I heard some discussion that this really has nothing to do with Lamar, it's about teams not wanting to get pushed into guaranteeing contracts. All the other issues involving Jackson are mostly noise (his injury history, his passing numbers, not playing in the playoff game last year, his playoff record, not having an agent, etc.)
Thirty-one other owners are still incensed at Haslam for the fully guaranteed contract the Browns gave Watson (who was not a beloved player by fans). The rest of the league is pushing back and doesn't want to have to start doing that. So the perceived collusion is about contract structure and not the individual player. Almost 20% of the league has essentially said in a roundabout way that they aren't interested in guaranteeing a $250-300M deal. BAL has been reluctant and MIA, ATL, CAR, WAS, and LV yesterday all seemed to get the word out that they aren't interested either. That could be a diversion, but that's nearly 20% of the league. From the discussion I saw on TV, owners want the Watson deal to be an outlier, not the norm. It will be interesting to see if you really can get toothpaste back into the tube once it's already out. Certainly, the players want as much guaranteed money as possible, and the owners want to shell out as little as possible. Guaranteeing contracts will dramatically change teams being able to cut players, will require bigger chunks of cap allocation they can't get out of, will impact roster management discussions, etc.