The VJax and McNeil Situation (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

Under the current CBA, to avoid the provision automatically making him a restricted free agent again, he'd just have to sign by the Nov 16 signing deadline. Then he would sit out three games for the roster exemption, and be eligible to play the final three games plus the playoffs.

Does the roster exemption time cover for the DUI suspension or are they separate?

The suspension will be served in weeks 1–3, apparently, no matter when he signs.The roster exemption will apply to the three games following his reporting date.They'd be served concurrently in weeks 1–3 if he reports before the first regular-season game. If he reports after the seventh game, the suspension would be served in games 1–3 while the roster exemption would apply to games 8–10. If he reports after tenth game, the suspension would be served in games 1–3 while the roster exemption would apply to games 11–13.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Under the current CBA, to avoid the provision automatically making him a restricted free agent again, he'd just have to sign by the Nov 16 signing deadline. Then he would sit out three games for the roster exemption, and be eligible to play the final three games plus the playoffs.

Does the roster exemption time cover for the DUI suspension or are they separate?

This crap is complicated ain't it?Good thing there is nobody better than Maurile at getting to the bottom of things like this.

 

[shader]

I think in the end, the fact that VJackson has made so little money in his career is what will get him on the field this season.

This isn't some guy who already has ten million banked. If this guy lives like many NFL players, he could be really low on funds right now...and considering the potential of a lockout, could really be struggling in another year and a half, plus be burdened with TWO new draft classes of fresh 22-23 year old wideouts who haven't been sitting on the bench for 2 years (assuming there is a lockout).

That being the case, I see four scenarios:

1) Vincent Jackson gets traded. I have to think there is a team out there willing to give up a 2nd round pick for a GREAT WR, especially in an un-capped year. I still expect the Redskins to sign him, because it's in Snyder's blood, and because at this point, Shanahan has to be getting worried about the WR's on hand in Washington. Snyder can pay a bunch of money this year, and have a reasonable contract in the future. This trade gives Washington a chance in the East, where I think they have zero chance without getting more weapons. Perfect scenario, imo.

2) Vincent Jackson re-signs with Chargers. Many people don't think there is a chance in heck of this happening, but I disagree. If the trades all flame out, and VJ realizes that no one wants to pay him right now, I think he'll go back to the Chargers and beg for the 3M back. I think the Chargers SHOULD realize that VJ is in a tough situation, and welcome him back. Remember, this 3M is pretty close to what VJ has made for his entire career. If he realizes that he isn't getting a big contract anywhere else, I think he'll push for this to happen.

3) VJ tries to get the 3M and the Chargers play hardball and refuse. At this point, it definetely does not make fiscal sense for VJ to play, and I doubt he would, aside from a few games at the end of the year. I just can't imagine this happening, as regardless of whether you want to play hardball or not, the Chargers would be fools not to use the 3M tender on VJ, as it could make the difference in them winning the super bowl or not.

4) VJ refuses to sign any tenders, doesn't get traded and sits out the ten games. I don't know VJ, so I don't know what his mindset is. But as I said earlier, I can't imagine he's got alot of money banked, so I'd be very surprised if he did this. Players threaten "hold out" all the time, but rarely follow through with it. At the very least, I'd expect him to beg for the 3M back, but I guess there is the chance that he won't, and that he will not play again without a big contract. I think this would be a bad decision, and could theoretically put him out of work for 2 years, which would seriously damage his chances of getting a big contract.

I expect a trade to happen within the next week, and if it doesn't, then I expect VJ to re-sign before the deadline in September. We'll see.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

That being the case, I see four scenarios:

I'm not sure how your #3 and #4 are different. It looks like they both have VJ playing a few games at the end of the season on the current one-year tender.In any case, here are the four most likely possibilities as I see them:1. VJ is traded and plays 13 games for the Seahawks, Redskins, or some other team.2. VJ sits out the whole year.3. VJ reports after the tenth game and plays three games with the Chargers (plus playoffs).4. VJ reports after the seventh game and plays six games with the Chargers (plus playoffs).I think 1 & 2 are very close (and I could easily have the order wrong), while 3 & 4 are far behind.

 

[Couch Potato]

In my mind there is only one sane option. He'll get traded, probably to Seattle, for less than he's asking for initially. Just like earlier this off season with Marshall and Boldin, this will drag on a bit because we're not yet bumping up against a deadline. At some point though it'll get done.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

In my mind there is only one sane option. He'll get traded, probably to Seattle, for less than he's asking for initially. Just like earlier this off season with Marshall and Boldin, this will drag on a bit because we're not yet bumping up against a deadline. At some point though it'll get done.

