PDA

View Full Version : Football Vincent Jackson Situation


BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 03:35 PM
First I get rid of Vick because of Reid only for him to change his mind the very next day then Vicent doesn't get traded AGAIN!!! They can only retain him until next year right? I am just trying to understand the benefit of them keeping him when there apparently was two deals on the table.

Pestilence
09-22-2010, 03:36 PM
Vincent Jackson's agent Jonathan Feinsod: "Archie Manning had it right. They call (A.J. Smith) 'The Lord of No Rings' for a reason."

.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 03:36 PM
I dropped him in my fantasy league a week ago.

The Chargers WANT to **** him like a drunk prom date...

Mecca
09-22-2010, 03:38 PM
Yea pretty sure this has ventured into grudge over just moving on.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 03:43 PM
The Vikings allegedly offered a 2nd and anoher conditional pick. AJ Smith is a moron for not taking that. At best they will get a 3rd or 4th round comp pick for him now.

The whole "we don't want to set a precedent" business just seems like bullshit . The Patriots have been doing that for years, and yet they keep having contract disputes. That's just the nature of this sports without guaranteed contracts. I don't see any reason to think that handling the Vincent Jackson situation like this will help the Chargers organization in the future. Besides, this whole UFAs becoming RFAs situation due to the CBA is pretty unique.

doomy3
09-22-2010, 03:45 PM
I read on here that AJ Smith is the best GM in the league.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 03:48 PM
I read on here that AJ Smith is the best GM in the league.

Unfortunately for AJ Smith, it's not 2006 anymore.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 03:52 PM
Why do they want to treat one of their best players this way? They are going to lose the locker room.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 03:52 PM
The Vikings allegedly offered a 2nd and anoher conditional pick. AJ Smith is a moron for not taking that. At best they will get a 3rd or 4th round comp pick for him now.

The whole "we don't want to set a precedent" business just seems like bullshit . The Patriots have been doing that for years, and yet they keep having contract disputes. That's just the nature of this sports without guaranteed contracts. I don't see any reason to think that handling the Vincent Jackson situation like this will help the Chargers organization in the future. Besides, this whole UFAs becoming RFAs situation due to the CBA is pretty unique.

He will sit for a year, not do $#it, and odds are the layoff will have a huge (and negative) impact on his career.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 03:53 PM
He will sit for a year, not do $#it, and odds are the layoff will have a huge (and negative) impact on his career.

Yea, I don't get why he didn't sign the original tender. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Fritz88
09-22-2010, 03:54 PM
Yea pretty sure this has ventured into grudge over just moving on.

Don't you think that will send a strong message to everyone else on the team though? That they can't be bent over?

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 03:54 PM
He will sit for a year, not do $#it, and odds are the layoff will have a huge (and negative) impact on his career.

And how do the Chargers benefit from that? They could have gotten a 2nd rounder + another pick for a one year rental of a guy coming off a suspension. What else was AJ Smith expecting?

Don't you think that will send a strong message to everyone else on the team though? That they can't be bent over?

Or will it just reflect poorly on the Chargers organization, especially with players and agents? I haven't seen any correlation between being a hardass on players and preventing holdouts. The Pats have done it many times, yet they have regular holdouts. Look at the Logan Mankins situation.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:00 PM
And how do the Chargers benefit from that? They could have gotten a 2nd rounder + another pick for a one year rental of a guy coming off a suspension. What else was AJ Smith expecting?



Or will it just reflect poorly on the Chargers organization, especially with players and agents? I haven't seen any correlation between being a hardass on players and preventing holdouts. The Pats have done it many times, yet they have regular holdouts. Look at the Logan Mankins situation.

They wanted two 2nd rounders. Unrealistic IMO

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:04 PM
They will get a 3rd rounder for him anyways. Whats the point of making a contender better when you are trying to win yourself.

Depending on what goes on with the CBA, he may be under San Diego control next year as well.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:05 PM
One more thing I think it creates is animosity around the league from the teams that negotiated in good faith on getting a fair deal done when they had no intention of doing anything at all unless it was bending somebody over.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:06 PM
They will get a 3rd rounder for him anyways. Whats the point of making a contender better when you are trying to win yourself.

Depending on what goes on with the CBA, he may be under San Diego control next year as well.

