1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!
    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers.
    We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Yahoo - Restricted trio may be forced to hold out

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by sdrocks, Jul 5, 2010.

  1. sdrocks
    Offline

    sdrocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    337
    Ratings Received:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    I didn't see this article posted yet. I thought it brought up some good points.


    "http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-directsnap062510

    "Logan Mankins, Vincent Jackson(notes) and Marcus McNeill(notes): These three are among nine restricted free agents who haven’t signed their contract tenders yet. The catch for these three is that not signing the tenders before the June 15 has theoretically cost them anywhere from $1.7 million (Mankins) to $2.6 million (Jackson) because the teams have reduced the tenders to each player.

    The other six restricted free agents lose no more than $100,000 on their offers because CBA rules stipulate that tendered players make 110 percent of last year’s salaries. As a result, the other six restricted free agents will feel far less of a financial impact than Jackson, Mankins and McNeill.

    However, not signing is the best strategic move these three could make, even if it costs them more money than some people make in a career. The reason is this: All three players can now stay away from their teams without incurring significant fines and/or other penalties (such as losing a year toward free agency).

    At issue is that all three were prevented from becoming unrestricted free agents this year when NFL owners opted to go to an uncapped year. By rule, the uncapped year pushed the requirement for unrestricted free agency from four years of service to six years. Sure, those are the breaks, but it’s fair to say that all three would have gotten much greater contracts if the rules were different.

    Much greater.

    For instance, based on recent contract figures for other players at these positions, Mankins would likely be making an average of $8 million a year with at least $25 million guaranteed on a long-term deal rather than the $3.168 million tender he was offered. Jackson would be getting close to $10 million a year with roughly $30 million guaranteed rather than the $3.268 million he was tendered for one year. McNeill would be making as much as Jackson, if not more.

    Now, before you start crying crocodile tears about this and claim they should just show up and play, consider this: All of them watched what happened to then-New York Jets running back Leon Washington(notes) last season. Washington, traded to the Seattle Seahawks in April, played last season on a one-year tender, broke his leg and wasn’t able to get a long-term deal done. In fact, he may not be ready to play by the beginning of this season.

    That’s the nature of football, which gets us back to the strategy of not signing the tender. The only power players really have is their ability to withhold services: the more talented the player, the greater his impact on the fortunes of his team. In the case of Jackson and McNeill, the Chargers are kidding themselves if they think they can be a serious contender without either or both of them.

    Refusing to sign the tender allows both players to hold out well into the regular season (they will have to report sometime between Week 6 and Week 11 of the season depending on how the CBA is interpreted). Then again, all three probably could get away with not playing at all and still be unrestricted free agents if a new CBA is finally negotiated sometime in 2011. It’s likely a new CBA would again feature a four-year requirement for unrestricted free agency, if not shorter.

    In other words, players like Mankins and Jackson are probably better served sitting out and refusing to play for $3 million or so for one year rather than risk playing, getting hurt and missing a chance at $8 million or so a year.

    While this is a hard concept for most fans to accept, it is logical. Moreover, fans should think about it this way: What would you do in the same situation? Would you risk the chance to make life-changing money for one year’s worth of pay that, while still good, doesn’t have anything close to that impact?"
  2. sdrocks
    Offline

    sdrocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    337
    Ratings Received:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    "However, not signing is the best strategic move these three could make, even if it costs them more money than some people make in a career. The reason is this: All three players can now stay away from their teams without incurring significant fines and/or other penalties (such as losing a year toward free agency)."

    Thought that was a good point. By not signing, it prevents AJ from suspending them or doing any other tactics like he did with Gates.
  3. DenverBolt67
    Offline

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Denver, Co
    Ratings Received:
    +627 / 5 / -3
    " In the case of Jackson and McNeill, the Chargers are kidding themselves if they think they can be a serious contender without either or both of them."

    That is what I have been trying to say although I think we can do better without VJ than we can without McNeil.
  4. RipTheJacker
    Offline

    RipTheJacker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,833
    Ratings Received:
    +152 / 0 / -0
    What ever happened with Merriman? Isnt he a RFA too who hasnt signed his tender? Is he going to hold out too?
  5. DenverBolt67
    Offline

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Denver, Co
    Ratings Received:
    +627 / 5 / -3
    He is already making 110% of his salary from last year, so there is no penalty until he misses training camp. Yet if he would have already signed, they could have penalized him for not being at some of the OTA's. All reports say he will be in training camp, so most are not worried about him
  6. ETicket
    Offline

    ETicket Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    909
    Ratings Received:
    +260 / 4 / -2
    Here's the part I don't understand. Why didn't we offer a one year tender that was at least close to what these two will likely get when signed long-term? Would they still be holding out if the tenders were double the offer at $6.5-ish? Or even more like $8 million?

    I get that AJ doesn't blink, but it would really piss me off if the Chargers were just trying to play it cheap and save money on these two pro-bowler's. That's not what you do if you're serious about winning a SB.
  7. wrbanwal
    Offline

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings Received:
    +1,036 / 0 / -0
    the way I understand it from reliable sources (these boards),

    both want long term deals. Ownership doesn't.
  8. DenverBolt67
    Offline

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Denver, Co
    Ratings Received:
    +627 / 5 / -3
    Because they didn't have to, and Dean isn't opening up his wallet this year, just like some other coaches, and the team will suffer because of it
  9. LV Bolt Fan
    Offline

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ratings Received:
    +432 / 0 / -0
    Wrong!
    The team want's to do long term deals. Gates is first,McNeil is second and Jackson is third.
    Without a new CBA......they have watch they're backs. Nobody knows what kind or if any type of salary cap there will be.

    How hard is this to understand?
  10. wrbanwal
    Offline

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings Received:
    +1,036 / 0 / -0


    I'm sorry, can you show me these long term deals that were offered?
  11. DenverBolt67
    Offline

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Denver, Co
    Ratings Received:
    +627 / 5 / -3
    If they really wanted deals in place, they would have been working on them prior to the Jun 15 deadline, instead they tried to strong arm the players and get them cheap, and it bit them in the ***
  12. DenverBolt67
    Offline

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Denver, Co
    Ratings Received:
    +627 / 5 / -3
    None have been. Kevin Acee has reported a couple time that the Chargers has stated they will not work on a deal with McNeil or VJ until they get a deal done with Gates, and they haven;t even started talking to gates
  13. LV Bolt Fan
    Offline

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ratings Received:
    +432 / 0 / -0
    Did I say they were offered? :no:

    Just read the same Acee crap that we all do. :icon_rofl:

    :icon_tease:
  14. wrbanwal
    Offline

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings Received:
    +1,036 / 0 / -0
    DAMN YOU LVBOLT!!!

    Got me

    :icon_evil:
  15. LV Bolt Fan
    Offline

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ratings Received:
    +432 / 0 / -0
    It's all good, Bro. :yes:

    Just a reminder to ALL of the Bolttalk posters..........
    It's never personal, unless we've met! LOL!

Share This Page