September 4 is a meaningful deadline. If he doesn't report by then, he has to miss the first six games. He'll miss the first three due to suspension no matter what, but he also has to miss the first three games after he reports (due to the roster exemption), and he can't report while he's suspended.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

With Minnesota receiver situation in flux, wouldn't it be nice to see Jackson go to the Vikings and catch Farve passes for a year?... That would be the ultimate redemption for V-Jax owners that have been and will continue to endure this unfortunate situation...

 

[kylechoffman]

With Minnesota receiver situation in flux, wouldn't it be nice to see Jackson go to the Vikings and catch Farve passes for a year?... That would be the ultimate redemption for V-Jax owners that have been and will continue to endure this unfortunate situation...

I was just about to comment on minnesota. Seems minn could use the talent with the issues they have in rice and harvin. Send a 2nd to SD and get it done.

 

[shader]

That being the case, I see four scenarios:

I'm not sure how your #3 and #4 are different. It looks like they both have VJ playing a few games at the end of the season on the current one-year tender.In any case, here are the four most likely possibilities as I see them:1. VJ is traded and plays 13 games for the Seahawks, Redskins, or some other team.2. VJ sits out the whole year.3. VJ reports after the tenth game and plays three games with the Chargers (plus playoffs).4. VJ reports after the seventh game and plays six games with the Chargers (plus playoffs).I think 1 & 2 are very close (and I could easily have the order wrong), while 3 & 4 are far behind.

Well in terms of the outcome for fantasy owners, 3 and 4 are the same, you are correct.I'm just saying that one scenario has Vincent refusing to sign anything and the other scenario has San Diego refusing to restructure the 500K tender. Either way, he probably isn't playing this year.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

A trade for Vincent Jackson makes sense before season or not at all

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on August 23, 2010 6:44 PM ET

Unsigned Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson will miss the first three games of the 2010 season because of a league suspension. When it was confirmed this weekend that he was officially placed on the roster exempt list, we asked the NFL to clarify how this coincided with his suspension.

Here’s what NFL spokesman Dan Masonson told us:

1. Vincent Jackson’s three-game Substance Abuse suspension begins once the final roster reduction takes place [6:00 PM ET on Sept. 4].

2. Jackson is ineligible to report to the club during his suspension.

3. As per the CBA’s restricted free agency provisions, if Jackson reports after his suspension begins on Sept. 4, he will be ineligible to play for an additional three weeks following the date he actually reports. The CBA’s restricted free agency provisions state that once a club has notified a player of its intention to place him on the roster exempt list, the player must remain on that list for three games following the date on which he actually reports to his club.

All right. This essentially means Jackson will miss three or six games if he plays this year, but not in between. If he reports to a team before Sept. 4, he can serve his suspension and use up his three weeks on the roster exempt list at the same time. Otherwise, he can’t start his roster exempt clock until his suspension is over.

This clarification puts even more pressure for the Chargers to trade Jackson by Sept. 4. If he’s not dealt before then, he will have to miss six games this season, lowering his trade value.

If Jackson stays put, he’ll have to report to the Chargers by the eighth week of the season or he’ll lose an accrued year of NFL service.

It’s getting difficult to imagine Jackson playing for the Chargers this year, and it also doesn’t make sense for a trade to happen after the season starts.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If Jackson stays put, he’ll have to report to the Chargers by the eighth week of the season or he’ll lose an accrued year of NFL service.

I see it phrased that way more often than not, but that's pretty confusing.He doesn't lose a year. He just fails to gain a year. He has five years now, and he'd still have five if he doesn't report by week eight. It won't go down to four.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

If Jackson stays put, he’ll have to report to the Chargers by the eighth week of the season or he’ll lose an accrued year of NFL service.

I see it phrased that way more often than not, but that's pretty confusing.He doesn't lose a year. He just fails to gain a year. He has five years now, and he'd still have five if he doesn't report by week eight. It won't go down to four.

I think what Rosenthal was saying in "losing a year" is that he would lose that 6th year which would make him "bulletproof" if they modify the CBA and attempt to screw him out of his time served. So to speak.

 

[craxie]

there are only 2 options

1. he gets traded

2. he sits the entire year

he will not play for the chargers no matter what

 

[kylechoffman]

When is brett favre going to fly out to San Diego and convince AJ Smith to trade vjax to him?

