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!
Vincent Jackson can play in the 5th game (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter identikit
- Start date
Abraham
Footballguy
Yup....And the notion that AJ Smith may want to "screw with him" is equally silly. AJ Smith is in the business of putting a football team on the field that can win games now and in the future. No, he won't give Jackson away, but he most definitely would trade him for the right offer. Improving the Chargers is AJ Smith's driving focus.
Breesisdaman
Footballguy
Concerning AJ's motivation: I think he would be much more inclined to deal to the Rams or Seahawks than to the Vikings because it won't be so good for A.J. if a trade he makes gives the Vikings a Superbowl just one year after falling short of a Superbowl appearance with the Chargers. Even if the Chargers have another brilliant regular season that would be a bitter pill to swallow if they fall short again and the Vikings won. The Chargers/AJ need to trade VJ to a team who is much further away from the Superbowl than they are or risk losing your job when the Vikings cash in. Get my drift?
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a trade, at this point, is almost a certainty. Neither party would have gone through so much effort to get the suspension reduced unless they thought there was a very, very real chance of making a trade happen. Jackson's camp wouldn't have accepted the settlement unless they knew that potential trading partners would be just fine with it. If I were laying completely arbitrary odds on a possible trade, I'd say there's an 85-90% chance that something goes down within the next week.
Hate to be a killjoy, but this is pretty much what Oakland Raider fans have been saying for the better part of a decade ("they aren't too far away from being legit! A few players make a big difference! Jamarcus Russell will make those WRs pro bowlers!").I think the Rams are on the right track, but I don't think they're going to miraculously turn it around in the next year or two. They've still got a ways to go. As a Jackson owner, I wouldn't be too excited about St. Louis as a possible destination. It wouldn't be the end of the world (it's no Buffalo, after all), but I'd put it in the bottom 50% of potential landing spots for Jackson after this season. Ideally, I'd love to see him in either New England (replacing Moss) or Washington (paired with Shanahan).
Vincent Jackson put himself in this position by signing a 5 year contract, playing out all 5 year of it, and then due to a loophole in the rules not becoming a free agent?Vincent Jackson isn't even holding out, here. Holding out implies that you have a contract. Vincent Jackson doesn't have a contract. He signed his contract, he honored his contract without complaint despite outperforming it, and now his contract is done. All Vincent Jackson is doing is refusing to sign a new contract with San Diego for a fraction of his true value. Ain't nothing wrong with that. If my boss offered me a job at 1/5th what I was worth, I'd tell him where to stick it, too. It's just that I would then be allowed to go look for work elsewhere, while thanks to an asinine loophole in the CBA, Vincent Jackson is prohibited from doing so.
Bandit
Footballguy
The Chargers play the Rams in week 6, and they play the Vikings next season. On the other hand, they play the Seahawks in week 3, which means if Jackson is traded to and signs long term with Seattle, San Diego won't have to face him until 2014. Of course, he could still get traded to Minnesota or St. Louis, but if the offers are similar, you've got think that Seattle has the best chance.
Also, the schedule works out great for Seattle if they make the trade. Because their bye is week 5, Jackson would have two full weeks of practice before his first game. Meanwhile, Minnesota's week 4 bye works against them because Jackson wouldn't be allowed to practice during that time off.
Also, the schedule works out great for Seattle if they make the trade. Because their bye is week 5, Jackson would have two full weeks of practice before his first game. Meanwhile, Minnesota's week 4 bye works against them because Jackson wouldn't be allowed to practice during that time off.
geoff8695
Footballguy
Well then, by all means get on a plane to Vegas and bet your entire savings on SD making it to the Super Bowl! Easy Money, right? Heck you're not alone.
