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!

Eagles release Desean Jackson

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by JoeRockhead, Mar 28, 2014.

  1. SuperCharger92

    SuperCharger92 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,311
    Ratings:
    +636
    But your intention is to keep him for at least 2 years.. So, he'd be a dead money hit of $2.5M after year two if you wanted to cut him. His deal is essentially 3 years/$22.75M, I would of gave him that all day and with $16M guaranteed.
     
  2. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,396
    Ratings:
    +1,075
    Hi
    His deal is for however long the $16m guaranteed is on the books because as soon as that amount has run out Jackson's shown to be the type that will demand a new deal (and more guaranteed money). It's splitting hairs, but given what we've seen of the man, it's the truth.

    He's getting low-level #1 WR money. The thing is only twice in his career - out of his 6 years in the league - has he produced in the manner expected of a #1 WR, and one of those seasons was where he received an abnormally large amount of targets.
     
  3. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    15,148
    Ratings:
    +2,723
    Part of his value though is FEAR, if CB slips or bites, and he's going to score a TD. Teams with secondary's like ours are going to get eaten for lunch by guys like that, especially if they don't dedicate a safety over the top.

    I'm sure he will hold out at some point though.
     
  4. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,396
    Ratings:
    +1,075
    Well, to be fair there aren't a lot of teams with secondaries like out - where both the talent and scheme-approach are lackluster. The blueprint is out on how contain DeSean Jackson - the Cowboys have done it for years (and they haven't had a particularly noteworthy defense in many of those years). You jam him at the line because he doesn't get off press terribly well (and in fact has fought now-teammate DeAngelo Hall on multiple occasions because of Hall's very aggressive pressing) and he's typically neutralized. Do you perhaps shade a safety towards Jackson's side pre-snap? Sure. But once that safety confirms that the corner over Jackson has gotten an effective jam at the line, he knows he can move on to other priorities.

    You don't pay #1 WR's because they draw attention off your other receivers, you pay them because they can draw double-coverage and still produce effectively. That's not DeSean.
     
  5. SuperCharger92

    SuperCharger92 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,311
    Ratings:
    +636
    In this offense you do.

    Look at what Royal was able to do with his limited playing/practice time and hampering of a turf toe for 2/3 of the year. Jackson could most likely double Royal's numbers in this offense. I actually can't wait to see what Jay Gruden does with RGIII, Jordan Reed, Andre Roberts, Pierre Garcon and Desean Jackson. That is going to be a fun offense to watch.
     
  6. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,396
    Ratings:
    +1,075
    Do we know quite what "this offense" is, though? I've been reading a lot of reports lately that project us to be one of the most run-heavy teams in the league next season. Jackson's not exactly renown for his run-blocking prowess, or his overwhelming willingness to give 100% as a run-blocker (one of the reasons why Chip is believed to be fine with parting with him). So we'd be paying $8m per for a decoy? I'm not buying it.
     
  7. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    15,148
    Ratings:
    +2,723
    Yeah but he's still a lot better than what we have opposite Keenan Allen. He could have stretched the field enough to open up room for Gates/Green to run some longer routes. I dont see Brown, Royal or Tutu being anywhere near that kind of player, and Floyd can't be relied upon for more than a handful of games even of he doesn't retire.

    I'm not lamenting the fact that we didn't chase Jackson, based on character issues, but it would have been refreshing to see us make a move to get this offense to the next step. Right now we're dependent on the run game, we don't have the weapons (in my opinion of course) to lean on our passing game if we had to.
     
  8. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,396
    Ratings:
    +1,075
    And how about we wait until we open camp to render these judgments. I'm not going to fault the club one bit for not paying a guy $8 million per year when he's produced like a #2 WR the majority of his career - and can't really play the "I was saddled with a crappy QB" card.

    I'm also realistic enough to look at what kind of coaching lineage Mike McCoy comes from (Hello John Fox School of I Need 3 Starting Caliber RB's on my Roster), look at the general approach to offense he implemented in terms of gameplans last season, and come to a reasonable assumption that he wants us to be a team that is very run-centric. I know there are several of us that would love to point to the albatross contract of Clary and say, "Hey, there's the money to sign a receiver if you want it," but until there's a proven option - in the eyes of our coaching staff and front office - to fill Clary's starting spot on the line, despite his staggering contract he's not going to be viewed as "expendable" as some of us want to believe he should be.

