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!
    Dismiss Notice

Chargers need to lock up McNeill, Jackson

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by Johnny Lightning, Jun 3, 2010.

  1. Johnny Lightning

    Johnny Lightning Go Bolts

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    23,310
    Ratings:
    +1,703
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    5-31-2010
    By Michael Blunda


    Franchise left tackles don't come around every day. Neither do No. 1 wide receivers. So why are the Chargers acting so lax regarding the contracts of OLT Marcus McNeill and WR Vincent Jackson? Your guess is as good as mine.

    With the team's minicamp getting under way this week, McNeill, Jackson, WR Malcom Floyd and OLB Shawne Merriman — San Diego's four remaining unsigned restricted free agents — are all conspicuous by their absence. None has agreed to his one-year tender offer, and it doesn't sound like any of them is planning to do so in the immediate future.

    That's because each one believes he has done enough to earn a long-term deal, which brings with it both financial and job security. After all, this quartet has been with the club for a number of years, helping the Chargers become the dominant team in the AFC West. But that hasn't swayed the opinion of GM A.J. Smith one bit. He apparently placed a lock on the franchise's proverbial wallet at the beginning of the offseason, then threw away the key.

    Smith's reasons for being careful with the Spanos family's money are understandable. For one, the current CBA situation and possibility of a 2011 lockout have caused many teams to think twice about handing out lucrative contracts containing loads of guaranteed dollars. Obviously, no owner wants to be doling out hefty paychecks next season if there's no football. Also, the Chargers have another group of integral players set to become free agents a year from now, including TE Antonio Gates, ILB Stephen Cooper and FS Eric Weddle. If the Bolts spend all their money now, they'll risk being strapped for cash when this trio is due to hit the market.

    But while Smith's logic for holding off on long-term deals may make sense, it doesn't make it the best course of action when it comes to negotiating with two of San Diego's premier players. One look at the GM's track record shows that he enjoys playing hardball with free agents, a strategy that has worked frequently. However, McNeill and Jackson aren't just any free agents, and telling them that they're not worthy of extensions could wind up being a major mistake.

    Since coming into the league in 2006, McNeill has been a stalwart at left tackle for an extremely effective offense, making two Pro Bowls and keeping QB Philip Rivers on his feet. An upper-echelon player at one of the toughest positions to fill, he has been an admirable blind-side protector for his $92 million quarterback, and at just 26 years old, he has many terrific seasons still ahead of him. Considering his importance to the squad and the significant drop-off behind him on the depth chart, McNeill is more than deserving of a multiyear deal.

    Jackson, meanwhile, is coming off back-to-back 1,000-yard seasons and has scored 16 touchdowns over the past two years. A giant at 6-5, 230 pounds, he's both a deep threat and a quality intermediate target, not to mention Rivers' favorite wideout. Just hitting his prime at age 27, Jackson has established himself as the anchor of this receiving corps. Some off-field driving incidents could result in a suspension to begin 2010, but that's the only baggage he carries. Without him, the Bolts' offense almost surely would take a major step back.

    By not agreeing to contract extensions with this pair prior to ’10, Smith is risking one or both players sitting out a major chunk of the regular season, especially if he rescinds their RFA tenders, which he can do if they don't sign by June 15. Such a move would result in major pay cuts for McNeill and Jackson this season, and it very possibly could sour them enough on the organization that they decide to sign elsewhere after becoming UFAs next year. Is that potential outcome really worth playing hardball over?

    Smith has made a slew of good decisions during his seven-year tenure as the Bolts' general manager — one look at the Chargers' record over that span is proof. Even choosing not to offer long-term contracts to Floyd and Merriman is probably the intelligent tactic, as both players have sufficient question marks to make them gambles. Without Smith, San Diego likely wouldn't be the dominant franchise it has been for the better part of six years.

    This time, though, the savvy GM is showing poor judgment. McNeill and Jackson are two of the primary reasons for the team's offensive success, and there's no sensible explanation as to why they shouldn't remain in San Diego for years to come. The club's window of opportunity to win a Super Bowl already was starting to close, but it very well might slam shut if these two exit the equation.

    There are times to play tough, and then there are times to cave in. If Smith opts to stick to his guns in this instance, Chargers fans have reason to be concerned about the future


    http://www.profootballweekly.com/2010/05/31/chargers-need-to-lock-up-mcneill-jackson
     
  2. bigmike.x.09

    bigmike.x.09 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,493
    Ratings:
    +280
  3. turbo_turtle

    turbo_turtle In Disguise

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,685
    Ratings:
    +890
    QFT!!!!!
     
  4. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,326
    Ratings:
    +341
    For truth on Mac. WTF didnt realize I was older than Marcus lol. Makes me really want to get him longterm even more. WTF AJ get this shiz done already. I dont understand why VJ has leverage in his contract as much however?

