MJD to Holdout (1 Viewer)

[kutta]

I'm gonna post a list of top salaries for DE for that one guy who thinks peppers is going to tear his acl and get cut.

I won't vet it, though, so don't use it for any of your school research papers.

Dwight Freeney $14,035,000

Elvis Dumervil $14,000,000

Jared Allen $11,619,850

Tamba Hali $11,250,000

(ok, I cheated)

Cliff Avril $10,605,000

(franchise tag fig when he signs)

it is always possible they restructure and extend, but to think they'll cut him is ridiculous, unless he just fails to perform, like a haynesworth, or has some career threatening injury.

and if he isn't going to produce, he shouldn't be getting paid -- so, what's the point?

edit:

this is what you posted

we can all say with 100% certainty that he will not see the money in those last 2-3 years

we can?you realize if they restructure and extend him, he IS getting that money, right??

have a little common sense, ffs.

Larry, I'm not sure what your point is in this thread. You aren't really saying much and you just keep saying that people don't understand NFL contracts.The bottom line is that a team can cut a player if they want to. The Colts signed Peyton to a 5 year $90M contract and promptly released him. Of course that's just one example. It happens ALL the time.

Please explain to those of us who think the contract thing goes both ways what we are missing.

Teams don't cut a player in a year where they're guaranteed $10.5 million in bonuses before their base salary.

No kidding. That's not my point.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

they can cut players because that is how the contract is written -- they are not tearing up any contract.

the player is not GUARANTEED a roster spot by signing a contract, he is agreeing to a salary for that given year IF he makes the roster.

if he was GUARANTEED those future salaries, they would be referred to as GUARANTEED money, which I'm pretty sure you've heard of -- see how that works?

in that case, he would be GUARANTEED to get that cash.

this is what the players' union has agreed to in their cba with the league.

while it's true that slavery has been abolished, so the player doesn't actually have to play for that team in those future years ( he might elect to retire, for example) he has already taken money up front in the form of a signing bonus, or even just frontloaded salaries.

if mjd didn't think it was a fair deal he shouldn't have signed it.

my point in this thread is that I get tired of self righteous ##### who seem to want to ##### just for the sake of #####ing about something when they don't even know wtf they are talking about.

and no, sitting out 10 games this year won't magically release mjd from his contract.

 

[Patroclus]

W/The GM dug in and saying NO WAY -- If MJD can sit out the first 10 games and become I FA at seasons end I can see that happening. Sitting out 10 games might actually help extend the little guys career anyway. If that isn't an option I can't see how MJD doesn't cave if he's tied to Jax for another season regardless. If I were Jax and dug in I would trade him for draft picks to a team that needs a stud back. Synder might bite

What is irksome is of MJD would seek to refund money to the club had he under performed.Did Chris Johnson give the Titans a refund?Contract as an agreement seems conveniently less binding when it serves the players best interests.MJD has a contract. He should honor it and his word.

If you are posting on this board you are a NFL fan who follows the sport closely. You have to know that NFL teams cut players under contract all the time. Either because the player is under performing or because the contract that the team willingly signed hurts the teams cap number too much. So why do people expect the players to act like their contracts are set in stone when they know that the owners will never behave in the same manner.

you knuckleheads have absolutely no idea wtf you are talking about.STOP POSTING!

They need to keep posting! This is hilarious. Kind of like watching these same guys kick each other in the nuts in high school and crush beer cans on their foreheads

 

[kutta]

they can cut players because that is how the contract is written -- they are not tearing up any contract.the player is not GUARANTEED a roster spot by signing a contract, he is agreeing to a salary for that given year IF he makes the roster.if he was GUARANTEED those future salaries, they would be referred to as GUARANTEED money, which I'm pretty sure you've heard of -- see how that works?in that case, he would be GUARANTEED to get that cash.this is what the players' union has agreed to in their cba with the league.while it's true that slavery has been abolished, so the player doesn't actually have to play for that team in those future years ( he might elect to retire, for example) he has already taken money up front in the form of a signing bonus, or even just frontloaded salaries.if mjd didn't think it was a fair deal he shouldn't have signed it.my point in this thread is that I get tired of self righteous ##### who seem to want to ##### just for the sake of #####ing about something when they don't even know wtf they are talking about. and no, sitting out 10 games this year won't magically release mjd from his contract.

But isn't the entire system set up to handle hold outs also? The deal is, if the player doesn't want to play, he can sit out. But he gets fined. And if he doesn't play for 10 weeks (or whatever the number is) then the year is lost to him.The team can cut him. The player can hold out. It's all in the rules and they all play by the rules.So why when the player exercises his option it is a bad thing, but when the team does it is is OK?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

W/The GM dug in and saying NO WAY -- If MJD can sit out the first 10 games and become I FA at seasons end I can see that happening. Sitting out 10 games might actually help extend the little guys career anyway. If that isn't an option I can't see how MJD doesn't cave if he's tied to Jax for another season regardless. If I were Jax and dug in I would trade him for draft picks to a team that needs a stud back. Synder might bite

What is irksome is of MJD would seek to refund money to the club had he under performed.Did Chris Johnson give the Titans a refund?Contract as an agreement seems conveniently less binding when it serves the players best interests.MJD has a contract. He should honor it and his word.