You take a 2nd rounder and a conditional 3rd because they are worth way more than a 3rd and you are not going to see the Viqueens in the SB anyway.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:07 PM
Don't you think that will send a strong message to everyone else on the team though? That they can't be bent over?

No, players will continue to hold out, being a hardass doesn't send any message other than players thinking you don't treat them fairly.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:09 PM
No, players will continue to hold out, being a hardass doesn't send any message other than players thinking you don't treat them fairly.

And it might make more sense to go to another team for a little less so you don't end up like VJ. There is no upside in the way the Chargers are handling this IMO.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:11 PM
And it might make more sense to go to another team for a little less so you don't end up like VJ. There is no upside in the way the Chargers are handling this IMO.

Well if he wants to have a year accrued, then he will have to come back for the last 6 games, so maybe they want him to play? Maybe they still want to sign him?

-King-
09-22-2010, 04:12 PM
Why do they want to treat one of their best players this way? They are going to lose the locker room.

I see what you did there.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:12 PM
And how do the Chargers benefit from that

You'll sign or sit the fuck at home.

The end...

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:13 PM
Jackson is never suiting up for that team again, I don't get the point of holding a grudge about it. Pay him or trade him, this isn't rocket science.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:13 PM
You'll sign or sit the fuck at home.

The end...

And this benefits them how? By him not playing and getting nothing in return?

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:14 PM
There is no upside in the way the Chargers are handling this IMO.

There is no salary cap.

We can sit on this and FUCK you.

And we CAN afford it.

Next contract?...

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:14 PM
They offered him a 1 year $3.2 million deal. Now he isn't going to get shit.

Don't blame the Chargers, blame VJ.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:14 PM
Well if he wants to have a year accrued, then he will have to come back for the last 6 games, so maybe they want him to play? Maybe they still want to sign him?

All I know is AJ is an idiot and that bids well for the demise of the Chargers in future years. Norv isn't going to be saving the day anytime soon.

OnTheWarpath58
09-22-2010, 04:15 PM
Why should Smith take less than value for Jackson?

Just to make him happy?

If that was the case, he could have just paid him.

The Chargers hold all the cards here.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:15 PM
They offered him a 1 year $3.2 million deal. Now he isn't going to get shit.

Don't blame the Chargers, blame VJ.

Oh yea?

How about Marcus McNeil, there's a pattern here.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:16 PM
And this benefits them how? By him not playing and getting nothing in return?

What do they need?

Odds are they still win this division walking away.

Same time they can play the hard line with one of their best playmakers and discourage insane demands from Divas...

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:16 PM
Why should Smith take less than value for Jackson?

Just to make him happy?

If that was the case, he could have just paid him.

The Chargers hold all the cards here.

They destroyed his value with the way they handled it making it obvious he'd never play there again, a 2 is more than fair.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:16 PM
Any news on McNeil?

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:16 PM
All I know is AJ is an idiot and that bids well for the demise of the Chargers in future years. Norv isn't going to be saving the day anytime soon.

Well, I wouldn't call him an idiot. He builds via the draft and not free agency. We've lost free agents in the past and built via the draft. I see no reason why we can't continue. They aren't going to pay top dollar for any free agent, including ones already on the Chargers. The only guy who got paid was Rivers. Sproles did too, but he's the Franchise Tag guy.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:17 PM
Why should Smith take less than value for Jackson?

Just to make him happy?

If that was the case, he could have just paid him.

The Chargers hold all the cards here.

So he doesn't play this year. Is he an unrestricted free agent next year?

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:17 PM
What do they need?

Odds are they still win this division walking away.

Same time they can play the hard line with one of their best playmakers and discourage insane demands from Divas...

It will discourage nothing, as pointed out the Pats have routinely done this, players still hold out.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:17 PM
Oh yea?

How about Marcus McNeil, there's a pattern here.

They offered him a 1 year $3.3 million dollar contract

He decided not to take it, don't blame the Chargers.

OnTheWarpath58
09-22-2010, 04:17 PM
And this benefits them how? By him not playing and getting nothing in return?

If he doesn't play 6 games this year, the Chargers still hold his rights, correct?

They aren't going to over-pay him, and they aren't going to take less than value in a trade - and the Chargers offense doesn't seem to be missing him.

