Skip to content

Chargers' limitation of potential Jackson trade partners makes no sense

The Chargers have given the Seahawks permission to negotiate a contract with receiver Vincent Jackson, the first step toward a possible trade.

But there’s a catch.  We’ve confirmed that the Chargers have given permission only to the Seahawks.  Also, it’s our understanding that the Chargers have given no indication as to the compensation they’d want, if the Seahawks and Jackson can work out a deal.

Though the Chargers’ intentions remain unclear, one thing is clearer than a StarCaps’ users urine.  This isn’t the way to go about trading a player.  Even if the Chargers are reluctant to consider trading Jackson to an AFC West rival, they should be willing to open the bidding at a minimum to other NFC teams.  Indeed, sometimes the best way to get the best deal comes from having two parties competing for the player’s services, especially if they’re in the same division.

So why not open it up to the Rams, who considered signing Terrell Owens?  Throw in the Cardinals and the 49ers, for good measure.  The Redskins supposedly were interested.  The Vikings are concerned about their depth at receiver, with the status of Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin in question.  The Bears’ wideouts are a collection of glorified journeymen, at best. 

If the Chargers are truly interested in trading Jackson, they’d be giving permission to more than one team to talk to Jackson, and they’d also be giving the Seahawks a rough idea of what it will take to get a deal done.

The current approach suggests either that the Chargers don’t know what they’re doing, or that their plan is, as we suggested last night, to slam the brakes if/when the Seahawks and Jackson work out a long-term deal and then to offer Jackson something comparable.

Though folks who follow the team much more closely than we do think Jackson and the Chargers would never reach an accord on a long-term deal, the team’s current approach suggests that something strange is happening — and one of the only logical explanations is that the Chargers are using the Seahawks to negotiate acceptable terms on San Diego’s behalf.

Permalink 49 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Arizona Cardinals, Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
49 Responses to “Chargers' limitation of potential Jackson trade partners makes no sense”
  1. BigBear123 says: Aug 21, 2010 10:21 AM

    I think the Chargers are simply toying with Jackson. A.J. Smith has developed a reputation as an a$$hole for good reasons.

  2. Asswipe Johnson (Pronounced Az-Wee-Pay) says: Aug 21, 2010 10:24 AM

    Posted by Mike Florio on August 21, 2010 10:14 AM ET
    The current approach suggests either that the Chargers don’t know what they’re doing, or that their plan is, as we suggested last night, to slam the brakes if/when the Seahawks and Jackson work out a long-term deal and then to offer Jackson something comparable.
    —————————————————
    You are missing an option, Florio…
    What if AJ Smith has targeted one of Seattle’s younger WRs, such as Deon Butler, as part of the return in any Vincent Jackson trade package?

  3. My Coke Can says: Aug 21, 2010 10:24 AM

    Its because norvell turner doesnt want to trade him to dc because dan snyder made him cry after a loss. Look it up if you dont believe me.

  4. lawdjayee says: Aug 21, 2010 10:26 AM

    Florio–Acee’s article clearly states that the team’s demand for compensation are not an issue. The problem is Jackson’s demand for 5 yrs., $50 million, $30 million guaranteed, i.e. significantly more than Brandon Marshall (whose production is so far superior to Jackson) got from Miami.

  5. Munze Konza says: Aug 21, 2010 10:27 AM

    The Seahawks added a ‘first us’ clause to the Whitehurst deal in case Jackson was open for a trade.
    Or
    The Chargers know Seattle over compensates when trading and they want to see what foolish trade they will offer.

  6. leather_face_jones says: Aug 21, 2010 10:36 AM

    too much opinion, not enough fact-based information. snooze.

  7. raiderrob21 says: Aug 21, 2010 10:40 AM

    Keep up the great work Chargers. Your doin one helluva job!
    Sincerely,
    THE RAIDER NATION

  8. TheRedBengal says: Aug 21, 2010 10:47 AM

    The Chargers are only talking to Seattle? Probably because of the sweet honeypot deal they got for 3rd stringer Whitehurst.
    I’d expect the Seahawks to part ways with 1st round picks, souls, and first borns for Vincent Jackson.

  9. GaryClark says: Aug 21, 2010 10:49 AM

    Agree….Idiots. Chargers are bafoons.