If you are posting on this board you are a NFL fan who follows the sport closely. You have to know that NFL teams cut players under contract all the time. Either because the player is under performing or because the contract that the team willingly signed hurts the teams cap number too much. So why do people expect the players to act like their contracts are set in stone when they know that the owners will never behave in the same manner.

you knuckleheads have absolutely no idea wtf you are talking about.STOP POSTING!

They need to keep posting! This is hilarious. Kind of like watching these same guys kick each other in the nuts in high school and crush beer cans on their foreheads

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

So why when the player exercises his option it is a bad thing, but when the team does it is is OK?

wtf did I just type?

while it's true that slavery has been abolished, so the player doesn't actually have to play for that team in those future years ( he might elect to retire, for example) he has already taken money up front in the form of a signing bonus, or even just frontloaded salaries.if mjd didn't think it was a fair deal he shouldn't have signed it.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

jesus, why do I bother?

the club and mjd have reached an agreement -- the club has agreed to pay him x dollars over a certain time period to play for them if he makes the roster.

he has made the roster, and taken some of this money up front and socked it away in his bank.

by not playing he is not honoring the agreement.

(and hurting the team, btw)

 

[kutta]

jesus, why do I bother?the club and mjd have reached an agreement -- the club has agreed to pay him x dollars over a certain time period to play for them if he makes the roster.he has made the roster, and taken some of this money up front and socked it away in his bank.by not playing he is not honoring the agreement.(and hurting the team, btw)

You are very entertaining, but a little dense.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

It's funny to see guys get so worked up in arguments over other people's money.

There's no wrong or right in NFL negotiations. Just what can you get and what will you give.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

jesus, why do I bother?the club and mjd have reached an agreement -- the club has agreed to pay him x dollars over a certain time period to play for them if he makes the roster.he has made the roster, and taken some of this money up front and socked it away in his bank.by not playing he is not honoring the agreement.(and hurting the team, btw)

You are very entertaining, but a little dense.

the player haters (those who lambaste players for holding out) around here are usually that way.

 

[massraider]

It's like this is the first time a player held out. MJD has no leverage., and no argument.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I'd say I'm probably more of a windbag hater than a player hater.

and for anyone actually reading this thread for mjd news, I believe he selected himself with the first pick of a celeb fantasy draft, so he must be planning on playing.

 

[bostonfred]

MJD isn't playing out the final two years of a rookie deal that he has outplayed. Three years ago, he signed a 5 year deal averaging over 6 mill per. And he will probably be able to collect every cent of that deal. He signed a top deal for a back, on a per year average. Top backs are now getting 7-9 mill per, no? MJD is NOT underpaid, he gave up the ability to be the top-paid back every year when he opted for security, getting a $9 mill signing bonus, and $17 mill guaranteed on his last deal. He could have played out his deal, and been franchised for two years straight, then been a free agent if he wanted. That's how you get the most dollars per year. But MJD wanted to hedge for injury, smartly. So he signed a 5 year deal. What happens when you sign a multi-year deal is that by the end of the deal, there are players making more money than you, that signed deals more recently. It's an insult to Jacksonville fans to imagine that they collectively don't know this. Further, to suggest that the Jags should give him what he wants, to appease some mouth-breathers on sports radio is absurd. Giving good players good long term deals, and holding them to those deals, is what smart teams do. Tearing a up a fair deal with two years left is what stupid teams do. Here's the 'message' you are sending: We are not a dumb front office.Just my guess:MJD is taking a shot. I really think he is quite ready to play under his current deal, and will probably not cause any problems. I think it's kind of a "Hey, let's make some noise, maybe they'll throw me some cash..." Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.MJD doesn't strike me as dumb, I don't imagine he'd be willing to pay 30 grand a day for two long.