So if I'm Jackson, I take a reasonable deal, and earn his free agency, instead of trying to get ridiculously overpaid.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:18 PM
So he doesn't play this year. Is he an unrestricted free agent next year?

That's why he's not reporting, he thinks a new CBA will make him a UFA.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:18 PM
So he doesn't play this year. Is he an unrestricted free agent next year?

That depends on the CBA. If they get it back down to 4 years accrued, then yes. If it stays at 6, and he never reports this year, then no.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:18 PM
So he doesn't play this year. Is he an unrestricted free agent next year?

I think so but he will also have to serve his 4 game suspension next year if he doesn't play which is the biggest reason his dumbass needs to sign and move on with it.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:19 PM
FYI, Shawne "roidman" Merriman was in the same boat as VJ/McNeil and he signed the tender. Same with Malcom Floyd.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:19 PM
If he doesn't play 6 games this year, the Chargers still hold his rights, correct?

They aren't going to over-pay him, and they aren't going to take less than value in a trade - and the Chargers offense doesn't seem to be missing him.

So if I'm Jackson, I take a reasonable deal, and earn his free agency, instead of trying to get ridiculously overpaid.

I don't know how that works, that's what I am trying to figure out.

doomy3
09-22-2010, 04:19 PM
Think how sick the Chargers would be if they would have held onto Brees, drafted Larry Fitzgerald in that draft and wouldn't have screwed this deal up.

Drew Brees throwing to Fitzgerald, Jackson and Gates, with Matthews in the backfield.

Dear God.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:19 PM
That depends on the CBA. If they get it back down to 4 years accrued, then yes. If it stays at 6, and he never reports this year, then no.

Still has the suspension hanging out there right?

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:19 PM
They offered him a 1 year $3.3 million dollar contract

He decided not to take it, don't blame the Chargers.

When you have several players with hold out issues, simply saying blame the player is jaded at best.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:20 PM
Why should Smith take less than value for Jackson?

Just to make him happy?

If that was the case, he could have just paid him.

The Chargers hold all the cards here.

This.

And I think this stance is mostly due to the fact he doesn't feel the cap will be back soon.

MHO.

doomy3
09-22-2010, 04:20 PM
FYI, Shawne "roidman" Merriman was in the same boat as VJ/McNeil and he signed the tender. Same with Malcom Floyd.

That's because Merriman sucks and shouldn't get a raise.

You pay guys like Jackson and McNeil.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:20 PM
FYI, Shawne "roidman" Merriman was in the same boat as VJ/McNeil and he signed the tender. Same with Malcom Floyd.

Those 2 don't have the same value as the guys holding out so it's really not comparable.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:20 PM
Still has the suspension hanging out there right?

No, he's already serving his suspension now.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:21 PM
When you have several players with hold out issues, simply saying blame the player is jaded at best.

"You signed the contract.

Period.

Play for it..."

That seems to be the attitude out of SD.

I love it for all the right AND wrong reasons...:)

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:22 PM
When you have several players with hold out issues, simply saying blame the player is jaded at best.

You have to look at like this, the players have no leverage unless they are irreplaceable.

As a player you have to be smart enough to figure out whether holding out will get you what you want. If not, sign and move on and wait for the new CBA. You have no real choice.

It hasn't worked for the 2 they have that have held out.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:23 PM
"You signed the contract.

Period.

Play for it..."

That seems to be the attitude out of SD.

I love it for all the right AND wrong reasons...:)

He didn't sign a contract. He was set to become a UFA, but then the CBA situation happened and he became restricted. Besides that logic doesn't work in the NFL. Teams certainly don't honor the contracts they give out, they cut players whenever it suits them.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:23 PM
No, he's already serving his suspension now.

How is he serving the suspension if he isn't on the roster? How is he suspended losing game checks when he isn't getting paid?

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:23 PM
That's because Merriman sucks and shouldn't get a raise.

You pay guys like Jackson and McNeil.

Those 2 don't have the same value as the guys holding out so it's really not comparable.

Floyd and McNeil are getting paid

Jackson and McNeil will never get that $3.2 million back and their production will likely fall because of the time they missed.