Stinkin' Ref thinks a trade to MIN should be avoided just b/c Jackson and the Vikes could end up facing the Chargers in the Super Bowl, so AJ and Co. need to start getting ready for their matchup in Dallas next February!Sheesh! I don't have any personal insights into the Chargers organization, but I highly doubt that Super Bowl matchups are factoring into potential trades. Whether or not AJ will trade him or not, is up for debate. But it's virtually a consensus that VJ has played his last game for the Chargers, so SD should absolutely get the best value they can in return for Jackson. If they fail to trade him they will most likely get a compensatory pick and nothing more!If another team is willing to pay VJ for this year and give up a 2nd round pick, that should be enough for AJ to pull the trigger. Maybe he will get cute and wait until the last minute to complete the trade in the hopes that a team will up the ante with a 1st rounder or multiple draft picks, but IMO settling for a compensatory pick is a losing proposition by comparison.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
That's funny, I thought his agents came out and publicly said that specifically wasn't their demand. Of course they didn't speak to what his demands might be only days after blasting AJ because AJ wouldn't come out and publicly make a list of which teams he'd be willing to trade VJ to and what he was looking for in terms of compensation. I guess they don't mind giving away all of AJ's bargaining power but they don't seem nearly as willing to part with their own.Last I heard they were still in a tizzy asking for a public apology to some newspaper for speculating they were giving VJ an allowance after making such a mess of his contract negotiations. They don't seem like the best representation in the world and if this dragged on past the trade deadline I think it would be interesting to see if VJ kept them on. If VJ changes representation anything can happen.Rumors out of the Twin Cities say VJ's agents are sticking to wanting 50 million, 30 guaranteed.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
Why wouldn't they simply franchise him?
CalBear
Footballguy
Perhaps you'd like to quantify what you think the odds are of San Diego making the Super Bowl without Jackson, along with the odds of Minnesota making the Super Bowl with Jackson.
he was offered a tender and chose not to sign it......he and his agent where aware of the consequences and asinine loopholes that you speak of.....he chose not to play with SD knowing what would happen if they called his bluff....they did.....his bad decision making in other areas also affect the way a team deals with you.......guy is one more bad decision away from a long suspension......maybe AJ wanted to see him keep his nose clean for awhile after signing thetender, and then give him a new contract after he has proven he isn't going to have any more off field issues.....so technically he is "not" holding out, call it whatever you want, but he has made every decision that has put him where he is right now....sorry if he didn't like his new salary.......had he not screwed up for the second time, he would be playing right now with a phat new contract.........
Last edited by a moderator:
BoltBacker
Footballguy
I must have misunderstood your post. I thought you were inferring SD couldn't be a superbowl contender based on the fact they lost a game to team coming off a four-win season. If that wasn't your intent my apologies. Carry on.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
I don't blame Jackson for not signing any contract he doesn't think is fair. But this line does make me curious... what is the "true value" of Jackson given his level of production and the fact he already has two strikes against him in your opinion?
Maybe, but I get pretty sick of seeing people pretend that Vincent Jackson is some doucher who is holding out because he wants more money. Jackson signed a 5 year contract under the premise that at the end of those 5 years, he would either be franchised (and paid among the 5 highest players at his position), or he'd be free to negotiate with whoever he wanted. He honored his end of the contract without complaint, and at the end of it, he was denied either of those considerations. If I were Jackson, I'd be pretty flipping pissed, too. If my employer did that to me (refused to offer me anywhere near market value for my services, but also barred me from negotiating with someone who would, after I had already honored every single term of the contract I signed with them), I'd refuse to work for them, too, provided I had the money to do so. I'd just say "screw you all, I won't sit idly by and let you bend me over" and take a year long sabbatical. If that's what Jackson wants to do, then good for him, I say.I hate how the average football fan expects the average football player to blithely put up with working conditions that they would themselves find wholly unacceptable in their own lives. I don't care if you're a brick layer, a teacher, a lawyer, a stock broker, a grocery bagger, an accountant, a CEO, or an NFL football player- that situation should be wholly untenable and no one should be thought the less of for refusing to abide by it, provided they had the means to make such a refusal. If your buddy the roofer found himself in that situation, no way in hell would you say "hey man, that's a raw deal, but it's your own fault for putting yourself in that situation."