 

[bostonfred]

He has no leverage right now, but by starting a holdout this preseason, he sends the message that he will hold out next preseason, and wont make it easy on them if they try to franchise him. And that's an important message for him to send, because the jags can just play out his final two years, then franchise him twice until he's retirement age. Any deal he gets now would have to be 8 million plus two years of the franchise tag, which is probably 9 mil per for running backs, leaving him with a 2 year deal for 9 mil with club options for 9 and 12 mil as he crosses the magical age of 30. Jones drew should have known that signing a four year deal at 25 is going to be your last big deal as a running back. And while he put up big numbers last year, it was for a losing team that is starting almost completely over with new ownership, coaching, quarterback and receivers, and teams in that situation don't spend big money on running backs in their prime. And ownership realizes that they arent contending for much if anything this year no matter what they do with his contract. Better to show that they will hold their ground, especially for a new owner facing his first test by a player and his agent. The only thing he has going for him is that he is by far their most marketable player, and a holdout will quickly kill that small amount of goodwill with one of the most transient fanbases in the nfl. If he's smart, he will end the holdout quickly, help the team to become competitive this year, and ask for them to restructure heading into next season. Then he will have leverage, because the jags desperately need to field a contender, whether in jacksonville or los angeles. But his agent will never tell him that, because every agent in the league is watching to see whether the new guy will really hold his ground.

 

[bostonfred]

I have a hard time drafting players who hold-out. It is not uncommon for them to tweak their hamstring badly shortly after returning. I prefer to stay away from players holding out.

Chris johnson held out until september. It is currently july. Lots of players do fine after short holdouts or when recovering from minor injuries in training camp. Its missing camp and all the preaseason games that keeps them from getting into game shape.

 

[bostonfred]

Back on track folks. The situation is messy, the question is do you take the risk of going in the 1st round with him. At this point I say no. There are a lot of good RBs going after him that I would rather have over MJD because of this situation.. mainly McFadden, Richardson, Johnson.

In three money drafts on MFL, I have seen him taken at the following spots:

[*]1.07

[*]1.11

[*]2.02

 

[beef moe]

He fell to pick 18 in a recent dynasty startup. I took him without a second thought

 

[Art Vandalay]

ESPN's Adam Schefter doesn't think the Maurice Jones-Drew situation will end "anytime soon."

Schefter doesn't have any new news on the holdout, just a gut opinion. "My sense right now, a few days into camp, is that it will go on into the summer," he writes. Schefter goes on to say that "these things always find a way of working themselves out, and this one will, too." Jones-Drew doesn't have any leverage, so he might have to just settle for a few more guarantees in his current contract.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

He has no leverage right now, but by starting a holdout this preseason, he sends the message that he will hold out next preseason, and wont make it easy on them if they try to franchise him. And that's an important message for him to send, because the jags can just play out his final two years, then franchise him twice until he's retirement age. Any deal he gets now would have to be 8 million plus two years of the franchise tag, which is probably 9 mil per for running backs, leaving him with a 2 year deal for 9 mil with club options for 9 and 12 mil as he crosses the magical age of 30. Jones drew should have known that signing a four year deal at 25 is going to be your last big deal as a running back. And while he put up big numbers last year, it was for a losing team that is starting almost completely over with new ownership, coaching, quarterback and receivers, and teams in that situation don't spend big money on running backs in their prime. And ownership realizes that they arent contending for much if anything this year no matter what they do with his contract. Better to show that they will hold their ground, especially for a new owner facing his first test by a player and his agent. The only thing he has going for him is that he is by far their most marketable player, and a holdout will quickly kill that small amount of goodwill with one of the most transient fanbases in the nfl. If he's smart, he will end the holdout quickly, help the team to become competitive this year, and ask for them to restructure heading into next season. Then he will have leverage, because the jags desperately need to field a contender, whether in jacksonville or los angeles. But his agent will never tell him that, because every agent in the league is watching to see whether the new guy will really hold his ground.

did you just yourself?

 

[Run It Up]

It's like this is the first time a player held out. MJD has no leverage., and no argument.

I think he has a pretty good argument.Hes the only thing that team has going for it, and has 3 years of elite production on a terrible team.

 

[bostonfred]

It's like this is the first time a player held out. MJD has no leverage., and no argument.

I think he has a pretty good argument.Hes the only thing that team has going for it, and has 3 years of elite production on a terrible team.

They aren't going to contend this year. The fans know it, the owner knows it, mjd knows it. They might take a step forward, but it would be a shocker for them to make the playoffs and absurd to think they'd win a championship. So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward? Because that's what they're relying on gabbart, the new receivers, lewis, and their defense for. If they can take a step forward and become a contender, then they will need jones drew next year. The questions become, can gabbart take a step forward without mjd? Is mjd key to their long term plan? And for those questions, mjd would be wiser to let his feelings be known, end his holdout, help the team take a step forward, and then negotiate next year. If he holds out, and the jags go 4-12, there's no reason for them to sign a running back at the end of his prime in 2013. And that's what his agent should be telling him, if he isn't more interested in testing the new owners resolve.