  10. MikeBara33 says: Aug 21, 2010 10:51 AM

    Acee says the compensation is agreed to as a 2nd round pick.
    As a Seahawks fan, I’d rather spend that on Marshawn Lynch, but hey…

  11. Sow Crates says: Aug 21, 2010 10:59 AM

    “The Bears’ wideouts are a collection of glorified journeymen, at best.”
    They aren’t great, they aren’t good, but I think they’ll prove adequate this season, however that’s a projection not a fact.
    But glorified journeymen? Bennett, Hester, Knox & Iglesias and Olsen & Kellen Davis as TE’s all home-grown. Aromashodu is a journeyman on his 3rd or 4th team, but glorified? He’s only like 26. Rashied Davis is from the CFL or wherever.

  12. JamFed says: Aug 21, 2010 11:02 AM

    …I like how Raider Nation still has an opinion – LOL.
    San Diego doesn’t need a $50 million WR. Sure, Jackson is a valid #1, but San Diego already has a #1, and that’s ANTONIO GATES!
    The Chargers DEPTH at WR is great, but with the addition of Ryan Mathews, WR is the last thing AJ wants to spend money on.
    Rivers, Sproles, Gates & Mathews are reaping all the cash on the O side.

  13. Filbertkiwi71 says: Aug 21, 2010 11:15 AM

    LOL, at Florio.
    Year after year, he seems to rag on AJ Smith. What did he do to you Mike? Did he pee in your Cheerios?
    Dude, I would take your columns about AJ more seriously if you were at least a little even handed.

  14. Deegan says: Aug 21, 2010 11:17 AM

    Keep up the great work Chargers. Your doin one helluva job!
    Sincerely,
    THE RAIDER NATION
    At this pace, the Raiders will overtake the Chargers in the division standings in 20 years time.

  15. Pilehiclown says: Aug 21, 2010 11:19 AM

    Cellar dwellers once again.

  16. Xpensive Wino says: Aug 21, 2010 11:24 AM

    Jackson issue aside, at what point is Smith going to be held accountable for the way he’s running the team? If he’s so brilliant how come they haven’t won sh**? Winning the AFC Worst the past few years is not exactly “Dynasty” material. They have no Super Bowls, Smith was allowed to run Marty out after a 14-2 season, he’s alienated the roster and the fan base (and we can only image what he does for the morale of the employees).
    There are a lot of intangibles that can help make the difference between winning and losing and his demeanor and the image he projects has definitely had a negative impact on the overall state of the organization. He’s cultivated an “us (or me) versus them” mentality in the organization and when push comes to shove, an individual player is going to sacrifice up to the point that it benefits him, not the team, because the team has shown no loyalty to the players.
    He’s a cancer and for the good of the organization, hopefully this will be his last year.

  17. Cake Or Death says: Aug 21, 2010 11:33 AM

    There’s another option: They’re waiting for an injury during the season to get a sweeter deal. Don’t forget that Jackson is suspended for the first few games.

  18. Hap says: Aug 21, 2010 11:40 AM

    People are strange -Jim Morrison

  19. humbolt says: Aug 21, 2010 11:49 AM

    The Chargers haven’t had a losing season for six seasons. During this stretch they’ve won five division titles, including the last 4 straight. They have developed a top 5 quarterback in Philip Rivers, who is just 28 years old. They are the only team in the league to make it to the divisional round of the playoffs each of the past 4 seasons.
    I doubt if the other NFL franchises are shaking their heads at the Chargers’ maneuverings. More likely, they are trying to emulate them.

  20. 420fan says: Aug 21, 2010 11:57 AM

    thanks Sandy Eggo for being douches when it comes to taking care of your best players. Norvel Turner and AJ will run that team into the ground and then they will be irrelevant again, like they’ve been for years until the last 5, but that was really Marty. Only a dumb@ss fires his coach after a 14-2 season. Norvel is almost done tearing that success apart and putting his losing ways back.
    Stay Classy Sandy Eggo!

  21. 56lightsout56 says: Aug 21, 2010 12:09 PM

    Raider Nation?
    that bankrupt relic of the 70s?
    Raider Nation is the backwater 3rd world country of the NFL with an old out of touch petty dictator.
    oh and great job with Jamarcus Russell
    boom goes the dynamite, raiderrob21

  22. Boltnut says: Aug 21, 2010 12:12 PM

    Have I mentioned Pilehiwithguys is a Tool??

  23. Danglybanging8----D says: Aug 21, 2010 12:15 PM

    It is because Pete Carol has sucker written on his forehead.