 

[Multiple Scores]

I read somewhere that the guy playing the left tackle spot is a better run blocker than mcneil. Good news for mathews if true. The bad news is for rivers that he is an awful pass blocker. Charger homers please chime in on this.

 

[craxie]

the charger's offense has morphed from deep threat to quick strike

they're going to lots of short stuff so it won't matter as much

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

the charger's offense has morphed from deep threat to quick strikethey're going to lots of short stuff so it won't matter as much

So exactly where are you getting this? Floyd will still be targeted on the deep stuff. Granted Vjax make a living on deep bombs as well.

 

[Gr00vus]

the charger's offense has morphed from deep threat to quick strikethey're going to lots of short stuff so it won't matter as much

So exactly where are you getting this? Floyd will still be targeted on the deep stuff. Granted Vjax make a living on deep bombs as well.

Buster Davis is basically a speed guy too - the 3 downs a year he actually plays.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I read somewhere that the guy playing the left tackle spot is a better run blocker than mcneil. Good news for mathews if true. The bad news is for rivers that he is an awful pass blocker. Charger homers please chime in on this.

McNeill looked great in his run-blocking as a rookie in 2006. Since then, run-blocking has been his weakness. I don't know how to explain the regression. Maybe injury (he's struggled with his neck). Maybe complacency. (I think that's one reason the Chargers really wanted to see McNeill play this season before offering him a long-term deal. They wanted to see if he could regain his 2006 form. Same issue with Merriman as well, perhaps.)Dombrowski is a physical run-blocker. He's also a good blocker in space on screen passes, and he can pull (though he wouldn't do much of that as a tackle).Dombrowski doesn't have McNeill's quick feet as a pass-blocker, and doesn't use his hands as well. Basically, you can't leave him alone against a premier edge rusher. He'll need help from a running back or tight end. At least, that's what I'd expect based on his 2009 performance at right tackle.So far during this year's preseason, however, he has handled the Bears' Julius Peppers and the Cowboys' DeMarcus Ware extremely well. Neither one got close to Rivers. That might be a bit misleading, though, because the Chargers haven't really called any slow-developing pass-plays with seven-step drops with Rivers in the game. Everything has been pretty quick-hitting. (This is probably what craxie was referring to.)So I'd say the bottom line is that Dombrowski is more physical than McNeill as a run-blocker, while not nearly as athletic as a pass-blocker. But you have to love his hustle, and he has actually done absolutely fine as a pass-blocker so far this preseason — though the play-calling has made it easier for him. When Rivers has to hold the ball longer, it remains to be seen whether Dombrowski can sustain his blocks on deeper drops.

 

[Touchdown There]

there are only 2 options1. he gets traded2. he sits the entire yearhe will not play for the chargers no matter what

There are many drafters that still think they are getting a steal with VJax in the sixth or seventh. I am not sure they have a good grasp of the unique situation.

 

[identikit]

WR Vincent Jackson's Agents Claim Chargers Limit Trade Options

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xeqRCOyZ

San Diego wide receiver Vincent Jackson was denied permission by the Chargers to talk to other teams besides the Seattle Seahawks about a trade, says Jackson's agents. That has left agents Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod to conclude that the Chargers have no interest in trading Jackson, who is unwilling to play under the one-year tender the team extended to him as a restricted free agent. "I asked the Chargers if we could talk to the rest of the teams in the NFL," Schwartz said. "They said there were certain teams they didn't want to trade him to, and I said, 'Fine, tell me those teams and we can exclude them.' Even after that, they said no, so the only conclusion I can come to is they don't want to trade him." Schwartz and Feinsod said approximately a half-dozen teams have expressed interest in Jackson, but were directed to speak with the Chargers. Seattle is the only team to have received written permission from San Diego to talk to Jackson, even though opening the market to other teams would seem to be a logical next move if the Chargers want to trade him. In addition, Schwartz said he asked the Chargers what the team would want in exchange for Jackson, but were rebuffed on that front as well. "We are trying to actively help [the Chargers] facilitate a trade so it can be a win for us and a win for the Chargers," Schwartz said. "This way, Vincent can move on with another team and the Chargers can get something for him. We never asked for a trade until [Tuesday]. Prior to that, the Chargers gave Seattle permission to talk to us. After that became public last week, four or five teams called us to ask about a trade, and we instructed them to talk to the Chargers because we didn't have permission to speak with any other team." "Vincent would love to continue playing for Chargers, but not under the present terms," Feinsod said.