 

[Run It Up]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

 

[bostonfred]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

As I said in the rest of my post, what good is an elite talent to a team going nowhere with or without him? The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick? Mjd could give them hope going into 2013, but only if he shows up. The only way he helps THIS year is if his presence somehow helps gabbarts development in 2012, and that's a tough sell when he has two years left on a contract and a whole bunch of soon to be free agents watching with interest to see if the owner will buckle. End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

 

[Run It Up]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

As I said in the rest of my post, what good is an elite talent to a team going nowhere with or without him? The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick? Mjd could give them hope going into 2013, but only if he shows up. The only way he helps THIS year is if his presence somehow helps gabbarts development in 2012, and that's a tough sell when he has two years left on a contract and a whole bunch of soon to be free agents watching with interest to see if the owner will buckle. End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

Maybe he wants to stay a Jaguar, maybe he doesnt want to essentially sell himself short two years from now to stay in the league. Im not saying he isnt obviously gonna play, because he is. All I was saying was that he does have an argument and I think the Jags should try to secure him through retirement.

 

[H8tank]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

The jags have no hope of competing this year... End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

So with him last year, they win 5 games. With him this year, they win 7-9, but the have no hope of competing? Do you read your posts before you hit Reply?

 

[bostonfred]

So with him last year, they win 5 games. With him this year, they win 7-9, but the have no hope of competing? Do you read your posts before you hit Reply?

I do, but im not sure you have. Winning 7 to 9 games would be a good step forward for the jags this year. I think its possible with mjd in the fold, but hardly a lock. They have a good d, improved at several offensive positions, and gabbart sounds like he's on the right track. If mjd isn't there, I doubt they win 7 games. So from that perepective, he helps them "be competitive" this year. But if im the owner, im not thinking, how can I get 7 wins. Im thinking about playoff runs and championships. And im not going to get either next year, with or without jones drew. So im already looking at 2013. So now jones drew, who is signed for 2012 and 2013, wants to hold out. But after 2013, he'll be on the wrong side of 30, just as the team is finally (hopefully) getting it together. Is that the time when I will want to have an old running back on my team? I doubt it. But those are precisely the extra years that mjd is asking to get paid for. Why would the owner do that right now? What if he pays mjd, the team sucks, the players and agents all think they can hold out and make the new oenr fold, and they gained nothing from the extension? That is why mjd has no leverage right now. But fast forward to next summer. Say mjd reports, has a good year, and helps the jags improve to. 500. If that happens, the team will have aspirations. And mjd will be a big part of them. An energized fanbase will buy season tickets. Now, mjd has leverage, holding out in the last year of his contract. That's when he can successfully hold out. In my mind, his holdout now should be short, send the message that he wants his deal redone, and then work hard to make it happen this year. That is his best route to one more payday. And its a win win for him, the fans, and managementl.

 

[[icon]]

 

[dontknowaboutme]

I have a hard time drafting players who hold-out. It is not uncommon for them to tweak their hamstring badly shortly after returning. I prefer to stay away from players holding out.

Chris johnson held out until september. It is currently july. Lots of players do fine after short holdouts or when recovering from minor injuries in training camp. Its missing camp and all the preaseason games that keeps them from getting into game shape.

I guess we will have to see then. I wasn't stating anything, just a personal preference of mine that involves usually avoiding drafting holdouts.

 

[Chase Stuart]

But if im the owner, im not thinking, how can I get 7 wins. Im thinking about playoff runs and championships. And im not going to get either next year, with or without jones drew. So im already looking at 2013. So now jones drew, who is signed for 2012 and 2013, wants to hold out. But after 2013, he'll be on the wrong side of 30, just as the team is finally (hopefully) getting it together. Is that the time when I will want to have an old running back on my team? I doubt it. But those are precisely the extra years that mjd is asking to get paid for. Why would the owner do that right now?

It sounds like they should trade him to a contender for a 2nd round pick. A second round pick is more likely to help the Jaguars win a Super Bowl than MJD, according to this logic.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

But if im the owner, im not thinking, how can I get 7 wins. Im thinking about playoff runs and championships. And im not going to get either next year, with or without jones drew. So im already looking at 2013. So now jones drew, who is signed for 2012 and 2013, wants to hold out. But after 2013, he'll be on the wrong side of 30, just as the team is finally (hopefully) getting it together. Is that the time when I will want to have an old running back on my team? I doubt it. But those are precisely the extra years that mjd is asking to get paid for. Why would the owner do that right now?

It sounds like they should trade him to a contender for a 2nd round pick. A second round pick is more likely to help the Jaguars win a Super Bowl than MJD, according to this logic.

Exactly and that is why i do not support the owner...you don't feel that MJD is the difference maker or the center of the team then please trade him to a contender for a 2013 draft pick so you can get better. OH you say that MJD does sell tickets and without him you would lose a decent amount of fans in the fall? Then do something to make him happy. If I owned the Jags I would try to trade MJD not only to get better as a franchise but also for a player that has done very well for the organization. I think the Jets would be more than happy to trade a decent draft pick for him. They are kicking the tires on Cedric Benson, MJD is leaps and bounds better than anything they have.