  24. Filbertkiwi71 says: Aug 21, 2010 12:15 PM

    Xpensive Wino said:”
    August 21, 2010 11:24 AM
    Jackson issue aside, at what point is Smith going to be held accountable for the way he’s running the team? If he’s so brilliant how come they haven’t won sh**? Winning the AFC Worst the past few years is not exactly “Dynasty” material. They have no Super Bowls, Smith was allowed to run Marty out after a 14-2 season, he’s alienated the roster and the fan base (and we can only image what he does for the morale of the employees).
    There are a lot of intangibles that can help make the difference between winning and losing and his demeanor and the image he projects has definitely had a negative impact on the overall state of the organization. He’s cultivated an “us (or me) versus them” mentality in the organization and when push comes to shove, an individual player is going to sacrifice up to the point that it benefits him, not the team, because the team has shown no loyalty to the players.
    He’s a cancer and for the good of the organization, hopefully this will be his last year.”
    ===
    I haven’t heard of any teams knocking on Marty’s door looking to hire him.
    AJ has been the most successful GM the Chargers ever had.
    How many playoff games did Marty win as the Chargers head coach?
    How many playoff games has Norv won as the Chargers head coach?

  25. thunkened says: Aug 21, 2010 12:18 PM

    We don’t want any of their first round picks. We want Seattles.

  26. A Velan says: Aug 21, 2010 12:24 PM

    not too long ago, Seattle was denied permission and the Chargers would not let anyone talk to VJ. After the Chargers could not work something out with VJ, they went straight to Seattle, giving them exclusive rights to talk to VJ, knowing that seattle will overcompensate…seattle probably already offered them something ridiculous the last time they tried to contact VJ…chargers probably want that offer now and feel like by opening up the discussion to other teams, them may get less from seattle…

  27. bwisnasky says: Aug 21, 2010 12:26 PM

    Seriously humbolt, get your head out of your posterior….. the only way they made the divisional round last year was playing a weak ass AFCW, and a complete collapse on Denver’s part by McDouchie and company…. they got a bye, because they had a great record thanks to playing “inferior” competition… and then showed their true colors in the playoffs against a mediocre WC team that backed into the playoffs thanks to a real team and a wannabe laying down…. They seriously haven’t been a threat to win “anything” since they fired Marty… they’ve just been the beneficiaries of Oakland and KC rebuilding, and Denver being stupid enough to think Shannie was the problem… When San Diego seriously makes a run at something relevant, come and talk to us.. until then, take Philip and his gaudy stats to go with no serious run at a championship, and in the words of Invader, GFY

  28. TylerDurden says: Aug 21, 2010 12:31 PM

    humbolt says:
    August 21, 2010 11:49 AM
    The Chargers haven’t had a losing season for six seasons. During this stretch they’ve won five division titles, including the last 4 straight. They have developed a top 5 quarterback in Philip Rivers, who is just 28 years old. They are the only team in the league to make it to the divisional round of the playoffs each of the past 4 seasons.
    —————————————————————-
    and yet what do they have to show for all this? Nothing.

  29. 420fan says: Aug 21, 2010 12:33 PM

    Humboldt, your drinking too much powder blue Kool aid. We all wanna be perinially losers! Stay Classy Sandy Eggo!

  30. Crowder911 says: Aug 21, 2010 1:03 PM

    AJ, send him to Miami in a trade for Pat White
    Brandon Marshall &
    Vincent Jackson would make a nice WR duo
    Chargers are one of my top favourites for the AFC this year (like every year) but their GM is really one of the worst in all football. Just pay McNeil and Jackson

  31. DeathByPurple says: Aug 21, 2010 1:04 PM

    humboldt,
    Oh ya, teams are tring to emulate a G.M. that lets drew brees go, fires a 14-2 coach, cannot win a playoff game, and can’t keep any of his players happy.
    Oh, and it just happens to be the easiest division in football. Ya, we really want to emulate the Chargers. When was the last time you sold out anyway?

  32. D Kirkpatrick says: Aug 21, 2010 1:04 PM

    Why is everyone acting like the Chargers and Seahawks are in the same division. That is so yesterday! Florio trade up for a brain or is that not permitted by lawyerland.

  33. westondav says: Aug 21, 2010 1:48 PM

    Read between the lines people. San Diego wants to keep Vincent Jackson. He will be starting week 4 for the Chargers. Anyone who has kept him or is thinking of drafting him will be rewarded. How many players really ever hold out the entire year??