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xepAre00

 

[-jb-]

WR Vincent Jackson's Agents Claim Chargers Limit Trade Options

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xeqRCOyZ

San Diego wide receiver Vincent Jackson was denied permission by the Chargers to talk to other teams besides the Seattle Seahawks about a trade, says Jackson's agents. That has left agents Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod to conclude that the Chargers have no interest in trading Jackson, who is unwilling to play under the one-year tender the team extended to him as a restricted free agent. "I asked the Chargers if we could talk to the rest of the teams in the NFL," Schwartz said. "They said there were certain teams they didn't want to trade him to, and I said, 'Fine, tell me those teams and we can exclude them.' Even after that, they said no, so the only conclusion I can come to is they don't want to trade him." Schwartz and Feinsod said approximately a half-dozen teams have expressed interest in Jackson, but were directed to speak with the Chargers. Seattle is the only team to have received written permission from San Diego to talk to Jackson, even though opening the market to other teams would seem to be a logical next move if the Chargers want to trade him. In addition, Schwartz said he asked the Chargers what the team would want in exchange for Jackson, but were rebuffed on that front as well. "We are trying to actively help [the Chargers] facilitate a trade so it can be a win for us and a win for the Chargers," Schwartz said. "This way, Vincent can move on with another team and the Chargers can get something for him. We never asked for a trade until [Tuesday]. Prior to that, the Chargers gave Seattle permission to talk to us. After that became public last week, four or five teams called us to ask about a trade, and we instructed them to talk to the Chargers because we didn't have permission to speak with any other team." "Vincent would love to continue playing for Chargers, but not under the present terms," Feinsod said.

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xepAre00

This might be a stoopid question, but do the Chargers really even need/want Jackson's agent involved in the process? What's to stop them from engaging with another team and just doing a deal? How much of this is just posturing on the part of the agent, getting the media involved?

 

[identikit]

WR Vincent Jackson's Agents Claim Chargers Limit Trade Options

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xeqRCOyZ

San Diego wide receiver Vincent Jackson was denied permission by the Chargers to talk to other teams besides the Seattle Seahawks about a trade, says Jackson's agents. That has left agents Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod to conclude that the Chargers have no interest in trading Jackson, who is unwilling to play under the one-year tender the team extended to him as a restricted free agent. "I asked the Chargers if we could talk to the rest of the teams in the NFL," Schwartz said. "They said there were certain teams they didn't want to trade him to, and I said, 'Fine, tell me those teams and we can exclude them.' Even after that, they said no, so the only conclusion I can come to is they don't want to trade him." Schwartz and Feinsod said approximately a half-dozen teams have expressed interest in Jackson, but were directed to speak with the Chargers. Seattle is the only team to have received written permission from San Diego to talk to Jackson, even though opening the market to other teams would seem to be a logical next move if the Chargers want to trade him. In addition, Schwartz said he asked the Chargers what the team would want in exchange for Jackson, but were rebuffed on that front as well. "We are trying to actively help [the Chargers] facilitate a trade so it can be a win for us and a win for the Chargers," Schwartz said. "This way, Vincent can move on with another team and the Chargers can get something for him. We never asked for a trade until [Tuesday]. Prior to that, the Chargers gave Seattle permission to talk to us. After that became public last week, four or five teams called us to ask about a trade, and we instructed them to talk to the Chargers because we didn't have permission to speak with any other team." "Vincent would love to continue playing for Chargers, but not under the present terms," Feinsod said.

Read more: http://gridironfans.com/forums/latest-nfl-...l#ixzz0xepAre00

This might be a stoopid question, but do the Chargers really even need/want Jackson's agent involved in the process? What's to stop them from engaging with another team and just doing a deal? How much of this is just posturing on the part of the agent, getting the media involved?

My guess is because he's not under contract (hasn't signed his tender), a trade would require all 3 groups (both teams involved and VJaz w/agent) to come to an agreement.I'm by no means an expert on this stuff though.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

This might be a stoopid question, but do the Chargers really even need/want Jackson's agent involved in the process? What's to stop them from engaging with another team and just doing a deal? How much of this is just posturing on the part of the agent, getting the media involved?