 

[bostonfred]

But if im the owner, im not thinking, how can I get 7 wins. Im thinking about playoff runs and championships. And im not going to get either next year, with or without jones drew. So im already looking at 2013. So now jones drew, who is signed for 2012 and 2013, wants to hold out. But after 2013, he'll be on the wrong side of 30, just as the team is finally (hopefully) getting it together. Is that the time when I will want to have an old running back on my team? I doubt it. But those are precisely the extra years that mjd is asking to get paid for. Why would the owner do that right now?

It sounds like they should trade him to a contender for a 2nd round pick. A second round pick is more likely to help the Jaguars win a Super Bowl than MJD, according to this logic.

Theres some merit to this. Thats what the patriots did with deion branch, and to a lesser extent seymour, although they didn't wait as long and got more than a second in both cases because of it. And the pats did it during their championship window, unlike the jags whose window has not yet opened. It seems to have been fairly successful, leading to two afc championships and a boatload of records, but no actual titles. But player trades are rare in the nfl, especially after training camps begin. Its hard enough to find a partner with room under the cap, and remember that mjd wants a new deal worth top running back money. But running backs - especially backs in their late twenties coming off 300+ carry seasons - don't command big contracts in the nfl, even if they're as good as jones drew. And every team in the league knows theyre deperate. So I don't think they could get a second for him right now, or if they could, it wouldn't be as simple as just deciding to pull the trigger. It would take some serious effort, and once word leaked, the situation would just get worse and worse for the jags.But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade. But yes, if you and mop are talking about how you'd manage your dynasty fantasy football team, a non contender should probably trade mjd right now, even if they are selling low.

 

[[icon]]

Super captain fantasy america #### yeah?!!!

 

[karmarooster]

I don't understand "moralizing" about players holding out, not playing, angling for a new contract or whatever with an expression that usually goes something like "he already SIGNED a contract! if he didn't like it he shouldn't have signed/shouldn't be holding out for more $$$ that greedy *******!" etc. etc.

Contracts are often breached, and there's nothing wrong with doing it. You just settle up as the contract provides. There are TONS of contract tools that deal with this, and the concept of efficient breach says that when it makes sense, you don't perform. Or you notify the other party by anticipatory repudiation that you will not perform. Or you pay the agreed on damages in the event of the breach. And you get sued for damages, or for performance or other equitable remedy.

They had these poor people on 60 minutes with underwater housing loans who refused to walk away from the contracts because of something like "my daddy taught me to stand by my word, and I gave the bank my word I would pay for this house, so that's what I'm gunna do."

Contracts are not holy.

 

[-jb-]

Super captain fantasy america #### yeah?!!!

you still drunk?

 

[Run It Up]

I don't understand "moralizing" about players holding out, not playing, angling for a new contract or whatever with an expression that usually goes something like "he already SIGNED a contract! if he didn't like it he shouldn't have signed/shouldn't be holding out for more $$$ that greedy *******!" etc. etc.Contracts are often breached, and there's nothing wrong with doing it. You just settle up as the contract provides. There are TONS of contract tools that deal with this, and the concept of efficient breach says that when it makes sense, you don't perform. Or you notify the other party by anticipatory repudiation that you will not perform. Or you pay the agreed on damages in the event of the breach. And you get sued for damages, or for performance or other equitable remedy.They had these poor people on 60 minutes with underwater housing loans who refused to walk away from the contracts because of something like "my daddy taught me to stand by my word, and I gave the bank my word I would pay for this house, so that's what I'm gunna do." Contracts are not holy.

Pretty much this, when the players only bargaining chip is his production hes gonna have to take a hit at the beginning of his career just to get paid. If he outperforms his initial contract he should be allowed to pursue a contract they feel is more appropriate.Criticize if you want he deserves more money.

 

[Shutout]

I don't understand "moralizing" about players holding out, not playing, angling for a new contract or whatever with an expression that usually goes something like "he already SIGNED a contract! if he didn't like it he shouldn't have signed/shouldn't be holding out for more $$$ that greedy *******!" etc. etc.Contracts are often breached, and there's nothing wrong with doing it. You just settle up as the contract provides. There are TONS of contract tools that deal with this, and the concept of efficient breach says that when it makes sense, you don't perform. Or you notify the other party by anticipatory repudiation that you will not perform. Or you pay the agreed on damages in the event of the breach. And you get sued for damages, or for performance or other equitable remedy.They had these poor people on 60 minutes with underwater housing loans who refused to walk away from the contracts because of something like "my daddy taught me to stand by my word, and I gave the bank my word I would pay for this house, so that's what I'm gunna do." Contracts are not holy.

Larry Crowne movie. Larry Crowne wisely asesses that his best interest is to default on his mortgae of his home he has lived in for many years. Sometimes you gotta understand where to cut your losses.