    Jeez june 15th thats like pretty close but AJ doesnt have to rescind the RFA contract offer and they could eventually sign that and not face playtime loss due to penalties??
     
  5. RM24

    RM24 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,109
    Ratings:
    +264
    Lock those 2 up fo sho! Those 2 are part of the nucleus of this offense. One keeps Rivers clean to make passes and the other catches many of those passes. It's one of those "no kidding" type articles but it's very true. AJ has to find a way to keep those 2 in a Charger uniform and I think he will.
     
  6. CoronaDoug

    CoronaDoug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    7,539
    Ratings:
    +814
    Gawd has a plan.
     
  7. Ride The Lightning

    Ride The Lightning Join the Dark Side, we have cookies.

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,928
    Ratings:
    +1,746
    [​IMG]

    You just blew my &*!?@* mind.
     
  8. Buck Melanoma

    Buck Melanoma Guest

    Ratings:
    +408
    Just keep believing that. In a few years you'll get to pull for the San Antonio Chargers.
     
  9. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    i hope we lock p both mcneill and jackson, but incase we have to choose just one i rather keep mcneill.jackson is replaceable, but a LT is very had to replace, and i honestly wouldnt mind if jackson did leave if the hype behind seyi aritoutiou and jermey williams is right plus our wide receiver corps is already beastly
     
  10. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    :icon_rofl:

    Sure! Let's lose a Pro Bowl WR and replace him with an UDFA.
    Make sense to me. :no:
     
  11. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    like i also said i rather have mcneill jackson could be replaced
     
  12. 17Rocks

    17Rocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,075
    Ratings:
    +135
    This smacks of deja vu... can you say Dean and Jefferson?
     
  13. Johnny Lightning

    Johnny Lightning Go Bolts

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    23,310
    Ratings:
    +1,703
    The Fake GM's Perspective: Holdouts


    6-4-2010

    The Chargers currently have 4 players that have been offered contracts as restricted free agents, but have refrained from signing these contracts. By not signing these contracts they are basically forced to stay away from any of the Chargers offseason training activities and mini camps. The Chargers offered contracts to other restricted free agents on the team, but only these 4 who were all offered at contracts at or near the highest level allowed decided not to sign. The 4 players are Shawne Merriman, Marcus McNeill, Malcom Floyd and Vincent Jackson.


    Those are the facts.


    These are the opinions:


    From a General Manager's perspective there's not much more to be done to resolve the contract squabbles with these players. Everything Charger Management has done regarding these players is exactly within the rules. It is not the Chargers fault that the rules are slightly different in 2010 than they were in 2009. Of course, it is also with the Chargers interest to field a team as cheaply as possible without sacrificing wins and this rule change is designed to help them do that. It is also in the best interest of the team for the GM to ensure that these 4 players get on the field because all 4 are starters on this team and can be the difference between wins and losses in 2010. It is also important to think about the future of the team beyond 2010 and all 4 of these players would most likely be considered assets beyond the 2010 season. However, it is unknown at this point as to what all the rules regarding contracts will be beyond the 2010 season. Without knowing the rules it could be considered quite difficult to structure the contract so that is beneficial to both parties. As a GM, I think it's fair to say that A.J. Smith is fairly conservative when it comes to handing out big contracts and with so much unknown past this season it makes sense that he would be very conservative when considering creating new long term contracts in 2010. I would be surprised if A.J. hasn't also made this clear to the agents of the 4 players that these are the only contracts the Chargers will offer for 2010. If that's the case then there doesn't seem to be sense in continuing to leave those offers unsigned.


    From the player and player agent perspective the most important thing from the business side of football is to get the biggest contract possible as soon as possible. The rule changes from 2009 to 2010 effectively delayed these players big money earning potential. There were even some complaints about how this wasn't fair for them to be treated differently from their predecessors even though this rule change was known years in advance. It would seem that because this rule change hurt these restricted free agents moreso than previous restricted free agents that they feel they are entitled to something more. This strikes me as slightly irrational. From an outsider's perspective it does not appear that these restricted free agents have any more leverage than any previous restricted free agents. As in the past, the most amount of leverage that a player can get in contract negotiations before unrestricted free agency is to hold out. This has proven to be a high risk strategy where actually missing games can lead to a harsh reaction from the fans and media. So instead many restricted free agents will just skip the offseason activities and refuse to sign the contract offered by the team. This does not gain much leverage since GM's can usually see through this ploy, but it also doesn't generate much venom from fans or the media. There is some risk involved in that at a certain point the team can actually choose to renew the players previous contract with a modest raise. For 3 of the Chargers players who have not signed their contracts this would be a value less than what they were offered by restricted free agency rules, however it seems unlikely that the team would take this route because of the increase in animosity that it would cause.


