What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

kohursky: mjd getting bad advice from bad agent (1 Viewer)

How was this guy mud and Jennings agent? Conflict?

http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2012/8/22/3260934/maurice-jones-drew-holdout-adisa-bakari

On January 31, 2011, just following a 1,000-yard season for the second time in his three-year career, Matt Forte let the Bears know that he was interested in hammering out a new contract with the team. It made sense for the Bears to placate the 25-year old running back as he entered the final year of his rookie contract. Yet, it wasn't until July 17, 2012, nearly 18 months after he originally asked for a new contract that he finally got his long-term deal with the Bears.

Somehow a contract that absolutely made sense for both sides and the Bears even called their "first priority" after the lockout turned into a very public dispute that lasted well over a season to resolve. It's certainly possible that Jerry Angelo and the Bears were very cheap during the negotiations of the deal, but there's a name in the negotiations that jumps out.

Forte's agent Adisa Bakari.

Bakari represents quite a few players in the NFL, but without a doubt, his two most high profile clients are Forte and Jaguars running back Maurice Jones-Drew.

Many have questioned the decision-making from Jones-Drew's camp during his lengthy hold-out that has now devolved into talks of a potential trade. At the helm of that camp is none other than Bakari.

What do you know? The guy that took 18 months and the franchise tag to finally negotiate a deal for Forte is now calling the shots for Maurice Jones-Drew who is scheduled to make over $9 million over the next two season.

It's purely speculative that Bakari is the one at the heart of the dispute that has now somehow delved into trade talks, but considering Forte's contract struggles and the recent firing of Bakari by fellow Jaguars running back, Rashad Jennings, it's not unreasonable to make the connection.

And I'm not the only one that thinks so. Paul Kuharsky said as much on 1010xl on Wednesday morning:

 
Totally agree BTW. You only holdout when you have leverage. Last yr would have been a much better time. Old ownership, Jennings wasn't ready, and NFL teams massively devalue rbs at 27/28. Plus having just drafted Gannett ownership wold know hey needed mid or the year could be 0-16.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
why was it a bad thing for mjd to hold out? he didn't gain anything but he didn't loose anything either.

 
why was it a bad thing for mjd to hold out? he didn't gain anything but he didn't loose anything either.
This remains to be seen. Every day he's missed the Jaguars can fine him up to $30k. He's over $1 million in potential fines already. Assuming he does report, it'll be up to the team just how much of that to actually fine him. But yes there is definitely a huge potential for this costing him.
 
This is getting worse by the minute

Rashad Jennings - RB - Jaguars

ESPN's Adam Schefter "gets the sense" that Rashad Jennings will start the first two games of the season "and possibly a bit more."

Schefter actually referred directly to fantasy football, speculating that Jennings will start in Weeks 1-2 before Maurice Jones-Drew ends his holdout. We won't love Jennings as a fantasy start against Minnesota and Houston, but he'll certainly be a threat for 20-plus touches in each game if MJD still isn't around.

then

Maurice Jones-Drew - RB - Jaguars

Vito Stellino of the Florida Times Union agrees that Maurice Jones-Drew now appears likely to miss regular season games.

Jaguars GM Gene Smith adamantly replied "no" Wednesday when asked whether Jones-Drew would be traded, and owner Shad Khan is fully supporting his general manager. Although Jones-Drew has forfeited over $1 million in training camp fines, weekly game checks will hit him hard. He's owed over $260,000 per week.

So you know have a beat-writer echoing what Schefter has been saying.

1m in fines, and another quarter mil every game? WTF is he thinking?

 
This is getting worse by the minute

Rashad Jennings - RB - Jaguars

ESPN's Adam Schefter "gets the sense" that Rashad Jennings will start the first two games of the season "and possibly a bit more."

Schefter actually referred directly to fantasy football, speculating that Jennings will start in Weeks 1-2 before Maurice Jones-Drew ends his holdout. We won't love Jennings as a fantasy start against Minnesota and Houston, but he'll certainly be a threat for 20-plus touches in each game if MJD still isn't around.

then

Maurice Jones-Drew - RB - Jaguars

Vito Stellino of the Florida Times Union agrees that Maurice Jones-Drew now appears likely to miss regular season games.

Jaguars GM Gene Smith adamantly replied "no" Wednesday when asked whether Jones-Drew would be traded, and owner Shad Khan is fully supporting his general manager. Although Jones-Drew has forfeited over $1 million in training camp fines, weekly game checks will hit him hard. He's owed over $260,000 per week.

So you know have a beat-writer echoing what Schefter has been saying.

1m in fines, and another quarter mil every game? WTF is he thinking?
He's probably thinking "my knees are shot, I'm getting older, and I'm by far the best player on my team"He's right to try and lock up a deal before the season begins. And ownership is right to deny him.

 
I strongly doubt that when this all eventually gets resolved that MJD will lose much in the way of these 'fines'. They look impactful on the surface, but aren't usually enforced. To the best of my knowledge, the CBA doesn't allow Owners to with-hold fine money (game checks might be different), they just 'assess' it. In contract negotiations, those things are bargaining chips for both sides. IIRC, more often than not, when things go to settlement, one of the concessions usually made by Ownership is the forgiveness of such fines for not reporting and holding out, in a 'show of good faith' kind of way...and both sides know it, so I wouldn't sweat that info too much. Again, Game Checks could be, and probably are, different. I don't know.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top