Jackson has fewer strikes than Brandon Marshall. Jackson's production over the last two seasons is essentially identical to Brandon Marshall's. Jackson wants a contract comparable to Brandon Marshall's. I don't think that's a particularly unreasonable demand.Regardless, Jackson's "true value" isn't for me to decide, it's for the market to decide. The fact that there's such a frenzy by several teams to try to acquire him pretty definitively proves that his "true value" is far, far more than "3 million for one year". If the rumored trade proposal is true, Minnesota thinks Jackson's "true value" is $7 million a year *AND* a second round draft pick. I would call San Diego's $3 million a year offer a "fraction of his true value".
CalBear
Footballguy
Frankly, I don't think San Diego is a Super Bowl contender without Jackson. If you think they are, let us know what you think the probability is that they make it there; 10%? 5%? Vegas has them at 12-1, 8.3%. Then figure out the Vikings' chances (another 0-1 team) and multiply the two together, and you have the likelihood that the Chargers would have to face Vincent Jackson in the Super Bowl. I'd rather have a pick in next year's draft than worry about such a small probability.Of course, I'd rather sign my stud WR to a contract than play dominance games with him.
scott72
Footballguy
When they negotiated that contract did Jackson inform his team that he'd have 2 DUI's by the end of that contract? How would that work with any of those other professions you listed? Bottom line is Jackson changed the terms when he chose to get into trouble not once, but twice. He's very high risk now that he's got two strikes, so you can't blame the Chargers for changing their minds. Jackson dictated that action himself.
geoff8695
Footballguy
Most don't feel that is a likely option. For one thing it would require a new CBA to contain the same specific provision to make it possible to franchise VJ next year. Perhaps even more importantly though, if the Chargers weren't willing to pay him this year - then why on earth would the take a huge risk and gamble that the possibility to pay him 9 million plus MIGHT exist next season. It just isn't a very logical strategy or tact to take.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
Exactly. One in seven Americans live under the poverty line but not enough attention is brought to the real victims in our society, the professional athletes that are forced to cobble together an existence on a mere $3mil for 7 full months of work. I blame Sally Strothers most of all for turning a blind eye to the REAL poverty on our very own shores!
Sweetness_34
Footballguy
Packer fans should never talk about revenue sharing. Without it, there would be no Green Bay Packers.I never thought the Vikings would be the team to Steinbrennerize the NFL in an uncapped year. If they've got the resources to do that, can we at least cut them off from that 8 million dollars in revenue sharing they get every year?
BoltBacker
Footballguy
I'm not an owner but I'd certainly be willing to pay a player $9mil instead of $50mil/$30guaranteed.
scott72
Footballguy
V Jax is that you??
scott72
Footballguy
Yes because Brandon Marshal made Denver a contender. I don't see the excitement here. how many receivers switch teams mid year and have a huge fantasy impact? look at Joey Galloway, Deion Branch, Roy Williams, Chris Chambers, the list geos on and on. yes, these teams that you are mentioning need receivers badly, but it does not mean Jackson will pick up the plays right away, also everyone knows that it takes a while to get in game playing shape. Look at Revis, he is already nursing a hamstring or something. There is a high likeliness of an injury when you play after no preseason and such. I would love him to get traded since I don't want him with San Diego, but I think all of your optimism is in vein for this year.
Last edited by a moderator:
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
I'm just confused as to how games count for the suspension if you're not currently under contract and not able to get paid regardless. So his suspension is 4 games. Is it 4 games from when he signs a contract, or has the clock begun to run? Now that week 1 has been played, are there only 3 games left on the suspension even though he is not under contract right now?
let's not forget he was getting a substantail raise.......even after getting two dui's during his 5 year contract.....and if he would get another one he would be unavailable for an extended period of time......
if this was my "buddy" and his boss of 5 years gave him a raise, even if it wasn't as much as he wanted, after getting two dui's and the boss knowing a third violation would result in a long abscence from work, and my buddy turned it down, I would probably punch him in the nuts, not feel sorry for him.......
it was VJ fault for this situation......and he did put himself in it.......if he had kept his nose clean, he probably would have been catching the tying TD pass last Monday with a phat new contract......
if this was my "buddy" and his boss of 5 years gave him a raise, even if it wasn't as much as he wanted, after getting two dui's and the boss knowing a third violation would result in a long abscence from work, and my buddy turned it down, I would probably punch him in the nuts, not feel sorry for him.......
it was VJ fault for this situation......and he did put himself in it.......if he had kept his nose clean, he probably would have been catching the tying TD pass last Monday with a phat new contract......