    From one fan's perspective I'm thikning: So what's the point? Why go through the motions of all this? It feels like the classic staredown in a boxing pre-fight press conference. You know they aren't going to fight this out soon yet they are pretending like they are going to brawl at any second. It's silly and it makes me feel like the players aren't taking this thing seriously. Like they think that if they ***** and moan enough people will hand them more money. It also seems like there is almost a peer pressure to do these fake holdouts since it has become the cool thing to do for restricted free agents even though it rarely works. I say just come into work, sign your multimillion dollar 1 year contract and prove that you deserve something better next year. Don't posture for the sake of posturing. If you really want to hold out then do it for real and don't fake it. Of course, maybe these players are really going to hold out. Would they have said so if they were? According to the rules, they need to play 6 games in 2010 in order to qualify for unrestricted free agency in 2011. Are we ready to only see some of these guys for only 6 games?


    http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2010/6/4/1497829/the-fake-gms-perspective-holdouts?ref=CBS
     
  14. wrbanwal

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings:
    +1,036

    LT,Sproles, Rivers and Shawne didn't sign big contracts?


    Has any player ever done this?
     
  15. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    I know what you said, that's why I laughed at you.
    Your willing to let VJ leave for a UDFA. :yes:

    I laugh at you, again! :icon_rofl:
     
  16. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    alright then let me ask you this, with out a good LT as Mcneill is, to protect phillip rivers blind side, hows jackson gonna catch the ball, last time i checked you cant throw the ball when you're on your back. our O-line is not the best i would rather have the better player and thats Mcneill, Jackson could be replaced very easily, if not with one of our udfa y not bring in Terrell Owens for one year, then draft a big tall wide receiver next year???? the battle is won in the trenches
     
  17. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    Kid.......You're starting to bore me.

    McNeil, VJ, Floyd and Merriman will all be in TC. :yes:

    Were not letting VJ walk and replace him with a UDFA from FSU or Tulane. :icon_rofl:

    Lang Will Not be the next Ware. :yes:

    100% positive!

    I didn't know that Ca. had passed the Mary Jane law, yet. Because I want what you're smoking! :yes:
     
  18. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    im not saying any of this will happen im just sayin a WR is easier to replace than a LT. and Lang might not be ware but i see alot of potential in this kid
     
  19. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    :icon_huh:
    Make up your mind.

    You said we could replace VJ with 2 UDFA's. Now your saying we can't? :icon_huh:
     
  20. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    i never said we couldnt, jackson is replaceable , easily
     
  21. Shumway

    Shumway BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    50
    Ratings:
    +14
    I think his point was pretty clearly that IF one of them were to leave, that his preference would be to keep McNeil.
     
  22. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    I understand the point being made. But, why does 1 have to leave? :icon_huh:
     
  23. turbo_turtle

    turbo_turtle In Disguise

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,685
    Ratings:
    +890
    Why not try and keep both VJack and McNeill? :icon_shrug:
     
  24. charger1993

    charger1993 bad motherfucker

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,910
    Ratings:
    +162
    we could i was just giving a situation
     
  25. Workplay

    Workplay scompl

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    932
    Ratings:
    +66
    If this season is uncapped, wouldn't it make sense to sign all these guys and frontload their contracts so the team will have more cap space in the future? Shouldn't they restructure all the big contracts so they pay the starters their big money up front but still lock them up for several years? :icon_huh:

    It seems like common sense to me to lock up your stars now so you can have major cap space for FA signings in the future. :bolt:
     
  26. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,108
    Ratings:
    +2,928
    I don't get the pissy-ness of these players right now - it's an uncapped year, it sucks for all the RFAs, next year with a deal you'll be a free agent and go get lots of money. By not signing the only thing they're doing is ensuring they won't be chargers pass this year and they're limiting their leverage with other teams who will wonder about whether the player will ever be satisfied with their contract.
     
  27. wrbanwal

    wrbanwal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    9,707
    Ratings:
    +1,036
    I think it might be because of the potential work stoppage.
     
  28. foober

    foober BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,980
    Ratings:
    +200
    I'm just guessing. But when all is said and done. The new nfl contract between players and oweners will have in it that players can only make so much money. And they'll have provisions of why. Definetly the rookies will get paid less because the new contract will have a ceiling of how much rookies can get. But I think all players will have the same stipulations applied.

    I'm just guessing. But the owners seem to want to have a cap on how much players can make.

    Which means for players like mcneil, merriman, jackson, floyd, ect. That their new huge 2nd contract will be limited. And thats why the stalemate on getting new contracts signed.
     
  29. Retired Catholic

    Retired Catholic BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    7,894
    Ratings:
    +347
    Just curious, but what happens if they fall into the reserved did not report category? Even these days the money they are passing on is not chump change. I'd have to think twice before I would pass up this money, facing the possibility of a strike or lockout. They are rejecting a lot more than walking around money.
     
  30. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    No team is doing that, nearly every team is pocketing as much money as possible. Just about every team is significantly below last years salary.

    The teams are planning for a lockout next year, so they are getting as much profit this year as possible
     

Share This Page