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 will consider using franchise tag on VJ

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by matilack, Dec 20, 2010.

  1. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,104
    Ratings:
    +3,554
    Analysis: Jackson could be a Bolt in '11 - SignOnSanDiego.com

    Analysis: Jackson could be a Bolt in '11
    By Kevin Acee

    Monday, December 20, 2010 at 4:53 p.m.


    K.C. Alfred
    Chargers Vincent Jackson celebrates after a win against the 49ers on Thursday, Dec. 16, 2010.
    There is possibly good news for Chargers fans on the Vincent Jackson front.

    That is, if it is good enough news that the spectacularly gifted receiver could be around for one more year, if there is a franchise tag as part of the NFL's new collective bargaining agreement and if $10 million is enough for Jackson to show up to work on time.

    There remains almost no chance the Chargers will sign Jackson to a long-term deal. The team believes the anticipated price tag (his agents were at one time asking for $50 million over five years) is too high, and it remains troubled by the receiver's DUI history and the fact Jackson drove on a suspended license for an extended period. There's also the specter of a possible mammoth suspension should Jackson have more off-the-field issues.

    But the team is considering using the franchise tag on Jackson – if whatever labor deal is reached before the next season allows for such a designation.

    In fact, the only question likely remaining is which tag they could/would place on Jackson.

    First, no one is certain what a tag would look like (and if there will even be one) under a new CBA. And even if the franchise tag rules remain the same, the Chargers would have to choose between putting the exclusive or non-exclusive tag on Jackson.

    The exclusive tag would mean Jackson would be guaranteed a one-year salary worth the average of the five highest-paid receivers (expected to be more than $10 million) but be unable to negotiate with any other teams. A non-exclusive tag would mean he gets the $10 mil-plus salary but would be able to negotiate with other teams. If he did agree to a contract with another team, the Chargers would be able to match the offer to keep him (not going to happen) or be entitled to two first-round picks as compensation for losing him.

    While there is no consideration currently to ever give Jackson a long-term deal, a tag also gives everyone time to see if Jackson stays clean. It is a concern – not just in the Chargers front office but around the NFL – that another serious legal issue for Jackson would result in him being suspended for a full year. The only thing that would bring leniency and calm fears is more time having passed.

    Much of the rhetoric since Jackson made his 2010 debut two weeks ago (not counting his mini-appearance at Indianapolis) has seemed to have a central theme: that Jackson has been so good that he certainly must have shown A.J. Smith his worth.

    Not exactly.

    Smith didn’t know that before? He has called Jackson a “great” player, been effusive in his praise for his practice habits and how hard he plays, as well as his ability to catch passes. Jackson was second in the league in yards per catch from 2008-09. His 63.6 reception percentage last season was remarkable considering the 68 passes he caught traveled an average of 14 yards in the air, most among anyone who caught more than 45 passes. He has 19 receiving touchdowns since the start of 2008 season, tied for 18th in the league while missing the first 11 games of this season. Smith knew what he had before Jackson went for 112 yards and three touchdowns on Thursday.

    But what was before a remote possibility is now a likelihood. The Chargers would like to keep their No.1 receiver another year.

    Now, there is almost no doubt – again, not just in the Chargers front office – that the franchise tag will not be welcomed by the Jackson camp.

    When his agents eventually came down off their insistence on a multiyear deal and were willing to accept a one-year contract, it was with the provision he would not be franchised in 2011.

    With the $281,000 he settled for to be on the roster the final six games of this season and a salary of around $10 million next year, Jackson would average less than $5.5 million over two years. That’s going to be a slap in the face to a guy who, had he gotten his wishes, would essentially have realized $20 million by now.

    There is the possibility Jackson could withhold his services again. At the very least, we could be going through the will-they-trade-him drama of 2010 all over again.

    But one of the league’s best receivers, a guy who is getting better still, would be under control of the Chargers.

    For now, that qualifies as good news.
     
  2. Ride The Lightning

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

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,928
    Ratings:
    +1,746
    No brainer if a long term deal isn't worked out (or isn't finished). If we can play Sproles 7+ mil for NOTHING we can pay the same for VJ to style on fools.
     
  3. Chargers-Superhero

    Chargers-Superhero Just win the Damn SB !!!

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,205
    Ratings:
    +117
    VJ will be a Charger in 2011, wait and see. After that, well who knows. If he is troublesome in 2011, we can always trade him b-4 the trade deadline. But really....where is he gonna get a better QB than Rivers, and an Offense like we have to throw him the ball to make plays??? I bet he's glad he didn't go the Redskins, Seahawks, or Vikings this season. None of those teams has a QB of the future. I say it's 60/40 he signs long term, unlike what Acee keeps saying, UGH.
     