If that's true, it was a bad premise. (Also, he was free to negotiate with whomever he wanted — during the free-agency period. He should have done so. I'm not sure why he didn't.)The Chargers have had their eye on the possibility of the uncapped year (and its implications for free agency) for quite some time, and the players should have as well. In any case, some players are making more than they should this season because of the lack of a salary cap, while others are making less than they should because of the limitations on unrestricted free agency. (At least, that was the theory.) It's a trade-off between the owners and the players. It's unreasonable to insist on upholding one side of the trade-off without also upholding the other side. There truly is no salary cap this season, and Jackson truly is a restricted free agent. It is therefore quite reasonable, IMO, for the Chargers to negotiate with Jackson like he's a restricted free agent. (Which doesn't mean I think they should have limited their offer to $3.2 million and then reduced it; but I also don't think they should offer anywhere near what Jackson is asking for, which seems in line with what an unrestricted free agent would demand.)
Last edited by a moderator:
geoff8695
Footballguy
Then why not offer him a one year deal THIS season? Obviously at least one other NFL team came up with a one year deal that Jackson and his agent found acceptable, but it wasn't the Chargers!Next year I HIGHLY DOUBT VJ signs with the Bolts.Heck many feel that there won't be a CBA in place that would contain the provision allowing SD to place the "Franchise Tag" on him. If that's correct, then your favorite team will get very little in compensation for VJAX leaving, but today AJ can actually accept the highest bidders offer. If I was an NFL GM I know what I would do at this point, and it's not waiting to see what happens in 2011.
His suspension is three games, which can be served whether or not he's under contract.The roster-exemption was originally three games, but has been reduced to one game (if he is traded). It starts after he's signed his contract and reports.
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
Alex Spanos is worth over $1 billion, and he duped the city of San Diego into spending public money (which could have gone towards helping the poor) on renovating his stadium. Then he charged the city for unsold tickets for nonexistent seats.Don't cry for the owners.
Yes. That's why I personally refuse to play in the NFL.
This is nonsense on so many levels that it's hard to know where to respond.Nobody is forcing the Chargers to give Vincent Jackson a new contract. If they don't want to give a new contract to a player with 2 DUIs, that's absolutely their prerogative. The Chargers have never "changed their minds". Both parties agreed to a contract, and both parties honored that contract, and now that contract is history. There's no mind-changing going on right now.
There are plenty of players who honor their contract for a team, and then the team decides that player is too risky and that they don't want to resign him. The problem is, when that happens to anyone else, that player is free to just go find a team that *DOES* want to resign him. Vincent Jackson can't do that. Vincent Jackson got screwed. Period, full stop.
So because football players make a good living, they aren't subject to the same basic rights and considerations that every other worker is subject to?Maybe we should pass a law that says that hospitals can unilaterally decide to cut a doctor's salary by 90% with no provocation. I mean, the doctor is well above the poverty line, so why should we care if he gets screwed? We should also pass laws that say that if school districts opt not to retain a teacher, they can bar that teacher from teaching in any other school district for an entire year. Teachers live above the poverty line, so why on earth should they be subject to an employee's basic rights?
For God's sake, people, there are people living in poverty in this country!!! How on earth could anyone possibly care about the working conditions of any of the six out of seven Americans who are above the poverty line at a time like this! Seriously, you just can't make this stuff up.
Look, I'm not saying that we should start up a Vincent Jackson Fund and go petition Congress... I'm just saying that the guy got screwed and he refused to put up with it. Good for him. Anyone who claims that it's somehow a character flaw on his part is an idiot. I bet the vast majority of people posting on this board would have done the same thing in the same situation.
If you want to pile on someone, pile on Darrell Revis, who wanted his contract torn up with 3+ years left on it. Don't pile on Vincent Jackson, who honored (and outperformed) his contract without complaint, only to have the rug pulled out from underneath him afterward.