I know this isn't the best comparison, but look at Mike Williams and Maurice Clarrett, they got fucked over and couldn't play ball for a whole season, and then they both sucked.

I guarantee you that VJ and McNeil missing a year will screw them over.

They are the stupid ones, not the team.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:23 PM
No, he's already serving his suspension now.

YES, HE DOES HAVE THE SUSPENSION THING going on until week 4.

AND he wants more money, AND a new contract, AND to be paid like a top 10 WR.

(Which would be fucking retarded.)

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:23 PM
"You signed the contract.

Period.

Play for it..."

That seems to be the attitude out of SD.

I love it for all the right AND wrong reasons...:)

Actually they didn't, the guys holding out would have been UFA's but the the uncapped year changed the CBA making them RFA's 2 years in a row, they responded with "fuck that" and didn't sign tenders.

That's a little different than "hey you signed the contract".

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:24 PM
I know this isn't the best comparison, but look at Mike Williams and Maurice Clarrett, they got ****ed over and couldn't play ball for a whole season, and then they both sucked.

I guarantee you that VJ and McNeil missing a year will screw them over.

They are the stupid ones, not the team.

Exactly.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:24 PM
YES, HE DOES HAVE THE SUSPENSION THING going on until week 4.

AND he wants more money, AND a new contract, AND to be paid like a top 10 WR.

(Which would be fucking retarded.)

He is a top 10 WR what's the problem with him wanting his value?

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:25 PM
You have to look at like this, the players have no leverage unless they are irreplaceable.

As a player you have to be smart enough to figure out whether holding out will get you what you want. If not, sign and move on and wait for the new CBA. You have no real choice.

It hasn't worked for the 2 they have that have held out.

Jackson has handled the situation very poorly, especially coming off a DUI, but that doesn't mean AJ Smith's decision to punish a player instead of getting compensation was a good one either.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:25 PM
YES, HE DOES HAVE THE SUSPENSION THING going on until week 4.

AND he wants more money, AND a new contract, AND to be paid like a top 10 WR.

(Which would be ****ing retarded.)

Well he did have more yards per catch than anyone else in the league. I forget what his total yardage was last year though.

Marcellus
09-22-2010, 04:25 PM
Actually they didn't, the guys holding out would have been UFA's but the the uncapped year changed the CBA making them RFA's 2 years in a row, they responded with "**** that" and didn't sign tenders.

That's a little different than "hey you signed the contract".

It's still stupid on their part, especially if they miss a season so it's hard to blame the team.

BIG_DADDY
09-22-2010, 04:26 PM
Jackson has handled the situation very poorly, especially coming off a DUI, but that doesn't mean AJ Smith's decision to punish a player instead of getting compensation was a good one either.

I am sure that had a lot to do with the agent being in his ear.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:26 PM
Personally I think all of this makes the Chargers look cheap and petty, oh well their problem.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:27 PM
It's still stupid on their part, especially if they miss a season so it's hard to blame the team.

No one is blaming AJ Smith for the holdout, we're saying he was stupid for not taking a 2nd rounder + another pick for someone who has no future in San Diego.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:27 PM
The Chargers have ALL of the leverage.

1. They are not required to offer them anything more than they did.
2. The players can't go anywhere else on their own.
3. The Chargers control compensation should they get traded.
4. The Chargers don't need them to win, they are still more than likely to make the playoffs.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:28 PM
AJ Smith turned down a 2 when he's going to end up with a 3rd round comp pick for no other reason than to fuck the guy over...that sure is good business isn't it?

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:28 PM
The Chargers have ALL of the leverage.

1. They are not required to offer them anything more than they did.
2. The players can't go anywhere else on their own.
3. The Chargers control compensation should they get traded.
4. The Chargers don't need them to win, they are still more than likely to make the playoffs.

And despite all of that, they will never get a better return on Jackson than what Minnesota was offering today. Why turn it down then, especially when the new CBA is almost certainly going to make him a UFA?

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:28 PM
The Chargers have ALL of the leverage.

1. They are not required to offer them anything more than they did.
2. The players can't go anywhere else on their own.
3. The Chargers control compensation should they get traded.
4. The Chargers don't need them to win, they are still more than likely to make the playoffs.

Being a playoff loser is high aspiration isn't it?