  34. BigFatDog says: Aug 21, 2010 1:50 PM

    Damn Mike, sometimes I feel like you just don’t see what’s really going on …
    AJ has several reasons for starting with Seattle:
    1. They won’t face Jackson for five seasons if he goes there.
    2. They have already discussed terms for a trade. Why you don’t think an agreement has already been reached is beyond me. Kevin Acee in the UT reports an agreement has probably been met. It’s probably one second round pick. I also wouldn’t doubt if Golden Tate is part of the package.
    To say AJ doesn’t know what he is doing is almost laughable. He’s a total dick, but he definitely knows what he’s doing.
    C’mon Mike, step up your game.

  35. thats_what_she_said says: Aug 21, 2010 1:57 PM

    “one thing is clearer than a StarCaps’ users urine”
    hahahaha

  36. nflhof says: Aug 21, 2010 2:05 PM

    AJ didnt fire Marty Squirtanheimer. Dean Spanos did.

  37. Hype says: Aug 21, 2010 2:05 PM

    420fan says:
    August 21, 2010 11:57 AM
    Stay Classy Sandy Eggo!
    Says the guy with the cute little play on words.

  38. OntBoltFan says: Aug 21, 2010 2:11 PM

    Well first off they may not want to trade him to another AFC team they could possibly face each year so that eliminates some of the potential trading partners.
    Maybe SEA as posted before has more players that have value in trade than say WAS or other NFC teams. This is true at the WR position.
    Just because you are a simpleton with no understanding of the business of the NFL doesn’t mean it makes no sense to the parties actually involved.

  39. Tony says: Aug 21, 2010 2:57 PM

    @humbolt – why would anyone want to emulate the chargers? they have no team loyalty (see LT, Brees, Marty) and they act like high school girls (trash talk once teammates leave). thats just for starters too, the chargers have been to 1 conference championship in 10 years TEN YEARS. how many super bowl appearances anyone? ZERO. but lets be nice and consider the entire history of your franchise, how many championships? ZERO. now who would want to emulate a franchise who has never won anything, go home charger fans.

  40. Garbanzo says: Aug 21, 2010 3:11 PM

    Way to do your research before making a dumb comment Florio. Calling the Bears WRs glorified journeymen is wr..wr..wr..incorrect. Of the WRs set to make the roster, only Devin Aromashadu has bounced around the NFl with multiple one year stops, which is what a journeyman is.

  41. SoFlor Steeler says: Aug 21, 2010 4:06 PM

    Florio,
    I am kinda amazed you don’t get it – the Chargers really don’t care – they believe the message being sent to the players via this – and the Brady non-contract and the Revis thing are consistent – we need a CBA that REDUCES the % of revenues going to players.
    And the other owners are not about to let the player win by going to a new team and getting a big fat new contract – so they don’t want to get involved…
    I suspect that while they may have given the Seahawks permission to talk – they also know that the Hawks will not be opening up Paul Allen’s checkbook too wide for this guy…
    All part of the “lesson” that players need to learn….

  42. JamFed says: Aug 21, 2010 4:41 PM

    AJ Smith is a great GM… His problems are DREAMS for other GM’s.
    Marcus McNeal and Vincent Jackson are 2nd round draft picks, and probowl players. Their contracts expired, so they should be free agents, right?
    NO! Their UNION screwed them – The Players Union. AJ is only taking what the UNION offered them… restricted free agency and a tender offer.
    Let those guys sit out the year then… SD will find a replacement. Floyd and Nanee will replace V.Jackson just fine (even Buster Davis), but Left Tackles are hard to come by…
    Remember Marcus McNeal has Spinal Stenosis (the narrowing of the spine). His carrer will not be longer than 10 years anyways…

  43. Broncosfan28532 says: Aug 21, 2010 4:50 PM

    Maybe the reason they are waiting is to see if they can possibly get either Golden Tate or Deon Butler in return.
    One could argue Tate isn’t available, but you’d be wrong. With Houshmandzadeh, Deion Branch still under a significant contract, and Jackson also on the roster, without letting go of a veteran they’d have to unload someone from the rotation.
    Either way I think chances are about 80% that Vincent Jackson doesn’t play for the Chargers ever again.
    I’m thinking acceptable terms would be:
    2nd Round Pick/Golden Tate
    or
    2nd Rounder/3rd rounder/Deon Butler
    or
    2 2nd rounders (Same as Broncos got for Marshall)