If your buddy was ludicrously underpaid, and he knew it, and his boss knew it, and his boss called him into his office and said "hey man, I know you're ridiculously underpaid and you could be making 10 times as much as you currently are making on the open market, but I'll tell you what... I'm going to give you a tiny, pathetic raise that will still leave you making a fraction of your true worth. But it's still a raise, right!", I'd imagine your buddy wouldn't be too thrilled with that whole situation, either. If your buddy made $40,000 a year, but the average person with his level of experience in his field of work in his area made $80,000 a year, and your buddy's employer gave him a $2,000 a year raise, your buddy wouldn't be groveling all over his boss out of gratitude for the generosity... your buddy would be updating his resume and looking for a new employer. Period. That's how things work in the real world.
5 years ago, it was a solid premise. The owners didn't opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement until 4 years ago- a full year after VJax signed his contract. So this whole uncapped year thing and "6 years for UFA" thing didn't crop up until VJax was a year into his contract.
I'm not sure what you're getting at, here. It seems to me that you're implying that NFL players should just suck it up and ignore any injustices because they have a glamorous job. Is that an accurate interpretation, or would you rather expound on this for me?
scott72
Footballguy
Well Vincent Jackson is an idiot if he thinks he deserves 50 million with 2 strikes against him. Like I stated before if he would have kept himself out of trouble, he'd probably be enjoying his huge contract right now, but he made his own bed now he gets to sleep in it.
Obviously he's not an idiot for thinking he deserves that much, given how many hoops Minnesota, Seattle, and St. Louis have been jumping through to try to land him despite knowing that was his asking price.
scott72
Footballguy
I think his point is you're not going to find a whole lot of sympathy around here for multi-millionaires playing a game to earn their living, and crying because they're underpaid. Especially given the economy for the 98% of the rest of us. If you want to hold a torch for Jackson (even though I'm convinced you are him), then you go ahead, but don't expect the rest of us to follow you off the cliff.
scott72
Footballguy
Have they signed him yet? Exactly, so you can't assume his asking price isn't the thing keeping him unemployed either.
I don't believe this is true. I don't think Jackson can practice with a team for 3 games for substance abuse but he can practice with a team during the 1 extra game for the roster suspension. This would allow him to start practicing with the Vikings during their bye week.
The Kerminator
Footballguy
Could the Redskins be interested in Jackson yet?
Redskins Insider
I think they were rumored to be interested back in July IIRC
Redskins Insider
I think they were rumored to be interested back in July IIRC
I'm just saying that most football fans would not find playing in the NFL (on the terms and working conditions offered to Vincent Jackson) wholly unacceptable.
Last edited by a moderator:
I know that's how you feel. I think it's idiotic. Human beings are human beings. If you were in his position, I'd bet dollars to donuts you'd be doing the same damn thing. And don't play that "no man, it's a game and I love it and I'd do it for the veteran minimum!" line, either. I get that you're a football fan and you think being a player would be the most amazing thing ever... but almost every single player in the NFL was also once exactly like you, a football fan who thought that being a player would be the most amazing thing ever. The fact that they still hold out for every penny they can get is probably a pretty good sign that you would do exactly the same thing, in their shoes.Look, at the end of the day, this is a disagreement between player and management. Either you support the player, or you support the management. You can say "why should I support the player, he's getting paid millions of dollars to play a game?!", but I'm just going to respond with "why should you support management, they're getting paid millions of dollars to watch other people play a game?!". The simple fact is that, if Vincent Jackson plays for an NFL franchise, he will be worth some monetary amount to that franchise. Every player generates revenue for their franchise, either through merchandising, or through increased ticket sales, or through increased wins (which in turn leads to higher merchandising and ticket sales), or whatever. Every single player generates money for the league. Star players make a ton of money, but that's because they're generating a commensurately higher amount of money for their franchise. Indy pays Peyton Manning, what, $15 million a year? But I bet Indy makes $20 million more a year because Peyton Manning is on their team. Peyton Manning gets paid such a huge sum of money because it's commensurate with the amount of revenue he generates for his bosses.Vincent Jackson, whether you like it or not, generates a huge amount of revenue for his franchise. As a result of his labors, his franchise is making millions of dollars. All Vincent Jackson wants is a portion of what he's earning for his bosses. That's a pretty reasonable request, in my mind, whether we're talking about wanting a piece of a $20,000 pie or a $20,000,000 pie. If you generate revenue for your employer, you deserve to be compensated appropriately. Vincent Jackson generates a huge amount of revenue for the billionaire owner of the San Diego Chargers, and he has been denied his opportunity to be compensated appropriately. That's an injustice any way you slice it, and I don't know what kind of person you are, but I'm not big on condoning injustices because I'm jealous of some guy's job.