 

[baconisgood]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

As I said in the rest of my post, what good is an elite talent to a team going nowhere with or without him? The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick? Mjd could give them hope going into 2013, but only if he shows up. The only way he helps THIS year is if his presence somehow helps gabbarts development in 2012, and that's a tough sell when he has two years left on a contract and a whole bunch of soon to be free agents watching with interest to see if the owner will buckle. End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

You know owners make or lose money in non championship years right? You know they make more in a championship (and beyond) year if they have a fan base right?

 

[bostonfred]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

As I said in the rest of my post, what good is an elite talent to a team going nowhere with or without him? The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick? Mjd could give them hope going into 2013, but only if he shows up. The only way he helps THIS year is if his presence somehow helps gabbarts development in 2012, and that's a tough sell when he has two years left on a contract and a whole bunch of soon to be free agents watching with interest to see if the owner will buckle. End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

You know owners make or lose money in non championship years right? You know they make more in a championship (and beyond) year if they have a fan base right?

Yes, and yes. I also know that owners take a longer term vision of their billion dollar investments than maybe we could get seven or eight wins this year if I buckle on the first contract demand I see. I know that the jaguars have enjoyed several of the types of year you seem to want for them, and they still put tarps on their seats. I know that most owners would prefer sustained excellence to the opportunity to upgrade a lost season the mediocrity. But it doesn't really matter what I know. It matters what the billionaires know. I am just explaining what the new owner is doing, and since there's not much jones drew can do to change that, I am also laying out a path he can take to make his last big contract. But your questions belie your business savvy. I'm sure you'll be a billionaire owner yourself in no time, since you obviously know quite a bit about running a successful organization. And when you do, I hope you forgive me for my post when I come to you for a job running what is sure to be the new benchmark for successfully run franchises.

 

[massraider]

I don't understand "moralizing" about players holding out, not playing, angling for a new contract or whatever with an expression that usually goes something like "he already SIGNED a contract! if he didn't like it he shouldn't have signed/shouldn't be holding out for more $$$ that greedy *******!" etc. etc.Contracts are often breached, and there's nothing wrong with doing it. You just settle up as the contract provides. There are TONS of contract tools that deal with this, and the concept of efficient breach says that when it makes sense, you don't perform. Or you notify the other party by anticipatory repudiation that you will not perform. Or you pay the agreed on damages in the event of the breach. And you get sued for damages, or for performance or other equitable remedy.They had these poor people on 60 minutes with underwater housing loans who refused to walk away from the contracts because of something like "my daddy taught me to stand by my word, and I gave the bank my word I would pay for this house, so that's what I'm gunna do." Contracts are not holy.

Pretty much this, when the players only bargaining chip is his production hes gonna have to take a hit at the beginning of his career just to get paid. If he outperforms his initial contract he should be allowed to pursue a contract they feel is more appropriate.

He is not on his initial contract. He DID pursue a more appropriate contract, and he received one. That is the contract he is on now.

 

[Chase Stuart]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.The precedent argument is pretty meaningless. If the goal is to avoid having a player in the future hold out and miss the season for the team, your way to do that is to let a star player hold out and miss the season? The Titans "caved" to Chris Johnson's holdout last year, and it didn't exactly spark a string of player holdouts.

 

[H8tank]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.

Say what? Holy crap I can't believe you just typed that. He got his 2nd contract, and he got paid big money. He's not working for some minimum deal, play this year, get your extension next year.

No team is going to trade a 2nd round anything for a disgruntled player who has lost a step and wants a new deal.

 

[baconisgood]

So when you say he's the only thing they have going for them, do you mean in terms of taking a step forward?

No I mean that he is literally their only elite talent, I would count blackmon but given their situation I think he is a nonfactor in this offense.They are trying (using this very loosely) to build a team, but there comes a point when you have to actually invest in talent and not gamble on an investment that likely wont pay any return.

As I said in the rest of my post, what good is an elite talent to a team going nowhere with or without him? The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick? Mjd could give them hope going into 2013, but only if he shows up. The only way he helps THIS year is if his presence somehow helps gabbarts development in 2012, and that's a tough sell when he has two years left on a contract and a whole bunch of soon to be free agents watching with interest to see if the owner will buckle. End the holdout, help them win 7-9 games, and hold out next year in the final year of your contract.

You know owners make or lose money in non championship years right? You know they make more in a championship (and beyond) year if they have a fan base right?

Yes, and yes. I also know that owners take a longer term vision of their billion dollar investments than maybe we could get seven or eight wins this year if I buckle on the first contract demand I see. I know that the jaguars have enjoyed several of the types of year you seem to want for them, and they still put tarps on their seats. I know that most owners would prefer sustained excellence to the opportunity to upgrade a lost season the mediocrity. But it doesn't really matter what I know. It matters what the billionaires know. I am just explaining what the new owner is doing, and since there's not much jones drew can do to change that, I am also laying out a path he can take to make his last big contract. But your questions belie your business savvy. I'm sure you'll be a billionaire owner yourself in no time, since you obviously know quite a bit about running a successful organization. And when you do, I hope you forgive me for my post when I come to you for a job running what is sure to be the new benchmark for successfully run franchises.