  44. Steve W. says: Aug 21, 2010 4:54 PM

    # westondav says: August 21, 2010 1:48 PM
    Read between the lines people. San Diego wants to keep Vincent Jackson. He will be starting week 4 for the Chargers. Anyone who has kept him or is thinking of drafting him will be rewarded. How many players really ever hold out the entire year??
    ________________________________
    I don’t know, probably about as many GMs who really think they can force a pro-bowl WR or LT to play for a one year $600,000 contract. Look, it doesn’t matter if you love the Chargers or hate them, this situation is simply ridiculous.
    It’s obvious that AJ figured the altered rules for the uncapped year gave him a chance to save some money. The problem is that he’s trying to do it at the expense of two pro-bowl players after they played out their contracts. Jackson’s DUIs aside, both McNeill and Jackson played out the last year of their contracts without causing any problems in the locker room, despite the fact that the team showed no desire to sign them to extensions. They kept their mouths shut and went to work. These are the kind of team players that you should want in your organization (as long as the contract protects you should Jackson be an idiot and get another DUI).
    Instead, AJ decided early on that he was going to force them to play for a huge discount this year, with no guarantee of any future extension. That’s particularly troubling to players given the uncertainty about whether there will be a football season next year. When the players refused to sign the tenders, and wanted to talk multi-year contracts, AJ sent them a note saying he could dramatically cut their tender offers if they didn’t sign by a certain date. Now, a bunch of GMs did the same thing, but only AJ actually did it. I know some people talk about loving to see a GM “put those spoiled players in their place”, but it’s a stupid move. If they were hesitant to sign their initial tenders, why would they ever sign such a dramatically reduced one? There’s no reason for them to sign, as the risk of injury (and the future loss of income that would represent) outweighs the compensation offered in the reduced tender.
    By doing this, AJ backed them into a corner. Instead of using that as a negotiating tool to force the players to the table to sign a team friendly contract, he simply says take it or leave it, and then ups the ante again by putting them on the roster exempt list. So, now, two team oriented players hate the organization, and every player in the league has seen how the organization mistreats its players.
    Way to go AJ, you’re a real bad ass. A bad ass who no free agent with options is going to want to play for (unless you overpay them, which you won’t), and a bad ass whose current players may also hesitate to continue to play for when their free agency approaches. Oh, but I’m sure N.O. loves your style. Without you, they never would have got their hands on Brees or the Lombardi trophy. Hey, at least you help one team win the SB. Too bad it wasn’t your own.

  45. Steve W. says: Aug 21, 2010 5:14 PM

    SoFlor Steeler,
    I think you’re seeing a grand plan where none exists. Brady and Revis situations have nothing to do with this. Brady has a good relationship with his owner and will get a big extension, most likely before the start of the regular season. The Jets want to sign Revis to a long-term extension, but they’re not ready to use the Asoughma contract as the base structure for doing so, and Revis is acting like a spoiled child about it despite the fact that he still has three years left on his rookie contract. So, both players still have contracts in effect. Jackson and McNeill, however, played out their contracts, and would have been UFAs if not for the altered rules for this uncapped year. AJ is trying to take advantage of this one time rules change to save some money for the Chargers.
    Their recent success aside, the Chargers aren’t exactly the most valuable team in the NFL. I don’t understand how a team can put up the kind of records the Chargers have over the past 5 years (granted, in a very weak division) and still not have the fan support it takes to really make some money. Not saying their fans don’t care at all, but a successful team should never have to worry about selling out a game or avoiding a blackout. So, to tall the Charger fans that want to talk about how great they are, my question is simple. If they’re so great, why don’t you support them?
    On a final note, this is not about the cba…at least not the way you imply it is. No team is going to set itself apart from the rest of the league as a destination to avoid because it’s so player unfriendly simply to prove a point for the entire league. You make those points during the cba negotiations, and you do it as a unified body. That way, no one team is left alone to suffer a player backlash when a new cba is signed. Besides, if that is the plan, then the other teams in the league are undercutting their efforts. Both Brady and Manning will get huge contracts this year. The 49ers gave Willis a huge extension. The Jets extended Ferguson’s contract, and is willing to extend Revis as well (just not at an insane amount). The Rams just gave Bradford more guaranteed money than any player in NFL history. I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point.