No team will trade for a guy who refuses to play. If, say, the Redskins are considering a trade with the Chargers, they need to get Jackson (through his agent) to agree to actually play for them. That's the part of the process that Jackson needs to be involved in.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

My guess is because he's not under contract (hasn't signed his tender), a trade would require all 3 groups (both teams involved and VJaz w/agent) to come to an agreement.I'm by no means an expert on this stuff though.

Yeah, that too. Apart from rookies, a team can't trade its rights to an unsigned player. The player has to sign first.

 

[shader]

Jackson really is screwed in this situation and I do feel bad for him. He has been underpaid for 2 years, and should have hit free agency this year.

I personally am not sure what San Diego's angle is. I don't see why they wouldn't allow all NFC teams the opportunity to talk with VJ and work deals. Jackson's agents are now saying that they still aren't allowing any NFL teams to negotiate, aside from Seattle.

It's risky, but the best move for VJackson is to beg and plead for the 3M tender, sign it, go to San Diego and have 13 amazing games, helping the Chargers to win as many games as possible. Then he can hit the road and never look back.

Time is starting to run out, and if the Chargers don't give him the right to negotiate with all interested teams, than he needs to try and get things resolved with San Diego, which might be exactly what they want.

One thing he has to realize though is that sitting out the year is a worst-case scenario. I just think his overall salary will be 15-20 percent lower if he misses the entire year and tries to get a big contract next off-season.

The injury risks are real, but if San Diego keeps playing hardball, than it's really the only choice he has, imo.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

VJax has to sign somewhere. The risk of sitting out most or all of 2010 and then missing most or all of 2011 is one I just can't imagine he'd be willing to take. No one will fork over the big $$ if he's been out of the game for the better part of two years.

 

[Touchdown There]

The CBA will be different next year (if there is one at all). There is no guarantee that VJax will be allowed to leave as an unrestricted free agent next year. The Chargers will not let him go without proper compensation.

 

[BoltBacker]

A trade for Vincent Jackson makes sense before season or not at all

This clarification puts even more pressure for the Chargers to trade Jackson by Sept. 4. If he’s not dealt before then, he will have to miss six games this season, lowering his trade value.

I don't understand this at all. AJ has no pressure on him to trade VJ. None. Most believe the asking price is a 2nd rounder and reasonable but that won't help them much this season. That means SD doesn't really need to worry about trading him before the draft in April. If you believe there is a work stoppage in 2011 then that pushes the priority of trading VJ back to April of 2012. None of this will improve SD's chances in 2010 and we don't even know if there will be NFL football in 2011.

If this report is true...

"San Diego Chargers WR Vincent Jackson is willing to forego his salary because of the financial backing from agents Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod with the understanding that Jackson will repay his agents once he receives the big contract he is looking for, source told Kevin Acee, of the San Diego Union Tribune."

.... then I think Schwartz/Feinsod may have just adopted VJ for the next year and a half. Not the spending of just your vanilla pro athlete, but a guy they've been telling is an all-pro and the world owes him $10mil/yr. My suggestion to them is to lock the liqueur cabinet and put a breathalyser on the ignition system for the next year or two or that big contract may never come. From the sounds of things it may not come anyway...

"The Seattle Seahawks are not interested in what San Diego Chargers restricted free-agent WR Vincent Jackson is looking for in a long-term contract, sources told Kevin Acee, of the San Diego Union-Tribune. Jackson's agents are looking for a five-year contract worth $50 million with $30 million guaranteed."

" The Minnesota Vikings were interested in trading for San Diego Chargers WR Vincent Jackson, but they balked at Jackson's demands for a five-year, $50 million contract with $30 million guaranteed, reports the San Diego Union-Tribune's Kevin Acee. Minnesota signed free-agent WR Javon Walker (Raiders) Tuesday, Aug. 24."

"San Diego Chargers WR Vincent Jackson is having a hard time finding a new team because other teams are not willing to pay him $10 million a season due to his inexperience and off-field baggage, sources told the San Diego Union-Tribune's Kevin Acee."

Maybe calling out AJ in the press will put them in an even better bargaining position than the corner they've already backed themselves into. Earlier in the thread I thought they would come to their senses and sign a reasonable deal sometime in September but if they really were unwilling to bend to go into a PERFECT situation in MIN then I doubt VJ plays.

 

[identikit]

This might be worth watching:

per NFL Network's twitter:

Vincent Jackson sits down exclusively with NFL Network Insider Jason La Canfora. See it on NFL Total Access, Friday at 7pm ET.