Your statements are borderline incoherent(and they are probably on the wrong side of the border at that).

The jags have no hope of competing this year, so why would they invest millions in putting extra wear and tear on a player who can only help them get a worse draft pick?

I know that the jaguars have enjoyed several of the types of year you seem to want for them, and they still put tarps on their seats. I know that most owners would prefer sustained excellence to the opportunity to upgrade a lost season the mediocrity.

The fact that the Jags have tarped over seats doesn't somehow imply that they don't have marginal fan base. In fact it implies the opposite- that they have much more to gain from a surprise playoff run or having a popular player on their team. Teams like the Packers that have decades long waiting lists can handle a few years in the doldrums, not teams like the Jags.

But it doesn't really matter what I know

Well that's a relief, I thought we were in trouble there for a second.Nothing that you've written implies you know how investors think about their investments. MJD is trying to figure out what kind of leverage he has, the billionaire owner has a large stake in getting the team on a profitable track ASAP because returns are compounded. This doesn't mean that MJD's leverage is enough to get him an extension, but he can find out now at relatively low cost to himself and he has the option to end the holdout at anytime.

 

[baconisgood]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.

Say what? Holy crap I can't believe you just typed that. He got his 2nd contract, and he got paid big money. He's not working for some minimum deal, play this year, get your extension next year.

No team is going to trade a 2nd round anything for a disgruntled player who has lost a step and wants a new deal.

Tons of teams make mistakes and overpay for players who have lost a step. Also I don't know how anyone can watch football and come away with the assessment that MJD lost a step last season. If anything he cemented himself as a top 5 RB talent in the league.

 

[Chase Stuart]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.

Say what? Holy crap I can't believe you just typed that. He got his 2nd contract, and he got paid big money. He's not working for some minimum deal, play this year, get your extension next year.

No team is going to trade a 2nd round anything for a disgruntled player who has lost a step and wants a new deal.

BostonFred said the Jaguars management should have the view that the team isn't going to compete this year, not me.Which step exactly did MJD lose?

 

[H8tank]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.

Say what? Holy crap I can't believe you just typed that. He got his 2nd contract, and he got paid big money. He's not working for some minimum deal, play this year, get your extension next year.

No team is going to trade a 2nd round anything for a disgruntled player who has lost a step and wants a new deal.

Also I don't know how anyone can watch football and come away with the assessment that MJD lost a step last season. If anything he cemented himself as a top 5 RB talent in the league.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8296ec67/article/report-jags-think-maurice-jonesdrew-lost-a-step-?module=HP11_headline_stack

And then there's the issue of durability. Team sources told CBSSports.com they feel Jones-Drew isn't nearly as explosive as he used to be.

http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2012/5/30/3052119/maurice-jones-drew-contract-hold-out-jaguars

This shouldn't be that big of a shocking reveal to anyone who's paid attention to Jones-Drew's career arc. As his role in the offense has increased, his explosive plays have decreased. This is rather normal as well, especially for someone who plays the game like Jones-Drew. From 2006 to 2007, Jones-Drew averaged a 20+ yard play every 17.5 touches. From 2008 on, that number has jumped to a 20+ yard play ever 35.5 touches.

 

[bostonfred]

But all of this missed the even more important point of how management would look if they let their superstar talk his way out of town and into a new contract when he had two years left. I just don't think a new owner can afford to set that precedent, even if they had the guts to pull off a trade.

I think you need to consider how management looks if they decide to not give an effort to be competitive for the 2012 season. I don't think that's a particularly inspiring message to send to your team.The precedent argument is pretty meaningless. If the goal is to avoid having a player in the future hold out and miss the season for the team, your way to do that is to let a star player hold out and miss the season? The Titans "caved" to Chris Johnson's holdout last year, and it didn't exactly spark a string of player holdouts.

chris johnson is a younger player, who was at the end of his first contract, on a team that had playoff aspirations (like jacksonville did last year when they thought they had a healthy garrard and a young stud qb to groom behind him), and he held out for so long that by the time he caved, he wasn't any good. It is now the go-to example when people discuss the risk of extended holdouts. Mjd is a running back in his late 20s, on his second contract, on a team with aspirations to improve this year, not compete, because their pro bowl qb is gone, and their young qb isn't ready yet, and the holdout is still in its early phases.And I don't think management views it as letting their star player hold out the whole season. I think management views it as a player holding out with two years left in their contract to see if they can get more money. And i think theyve chosen to make it clear that players cannot hold out in the second to last year of a contract after they've earned their guaranteed money and hope that there will be a renegotiation. Is that the best tactic? Probably, imo. I understand and agree with the points you guys have made, I just don't think that management budges significantly on this. I also think that mjd has a better chance of getting money by reporting after a short holdout, then trying again next year.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

there isn't a single successful franchise where the inmates run the asylum.

people don't show up for mjd, they show up for the jacksonville jags and wins.

they lost with him, and they can just as well lose without him.