You know god forbid you take the more than fair deal Minnesota offered which is the best you'd get to improve the team in the future. No can't do that, it's all about sticking it to Jackson above all else.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:30 PM
Actually they didn't, the guys holding out would have been UFA's but the the uncapped year changed the CBA making them RFA's 2 years in a row, they responded with "**** that" and didn't sign tenders.

That's a little different than "hey you signed the contract".

Yeah, they did participate in the existing CBA, player's union, and the contract they had with the team.

THE PLAYERS decided not to renew the contract.

THEY are still bound to rules set up outside of their individual contracts and much fucked in the short term.

STUPID. STUPID. STUPID.

Buck
09-22-2010, 04:31 PM
And despite all of that, they will never get a better return on Jackson than what Minnesota was offering today. Why turn it down then?

You realize that today's deadline was only for his suspension to be reduced? He can still be traded. (At least I think thats what the deadline was). I'm sure the Chargers are also concerned he'll pull a Favre and sign a one year deal with Minnesota before coming back and signing with Denver/KC/Oakland.

Being a playoff loser is high aspiration isn't it?

You know god forbid you take the more than fair deal Minnesota offered which is the best you'd get to improve the team in the future. No can't do that, it's all about sticking it to Jackson above all else.

You never know what is going to happen with Jackson, and you never know whats going to happen in the playoffs.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:32 PM
The Chargers have ALL of the leverage.

1. They are not required to offer them anything more than they did.
2. The players can't go anywhere else on their own.
3. The Chargers control compensation should they get traded.
4. The Chargers don't need them to win, they are still more than likely to make the playoffs.

EXACTLY.







Fucking hate repping rival fans...

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:32 PM
As long as contract aren't guaranteed in the NFL, there are going to be holdouts. That's simply the price you pay. There's no reason to hate on players for wanting to get paid when the teams they play for have no qualms about cutting them mid-contract.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:33 PM
You realize that today's deadline was only for his suspension to be reduced? He can still be traded. (At least I think thats what the deadline was). I'm sure the Chargers are also concerned he'll pull a Favre and sign a one year deal with Minnesota before coming back and signing with Denver/KC/Oakland.

Even if he does still get traded (unlikely though), his value is going to be significantly lower since he will be suspended for 6 games now, instead of 4. Nop one is beating Minnesota's offer, especially since it was already more than a rental of Jackson is worth.

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:33 PM
Considering how the Chargers have handled contracts other than Rivers, who can blame these guys? This is why the Chargers have hold out issues they don't have a good rep with paying players.

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:33 PM
You never know what is going to happen with Jackson, and you never know whats going to happen in the playoffs.

If I had to bet on any team in the west, as pathetic and underachieving as the Chargers have been for YEARS, I'd still pick them...

Mecca
09-22-2010, 04:34 PM
Even if he does still get traded (unlikely though), his value is going to be significantly lower since he will be suspended for 6 games now, instead of 4.

Not like it matters, they'll never get a better off than they did today. Not taking that means saying they'd listen to offers was nothing more than lip service. This is about holding a grudge.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:35 PM
If I had to bet on any team in the west, as pathetic and underachieving as the Chargers have been for YEARS, I'd still pick them...

High praise there....

Rausch
09-22-2010, 04:35 PM
Not like it matters, they'll never get a better off than they did today. Not taking that means saying they'd listen to offers was nothing more than lip service. This is about holding a grudge.

It's about fucking his career.

BossChief
09-22-2010, 04:44 PM
Heres the problem I see here:

Vincent Jacksons agent thinks he is worth a premium contract, right? Because they view him as a premier player, right?

Then whats wrong with the Chargers wanting premium compensation, too?

No way would I let an all pro receiver go for a second round pick, he should get compensation in line with what Denver got for Marshall IMO...or more, not a penny less (or in this case, a lesser pick)

The agents are the problem here. Same as rookie contracts, they care about their pocketbooks more than they care about the players.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:47 PM
Heres the problem I see here:

Vincent Jacksons agent thinks he is worth a premium contract, right? Because they view him as a premier player, right?

Then whats wrong with the Chargers wanting premium compensation, too?