  46. lieutenant Dan's Ice Cream says: Aug 21, 2010 6:04 PM

    No way Seattle offers Golden Tate. What a ruh-tarded assumption.
    Other than possibly over paying for whitehurst Seattle looks to have been brilliant this offseason. Getting guys like Washington and Vickerson look like awesome moves now, plus there was that stellar draft. I think Seattle had the best draft by far and I know we wont know for sure for a few seasons, but I think they have at least 2 future stars (okung , thomas or Tate)
    IMO Tate will be the biggest steal since Marquis Colston.

  47. SoFlor Steeler says: Aug 21, 2010 6:40 PM

    Folks – Steve W. and others – what am I missing? The owners are just using the rules agreed to BY THE UNION – the gave both players legitimate tender offers as required – and both Jackson and McNeil REFUSED to sign $3M+ tenders – that is why will be paid $600k this year – that is part of the CBA which again was agreed to by both the owners and the players – they made the choice – they could be in camp making a nice $3m a year. I will continue to believe that the owners are concerned about creating “if-buts” that essentially make the CBA meaningless.
    The Reavis thing is actually similar – as I pointed out before the Jets are actually currently OVER what the cap would have been for this year – they are paying out over 61% of revenues to the players – giving Reavis a big contract makes that worse a – a lot worse – and also opens them up to similar requests [I am surprised our lawyer host has not raised this precedent concern]. By the way San Diego is under the projected salary floor for this year by about $10 million [but thanks to the players union's stupidity there is no floor] they can choose to make more money by not paying the two players – or to reduce their bottom line. I think I know what I would do if I were in their shoes.

  48. Steve W. says: Aug 21, 2010 8:00 PM

    SoFlor Steeler, the point I was making is that Jackson and McNeill (as well as a lot of restricted free agents this year) aren’t typical RFAs. In most years, they would be unrestricted free agents. The only reason that they are RFAs is because the teams opted out of the current cba. Yeah, the union messed up letting the teams put this clause in the opt out section, but let’s face it, the teams typically have more leverage. The whole point of the uncapped year was to push the teams back to the bargaining table to keep the uncapped year from happening, but the teams have turned the table on them and used it to hammer the players instead. Until this year, I very rarely (almost never) sided with players in contract issues. With the way teams are taking advantage of the extended RFA period, however, things have changed. I’m all for players honoring contracts, but when they do and play well, the team should show some loyalty in return.
    As for Revis, the Jets actually went to him about a long term extension. Why, I don’t know. Maybe they figured it was coming, and just wanted to get ahead of it. Anyway, that wasn’t my point about Revis. My point was that Revis and Brady were still under contract, while Jackson and McNeill had played their contracts out. Different issues, completely. That’s especially true considering your own point that the Jets are above what the salary cap would be, and the Chargers are below what the floor would be. In other words, why don’t they at least sign McNeill to a multi-year deal? I still think this is a case of AJ being penny wise and dollar dumb. Every player in the league is paying attention to what’s going on, and the Chargers will likely pay a price for it later.

  49. Steve W. says: Aug 21, 2010 8:19 PM

    The owners are just using the rules agreed to BY THE UNION – the gave both players legitimate tender offers as required – and both Jackson and McNeil REFUSED to sign $3M+ tenders – that is why will be paid $600k this year – that is part of the CBA which again was agreed to by both the owners and the players – they made the choice – they could be in camp making a nice $3m a year.
    _______________________________
    I agree that the Chargers had the power to do what they did, but I still think it’s foolish. The ability to reduce the tender offer is like a nuclear weapon. It’s great to have that weapon in your arsenal, but if the other side has nukes too (even if they’re smaller nukes or less of them) you’re insane to launch them because you guarantee a response. In this case, the response is that two pro-bowl players are refusing their services. Maybe they can get by without Jackson, but they need McNeill. Why give your QB a huge long term extension, and then leave his blind side weak?
    In lowering the offer and refusing to discuss any kind of deal, even short term, he’s created an unusual situation in which it actually makes sense for these players to hold out. The risk of suffering an injury that could seriously limit their future earnings potential is greater than the reduced tender offers. Neither player will give in and start the season for $600,000. Furthermore, unless they’re worried that unrestricted free agency will be permanently pushed back in the next cba, there’s really no reason for either player to worry about getting that accrued year. They both have enough for unrestricted free agency based on the past cba. It’s only the uncapped year that altered that.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!