  4. Bergo23

    Bergo23 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Messages:
    263
    Ratings:
    +22
    If he is willing to sign a deal where the team is protected in the event of another off field issue, both sides may agree to a deal. I could see the Bolts offering 20 mill guaranteed for a couple more years.
     
  5. Buck Blincoe

    Buck Blincoe BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,860
    Ratings:
    +207
    I know a team who can use a VJ caliber deep threat.
     
  6. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,104
    Ratings:
    +3,554
    It'll probably cost a 1st and 3rd. I also believe there is a F-tag that requires two 1sts.

    You know AJ wanted a 1st and 2nd from AFC opponents before the trade deadline.
     
  7. Trumpet_Man

    Trumpet_Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,996
    Ratings:
    +654
    There are 2 versions of the F-tag (Exclusive and non exclusive). Both require two 1st round picks as compensation. This is negotiable.

    The Exclusive F-tag does not allow VJ to negotiate with other teams.

    The Non-Exclusive F-tag allows VJ to pimp his as.s. out.
     
  8. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,043
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    There will be no tag options unless a new CBA is done...
     
  9. Trumpet_Man

    Trumpet_Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,996
    Ratings:
    +654
    More misinformation as usual.

    If a team wants to F-tag a player, it has to be done in the middle of February 2011.

    The CBA expires in March 2011.

    Contract Law 101 - Offer - $Consideration$ - Acceptance

    The CBA is a laymans excuse. Take the time and exert some effort and do your homework.

    The ONLY way the F-tag is compromised for 2011 will require the CBA to be ratified BEFORE the current one expires in March 2011 or the new CBA is not ratified.

    If VJ signs and accepts the F-tag February 2011, the expiration of the CBA in March 2011 means nothing.

    VJ is still F-tagged and a contract was offered prior to the expiration of the CBA.

    So step up or step out.
     
  10. gsxr

    gsxr BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    141
    Ratings:
    +2
    Just sign the guy. Probably no nfl next year anyway. That's ok the Aztecs are moving up and high school games are always fun.
     
  11. Trumpet_Man

    Trumpet_Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,996
    Ratings:
    +654
    Anyway, I do not see VJ passing up a $10 million payday for one year. The CBA expiration in March 2011 has no bearing on the F-Tag by my reads. Accee will write another piece and it will be a "guess what VJ got F-tagged prior to the expiration of the CBA" article. Well no sh it.
     
  12. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,043
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    Wow... I am really surprised that you actually believe that there will be any rules governing free agency if the CBA expires... There wont be. There will be no tags, no Free Agency, nada.

    An expired piece of paper is meaningless... Go do some research, I have and again you are blatantly ignorant about what you are posting.

    In other words, if they tag him, and he does not sign a tender, once the CBA expires, he is not under contract with any team. Get your head on straight and use it for something other than a colon warmer...
     
  13. scratchnz

    scratchnz BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,077
    Ratings:
    +91
    Doesn't matter, either way cos trying to franchise this guy would be the dummest move since picking Ryan Leaf!! If the Chargers Franchise VJ he will make no end of trouble for us. Either sign him long term...or cut him, simple!!
     
  14. Buck Blincoe

    Buck Blincoe BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,860
    Ratings:
    +207
    Costly.
     
  15. CoronaDoug

    CoronaDoug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2007
    Messages:
    7,539
    Ratings:
    +814
  16. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,043
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    Agreed. I just don't see the Chargers signing him if there is no CBA by the end of the season. Gooddell Said there could be one by the Superbowl, if not, then it will probably expire. Should it expire, there will be no rules for free agency, tagging or anything, therefore without a CBA there can be no tags.

    Teams will not want to give contracts to any but franchise players with a looming lockout and labor dispute.
     
  17. AnteaterCharger

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

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,109
    Ratings:
    +2,928
    Not sure how much more cheerful he's going to be playing on another one year tag when he demands a long term deal. 9 million + can make anyone more cheerful about playing but still debateable if he'll cooperate or pull another of what he did this past year
     
  18. foober

    foober BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,980
    Ratings:
    +200
    with jacksons great play this year some team may just give us a 1st rounder and more for him.

    i'd think just giving him a long term deal would be cheaper than a franchise tag anyway. They could put stipulations of character in the contract to offset him getting into trouble anymore. Somehow it doesn't add up the way teh chargers are handling this. I'd love to keep him. There must be some other wierd stuff going on. Is he dating a spanos girl. Thats the only thing I can come up with.
     
  19. Aggieman

    Aggieman I bleed blue and gold

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2,363
    Ratings:
    +194
    I'm with Conc. If there is no CBA in place, then Jackson will not get signed long term and get sent packing. I don't think that move would be all that damaging either. And I think that is the way AJ Smith will end up going.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    "Great play this year"? Dude has played in 3 games, one he got injured on the 2nd play, one he didn't do squat, and the 3rd was not any better than what we have seen from Floyd in his best game
     

Share This Page