No way would I let an all pro receiver go for a second round pick, he should get compensation in line with what Denver got for Marshall IMO...or more, not a penny less (or in this case, a lesser pick)

The agents are the problem here. Same as rookie contracts, they care about their pocketbooks more than they care about the players.

It works both ways. The Chargers wanted premium compensation (2 2nd rounders) and wouldn't pay him like a premium player. Other teams also have to deal with the fact that he's a one year rental coming in mid-season, making that analogy pretty thin.

BossChief
09-22-2010, 04:53 PM
It works both ways. The Chargers wanted premium compensation (2 2nd rounders) and wouldn't pay him like a premium player.
No, you have my post confused. If I was AJ, I would want premium compensation so I have no problem with him asking for what the Broncos got for Marshall (2 2nds)

They offered him the highest tender possible to get him about 3.5 mill this year and he should have signed it and earned an extension by going to another probowl catching passes from a probowl quarterback, they just werent ready to sign him to a full blown deal for whatever reason (which I think they most certainly should have done, but what do I know)

Brock
09-22-2010, 04:56 PM
Heres the problem I see here:

Vincent Jacksons agent thinks he is worth a premium contract, right? Because they view him as a premier player, right?

Then whats wrong with the Chargers wanting premium compensation, too?

No way would I let an all pro receiver go for a second round pick, he should get compensation in line with what Denver got for Marshall IMO...or more, not a penny less (or in this case, a lesser pick)

The agents are the problem here. Same as rookie contracts, they care about their pocketbooks more than they care about the players.

He isn't an all-pro, and he isn't as good as Brandon Marshall.

Basileus777
09-22-2010, 04:58 PM
No, you have my post confused. If I was AJ, I would want premium compensation so I have no problem with him asking for what the Broncos got for Marshall (2 2nds)

They offered him the highest tender possible to get him about 3.5 mill this year and he should have signed it and earned an extension by going to another probowl catching passes from a probowl quarterback, they just werent ready to sign him to a full blown deal for whatever reason (which I think they most certainly should have done, but what do I know)

I didn't confuse anything. As I said, If the Chargers don't think Vincent Jackson is worth an extension right now, it's a bit hypocritical to demand premium value for a partial season rental of Vincent Jackson. Let's be honest, what the Vikings offered was actually more than Jackson is really worth considering the circumstances.

Sure-Oz
09-22-2010, 06:12 PM
Vikings shouldve paid up the compensation, this is their year to contend, they just shit the bed

Param
09-22-2010, 07:42 PM
.
4. The Chargers don't need them to win, they are still more than likely to make the playoffs.

Guess you're excited to just make the playoffs these days. The Chargers are better with VJax in the lineup. Pay the man.

Von Dumbass
09-24-2010, 03:34 AM
sources say Jackson’s agents will attempt to get back at Smith by making sure their receiver, once he ends up with a new team next spring (or later, depending upon the uncertain labor landscape), has an inordinately low base salary for 2011 – which would likely reduce the compensatory pick the Chargers would receive for losing Jackson from a potential third-rounder to a sixth- or seventh-round selection.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-smithjackson092210

At least McD gets top dollar when it comes to trading his Pro Bowlers. LMAO

Von Dumbass
09-24-2010, 03:34 AM
sources say Jackson’s agents will attempt to get back at Smith by making sure their receiver, once he ends up with a new team next spring (or later, depending upon the uncertain labor landscape), has an inordinately low base salary for 2011 – which would likely reduce the compensatory pick the Chargers would receive for losing Jackson from a potential third-rounder to a sixth- or seventh-round selection.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-smithjackson092210

At least McD gets top dollar when it comes to trading his Pro Bowlers. LMAO

Basileus777
09-24-2010, 12:36 PM
AJ Smith didn't want those draft picks anyway. HE SENT A MESSAGE. Now no player or agent would ever dare risk his wrath again.


That's how these things work in the NFL..right?

Buck
07-16-2012, 07:31 PM
Personally I think all of this makes the Chargers look cheap and petty, oh well their problem.

lol

Sofa King
07-16-2012, 07:50 PM
oops!!!







oh and ban buck for bump.

Buck
07-16-2012, 07:53 PM
BAN 4 BUCK

Sofa King
07-16-2012, 08:07 PM
BAN 4 BUCK

http://i2.listal.com/image/227382/600full-judi-dench.jpg