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
That's only true if you assume that football fans are somehow different from football players. IMO people are people pretty much everywhere and no one stops caring about fairness just because they make a ####load of money. If you think you're getting a raw deal, you'll do something about it (if you can) no matter who you are or how much money you make. The fact that we don't make millions has no bearing on Jackson's market worth, or what we'd perceive as our worth if we were in Jackson's shoes.Maurile Tremblay said:
Last edited by a moderator:
None_More_Black
Footballguy
How is Jackson crying? He is trying to get fair market value for his services just like everyone else. Just because you would be happy with a tiny fraction of his salary does not mean he should be.scott72 said:
Probably because most football fans don't have a blessed clue what it would be like to play in the NFL. I think it's telling that all of these football fans who go on to play in the league do things like hold out, while all of the football fans who DON'T go to the league are totally convinced that they'd never hold out if they'd gotten a shot.Let's play a little game. Imagine there's a guy who gets paid to write about fantasy football. We'll call him, I don't know, "Maurice Trambley". Maurice signs a 5-year contract with FootballDudes.com and he just kills it. His articles are awesome, and his rankings are the best in the business. Towards the end of that 5 years, an independent service rates the best Fantasy Football analysts in the business and Maurice makes their top 10 list (just for fun, let's call this list a "pro bowl"). Maurice sees that everyone else on the top 10 list went out and signed lucrative new contracts with their employers, radically increasing their pay. Maurice then goes to FootballDudes.com brass and says he'd like to sign a new contract with them, but he'd like a salary more commensurate with his talents and with the value he provides. FootballDudes.com, instead, offers him a contract worth maybe a third of what Maurice knows he would be worth on the open market. Maurice decides to shop his services elsewhere, but he finds that the legal team at FootballDudes.com managed to slip a No Compete clause into the final contract without Maurice's knowledge or approval. Maurice has two options- he can either remain with FootballDudes for a year, making a fraction of what he is worth and knowing that if his projections for that season are weak, his value on the open market will plummet... or he can tell FootballDudes.com where to stick their joke of an offer, take a year off of writing about fantasy football, and then sign a lucrative new deal with EPSN, a big-time rival sports website.In this situation, what thoughts do you think might be running through the hypothetical "Maurice's" head? Do you think he might feel upset at FootballDudes.com? Do you think he might feel cheated? If there was some guy on the FootballDudes.com website who would have loved to get paid to write about a hobby like fantasy football, do you think that should factor into Maurice's decision-making process? Would it be okay for Maurice to be upset if he didn't work in a desirable job, but the fact that he works in a desirable job makes it a sign of how bad Maurice's character is for feeling cheated?Maurile Tremblay said:
Ask the average fan if he'd play this year for $3.2 million. He'd say hes.I'm not saying that Jackson should play for that amount. He can do what he wants. I'm just pointing out that it's probably wrong to say that the average fan wouldn't "put up with" playing for that amount.(It wasn't a substantive point to begin with; it was just a one-liner.)
Velvet Revolver
Footballguy
Heard also that Rice's rehab is ahead of schedule - so potentially:
The Vikes could have Rice and VJ for half a year. Next year they wont have a Qb to throw to them - seems like the Vikes are putting the cart before the horse (again) -
The Vikes could have Rice and VJ for half a year. Next year they wont have a Qb to throw to them - seems like the Vikes are putting the cart before the horse (again) -
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Yeah, overreaction on my part. Just tired of hearing what average people would be willing to do for $3m. If you're average no one's going to ask you to do anything for $3m a year.