 

[karmarooster]

I don't understand "moralizing" about players holding out, not playing, angling for a new contract or whatever with an expression that usually goes something like "he already SIGNED a contract! if he didn't like it he shouldn't have signed/shouldn't be holding out for more $$$ that greedy *******!" etc. etc.Contracts are often breached, and there's nothing wrong with doing it. You just settle up as the contract provides. There are TONS of contract tools that deal with this, and the concept of efficient breach says that when it makes sense, you don't perform. Or you notify the other party by anticipatory repudiation that you will not perform. Or you pay the agreed on damages in the event of the breach. And you get sued for damages, or for performance or other equitable remedy.They had these poor people on 60 minutes with underwater housing loans who refused to walk away from the contracts because of something like "my daddy taught me to stand by my word, and I gave the bank my word I would pay for this house, so that's what I'm gunna do." Contracts are not holy.

Pretty much this, when the players only bargaining chip is his production hes gonna have to take a hit at the beginning of his career just to get paid. If he outperforms his initial contract he should be allowed to pursue a contract they feel is more appropriate.

He is not on his initial contract. He DID pursue a more appropriate contract, and he received one. That is the contract he is on now.

What difference does it make? You seem to assume that it would be "ok" (morally) for him to refuse to perform under his first contract, but once he "got what he bargained for" in his second contract, he has some kind of obligation to perform. Contracts do not "add up." There is NO MORAL OBLIGATION TO PERFORM A CONTRACT. They are useful only so long as they serve both parties' interests. You could give someone a new contract every single day, and eventually, that person might decide it's wiser to refuse to perform. The entire slogan "honor a contract" is a misnomer, because the concept of shaking hands/giving one's word/being morally obligated to perform as promised is NOT part of the equation. An obligation for performance of a contract is not the same thing as personal integrity, and blue-collar types confuse the two ideas.

 

[massraider]

What difference does it make? You seem to assume that it would be "ok" (morally) for him to refuse to perform under his first contract, but once he "got what he bargained for" in his second contract, he has some kind of obligation to perform. Contracts do not "add up." There is NO MORAL OBLIGATION TO PERFORM A CONTRACT. They are useful only so long as they serve both parties' interests. You could give someone a new contract every single day, and eventually, that person might decide it's wiser to refuse to perform. The entire slogan "honor a contract" is a misnomer, because the concept of shaking hands/giving one's word/being morally obligated to perform as promised is NOT part of the equation. An obligation for performance of a contract is not the same thing as personal integrity, and blue-collar types confuse the two ideas.

You assume incorrectly. I am placing no moral grade on anything. I was answering the previous poster, who seemed to be under the impression MJD was on his rookie deal. If you want to use is as a springboard to repeat your moral obligation/contract rant, fine with me. I actually agree with your position. Which contract it is DOES matter, to me, when I decide who I agree with. When a player hold out, I look at the pertinent details, and decide who I agree with. When a young RB joins the elite I am usually in their corner during a holdout. They signed a contract they had little control over, they have short lifespans, and squeaky wheel gets the grease. So go get your money, kid. It is rare that once a player gets a second deal, that he will find me agreeing with him. In this case, usually the player signed a fair market deal, making him one of the highest paid players at his position, and got a big bonus up front, assuring the financial security we were told is lacking during the underpaid years of his rookie deal. All of these things transpired with MJD. I have no moral problem with him holding out. I think it's dumb, and he has no leverage, but yeah, he can hold out.

 

[H8tank]

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

JACKSONVILLE--Jag thoughts 1: Good night for BGabbert, tho w/conservative pass calls. Sharp bullet to Laurent Robinson on crossing rte.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

Jag thoughts 2: Mularkey likes where Gabbert is as they try to rebuild psyche after disastrous '11 ... I see Cecil Shorts emerging at WR.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

Jag thoughts 3: MJD: I think they're going to let him sit. And sit ... Blackmon? No deal til he compromises on givebacks if he has a 3d dui.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

Jag thoughts 4: OLB Daryl Smith, hidden star, entering final year. Could strike it rich ... $3m locker room: The Ritz of NFL locker rooms.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

Jag thoughts 5: C BMeester one of quiet leaders in NFL ... Lee Evans could be on bubble ... BRobiskie/TPrice don't have roster spots locked.

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing

By the way, kudos to the Jags for a free scrimmage, fireworks display, player autographs, jersey giveaways. That team makes fans welcome.