    Look, I know folks want us to be able to pick up where we left off last season, be competitive, be back in the playoffs, and be doing everything we can to win a Lombardi NEXT SEASON. Reality suggests that probability isn't terribly high - particularly if you start getting into some arguments that could be considered tantamount to conspiracy theories that might just be true - where what Peyton wants (at least during the regular season) Peyton gets. I get that people want to get Rivers a ring before he hangs the cleats up, but consider that his window isn't exactly closing. Rivers, if anything, has demonstrated he has Warren Moon/Brett Favre type longevity - only one major injury in his entire career (collegiate and pro) and he played through it even still. His game isn't dependent on great arms strength because he's never had particularly great arm strength - and kinesthetically-speaking, I'm fairly certain his 3/4 delivery actually puts less wear on his shoulder ligaments and cartilage than the full delivery would. Philip's a guy that's going to play until his body literally won't let him... or no one will hire him to play.

    I get that people want to see this administration "take a leap on someone" (funny, because that was what got AJ utterly lambasted and people were lamenting him being so "frivolous" towards the end of his tenure - but that's a discussion for a different day), but how about we wait until they actually have resources at least somewhat on the level with the mean as opposed to bottom 20%? I know it's not an easy one to practice, but there's a reason why patience is a virtue.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    15,148
    Ratings:
    +2,723
    He's had McNabb (Elderly version), Vick (plagued with injury), Kolb, Young, and now Foles. Not exactly killers there man. Anytime he has had some semblance of stability at QB the guy has produced, which is true for most every good receiver. Even Fitzgerald (at age 28 and 29) hasn't broken 1000 yards the last 2 years despite starting all 32 games.

    Point is even if he's only a #2 he's a damn good #2, and so what if he's making LOW end #1 money. He'll probably be even more effective if he's not the true #1 target like he has been, matching up against the opponents best CBs.

    I'm very down on Vincent Brown because despite playing 900+ snaps (legit starting level PT) he only had 41 catches for 471 yards, which needless to say is VERY very bad. Now I'm not sure if that's because he wasn't comfortable in the new scheme or if Rivers is just staring down Allen and Gates too often, but we have very good reason to be concerned with our #2 receiver situation weather it's April or late August.

    Philip Rivers longevity aside, we are playoff contenders right now, this isn't the same as times past when Oakland, Washington, or Tampa were breaking the bank on OGs, DEs, and WRs when they are still searching for a coach and a QB. I'm not saying mortgage the entire future, but have the guts to take one calculated risk and give Hakeem Nicks a 1 year deal, or DeSean what really amounts to a 2 year deal.


    PS. It's worth noting that as of now Butler is the only large contract we have on the books after the 2015 season, so we have TONS of maneuverability even if Jackson had gone full Derek Cox on us (which is doubtful).
     
  10. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,396
    Ratings:
    +1,075
    That's because all that cap-space that everyone's so eager to fill up with free agents... it's coming because of the guys we have who are either out of contract or going to be in the final year of their contracts (and likely seeking new deals) like Rivers, Weddle, Liuget, Mathews.

    At least thus far, Telesco's building the tried and true way of building - through the draft and adding vets on low-risk contracts where they're affordable and don't require robbing Peter to pay Paul in terms of year-to-year cap-finances. For being the GM of a team that is habitually hampered by injuries, it's hard to fault a GM for not taking a risk on players who have histories of constantly picking up nicks (yes, that's both Jackson and Nicks). You've got to lay the foundation before you're positioned to where you can start making risky moves and still be able to fall back safely if you miss. And it kind of takes more than one year to lay that foundation.
     
  11. matilack

    matilack #therealagent47

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    15,148
    Ratings:
    +2,723
    And with a projected $116M in open space in 2016 you don't think we'll be able to re-sign a 35 year old Rivers, Weddle, Liuget and Mathews, (RBs are not breaking the bank anyway) and whatever other key players may need signing at that time? Cuz I do, rather easily, we're not exactly the Seahawks at the moment. Guys like Hardwick, JJ, Freeney, Gates etc...will be replaced by cheap youth (unless Green explodes), and by the time we need to make any real tough decisions we'd probably chose to trade or cut a guy like Jackson in favor of that younger talent.

    As for the foundation you speak of, as older guys like Freeney, Johnson, Hardwick, Gates leave over the next 2 years and are replaced by rookies that foundation will not be as solid as it is right now. As counter intuitive as it may seem 1 year into a young regime, right now may be the best time to take A RISK with the locker room of support currently in place.

    This is not the potential locker room or cap space nuclear bomb your making it out to be dude. I realize building through the draft exclusively is en vogue with the smarty pants talking heads out there, but you can't be afraid to supplement through FA.
     

Share This Page