/story/2012-08-21/Maurice-Jones-Drew-Shad-Khan-Jaguars-holdout/57194530/1

Last week, however, Khan said MJD's absence "doesn't even move the needle" in terms of stress. Khan reiterated his stance Tuesday by saying, "This is not a team about one person."

His message to Jones-Drew?

"Train's leaving the station. Run, get on it," Khan said.
My lord, how can MJD recover from such a horrible verbal attack???From the same article:

When asked Tuesday whether he would trade Jones-Drew, Khan said he is "not going to get into all the theses and hypotheses." Khan added that Jones-Drew is "a great player, and we would love for him to be back."
A great player?? Where do you gt off Khan?!? :hot: Calling MJD a great player!! You dirty no-good little........So, 'train is leaving the station'? That's what we have? That's what Khan said? Not basically, but actually?

How is that an insult, exactly?
I already said in my previous post, the one you quoted.Whether you realize how insulting it is - is on you. Its demeaning and from my perspective its pretty clear no one has ever talked down to you in the workplace.

If my boss ever talked to me like that id be looking for a lawyer and a job, because I would have punched him right in the throat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'Run It Up said:
'massraider said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
What was the insult exactly? I don't think telling a player that his holdout is not going tyo work and he better hurry up and get on board is insulting. I think completely the opposite, by the way. I love Khan. Love him taking the tarps off, love him telling the holdout he ain't getting an extra penny. Think the Jags are on the right track. When MJD reports, and the Jags 'win' this little battler, and MJD is acting the good soldier, make sure you come back in here and say what a good owner Khan is.
He insulted him on many levels. Its demeaning.He has on more than one occasion basically said you arent worth it, and if you are im still not gonna pay you. Because im the boss, and I hold all the cards.He called him out in front of everyone saying that he better do as he is told, or he wont get paid, or traded.
Highly insulting! MJD should teach him a lesson and never play again.
 
'Run It Up said:
'massraider said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it taunting. I would say Khan is making his position clear: He is not going to cave in. Is what he said that insulting? Is MJD so sensitive to get all butt-hurt because Khan said what he said?
Has your boss ever insulted you?In front of coworkers?In front of everyone?Its always beyond insulting.I think Khan is a joke of an owner. I also think MJD caves and still plays. But I want nothing more for him to land on any other team. Sorry Jax fans, your franchise is quickly approaching the Jets in terms of being just a complete joke of a franchise.
How is Khan a joke? You don't become a self made billionaire by conforming to what everyone thinks is best. Running a NFL team is a business and if anyone knows this, he does. He is the first owner to really understand how untapped the global market is for the NFL. MJD has been the face of Jacksonville for years, but Khan is smart enough to know that paying an aging RB with a ton of miles a lot of money is not best for the future of this team. I had to google some information, but Larry Johnson seems like a good example. In 2007 (age 28), he signed a 6 year, $45m contract with $19m guaranteed. He missed half of 2007 finishing with 559 yds, 3 TDs. 2008 - 874 yds, 5 TDs. In 2009, he had that tweet using a word that rhymes with bag and was then waived that year. In 2006, KC was 9-7 and made the playoffs. 2007 they went 4-122008 they went 2-142009 they went 4-122010 they rebounded at 10-6.I like where the Jaguars defense was in the beginning of the year. They had a lot of injuries to both the defense and OL. I don't think record last year really indicates the talent they have. They have young players in Blackmon and Jennings on offense. Hats off to MJD for all his work, but his best years are behind him. If Khan wants to turn this franchise around, he is absolutely making the right move not paying MJD.
 
I already said in my previous post, the one you quoted.Whether you realize how insulting it is - is on you. Its demeaning and from my perspective its pretty clear no one has ever talked down to you in the workplace.If my boss ever talked to me like that id be looking for a lawyer and a job, because I would have punched him right in the throat.
What's demeaning? 'Train is leaving'? Really? Or is it the other loosely translated quotes that you are referring to, that I have never read, anywhere?This MJD thread is like a time warp. It's like no one has ever encountered an NFL holdout before. Holdouts get nasty all the time, much worse than 'train is leaving', and everything gets forgiven when a player returns. A lot of players have more leverage than MJD, and don't get a new deal. MJD isn't getting one, and frankly, shouldn't be expecting one.
 
'GDogg said:
'stbugs said:
'GDogg said:
'yellowdog said:
Question for those that say he deserves to paid: IF MJD had failed to produce the first 3 years of his deal, do you think he would've given money back to the Jags? I thought not. I'm with the owner on this one.
He would have been cut or traded.
Right, hence the almost $18M guaranteed. Even if he got cut, he would have been rewarded handsomely. Heck, if MJD thought he would play so well and rates for RBs would be so much better, why not get franchised the first two years and then sign a better market deal after that? Why not sign a 3 year deal and be a FA now? He signed a great deal at the time and was pretty much golden that he would get paid for all 5 years barring a catastrophic injury. His deal was team friendly in years 4 and 5.He is just pissed that other (much younger) RBs are now showing him up contract wise and he wants a big deal for an aging RB and I agree with JAX's stance. As said above, Jacksonville doesn't become a playoff team again signing MJD to a fat deal. With the rookie cap in place now, their best shot is to trade him and be awful and get a great player at a decent price next year. Heck, if they play well without him, all it means is that Gabbert turned the corner, which is the single biggest thing that could turn them into a playoff contender. That or the #1 spot in the draft and some stud QB is available in the draft.
I completely understand how contract negotiation works. I'm not really sure what you're arguing here. I suppose I shouldn't have responded to the previous poster because I don't really care one way or the other. I'm generally in favor of players, particularly in the NFL which is a sport that essentially destroys a person's body, getting paid as much as they possibly can while they can, but I also can see it from the team's perspective.And, I also think the argument someone above made of, "well, I'm just an average joe and $4.5M is a boatload of money to me, so Maurice should just take it and like it," is one of the dumbest arguments fans can make. Sports and athletes (and entertainers) are unique from most of the rest of the working world in that they are not only employees, but they are the product. Of course they get paid more than the average fan. Think about it, fans pay to go watch them do their job. Does anyone pay to watch you do yours? And, the owners and the league make a ton of money off of the work these guys do and the stuff they do to their bodies for our entertainment.That being said, I don't think the Jaguars pay and they probably shouldn't. On the flip side, Maurice is a player who has entertained me for the last decade. Like most players, he's probably going to have some physical problems when he retires and the league doesn't exactly take care of these guys once they are done with them. For running backs, the window to earn money is even smaller. For his sake, I hope he gets paid and I understand why he's doing it.
Good post. I feel the same way. Calling the athletes greedy or what not is just ludicrous. Once they are done with football, the NFL will not help them out with medical issues directly related from playing football. Owners make way more than the players in most cases. It's mind-boggling to me some of these broke ### Joes side with the owners. I suppose the hate stems from jealousy...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top