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

Vincent Jackson, Logan Mankins make their power play

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by DenverBolt67, Jul 19, 2011.

  1. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
  2. Lightning_Dynasty

    Lightning_Dynasty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,422
    Ratings:
    +310
    They won't be able to screw anything up.

    And AJ did try to work to VJ. He just wanted a ridiculous contract that would not have worked with his legal issues.
     
  3. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    No he didn't. He even publicly said the tender was all he was getting, and they could discuss a new deal after the season. AJ gave him a take it or leave it offer and was never willing to work on a deal, in fact, AJ refused to even talk with his agent

    Here is AJ's quote-

    "We’re not signing anyone right now. We’re taking our time. Those players would like long-term contracts. What we decided to do, which we thought was fair, was say, ‘Play for $3.2 million, and let’s see what happens at the end of the year with us.’ "
     
  4. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,044
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    VJ got offered a fair tender, which was a pay increase. He would have been able to negotiate a long term contract after the one year tender. He and Big Mac both decided to test the resolve of the Chargers and got burnt. Their desicion.

    You keep pining that AJ screwed VJ, not so. VJ screwed himself through his actions. There is really no other way to look at it.

    Further, this is the mentality of the Chargers under Spanos, not just AJ. Go back and look what happened to Natrone Means under simular circumstances. Hold outs do not often get the players what they want with the Chargers.

    Further, I believe this quote from the article acurately shows the type 'team player, i want to be fair' kind of guy VJ really is:

    Two guys. Holding up the rest of the players in the league. VJ made his choice, now he wants to demand 10 million dollars because of HIS CHOICE HE MADE! Sorry, this guy is not the victim here...
     
  5. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,639
    Ratings:
    +2,074
    John Jefferson held out, and was traded to Green Bay, and at that time, it killed his career.
     
  6. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    Can't say I didn't see this one coming........ Jackson is nothing, if not predictable. ;)
     
  7. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    Fact of the matter is, if you are willing to sit down and treat people like adults, most holdouts can be avoided. AJ doesn't like treating people like adults though, and we got the results we had last year

    And I am sorry to break this to you, but you are kidding yourself if you think offering a deal which is 50-60% less than what he would get on the open market is "a fair deal". So many people take the owners side and try to put them on the same level as any other business, but when they are not following free market principles, they cannot be compared to other businesses

    I still believe that if they would have just offered him a 2 year $14-15 mil deal (About the same as what he would have made with the RFA tender and franchise tag), he would have signed it, been in camp, and the team could have eliminated all the controversy. But that would have required that they sit down with him and treat him like a man
     
  8. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    The fact of the matter is that AJ won't allow players to dictate terms to the team...... it's as simple as that.

    Anyone who holds out, will not be negotiated with. That's AJ's hardline stance. You may not agree with it, but in AJ's mind, Jackson had a lot to prove to the organization before he deserved any kind of big contract. If Jackson didn't have his off-field issues, things might've been different.

    Any agent who hasn't been in a coma the last 8 years would know that AJ doesn't deal with holdouts. Jackson's people handled things very poorly. Even if you don't agree with AJ's stance, it's hard to argue that fact.
     
  9. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    And so it goes.......

    Peyton Manning and Drew Brees request settlement terms
    Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 19, 2011, 12:58 PM EDT


    Logan Mankins and Vincent Jackson aren’t the only Brady antitrust plaintiffs that will want a little sweetening of the pie.

    Drew Brees and Peyton Manning both are requesting to be exempt from the franchise tag for the rest of their careers, according to Greg A. Bedard of the Boston Globe.

    Bedard’s source says that would be effective immediately, which would conceivably make Manning an unrestricted free agent next week. (Now that would fun.) Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com confirmed Bedard’s report. This could slow the process down a bit, but we find it hard to believe the plaintiffs couldn’t be settled quickly, one way or another.

    The NFLPA* appears sensitive to the P.R. of players looking like bad guys in the process.

    “Rely on the process and rely on your player leadership to get you the right information. Don’t let ‘anonymous sources’ influence you,” NFLPA* spokesman George Atallah wrote on Twitter.

    We think there is room for all of the above to be completely accurate. It is not a surprise Brees, Manning, Mankins, and Jackson are trying to get what they can.

    That doesn’t mean the players will get what they want, but it’s part of the “process” that Atallah describes.
     
  10. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    Once again, it is only a holdout after AJ refuses to even talk with him.
     
  11. BoltsFanUK

    BoltsFanUK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,111
    Ratings:
    +848
    And just to add- once Marcus showed up and signed his tender, AJ gave him a contract so VJ only has himself to blame
     
  12. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    And after AJ said they would not be giving out any contracts and they would have to wait until after the year to discuss a new deal, why would VJ assume that he would break his word and start talking before the season was over?

    Also, McNeil also hinted that they called and promised him a new deal if he signed his tender. I didn't hear or read it, but I remember it being discussed on both 1090 and 1360 after he got his deal.
     
  13. FCBolt

    FCBolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,355
    Ratings:
    +606
    This is good for a laugh

    The Manning, Brees, Mankins, Jackson backlash begins

    Posted by Mike Florio on July 19, 2011, 2:42 PM EDT
    [​IMG] Getty Images

    With four of the 10 named plaintiffs who supposedly are representing all players trying to cut their own deal, possibly at the risk of blowing up the entire settlement, the other 1,896 players can’t be all that happy about this.
    Now, at least one of them has gone on the record. (Sure, he’s a punter. But he’s still technically a player.)
    Vikings punter Chris Kluwe has posted the following message on his Twitter page: “Sigh, and once again greed is the operative byword. Congrats Brees, Manning, Mankins, and Jackson for being ‘that guy’. #douchebags.
    We love you, Chris Kluwe. Even though you’re just a punter.
     
  14. FCBolt

    FCBolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,355
    Ratings:
    +606
    Back to the regularly scheduled 'effin lawyers' thread jacking :)

    Kessler’s last stand?

    Posted by Mike Florio on July 19, 2011, 10:04 AM EDT
    [​IMG] Getty Images
    As the NFL sees it, close inspection of the demands of Patriots guard Logan Mankins and Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson could very well reveal the fingerprints of Jeffrey Kessler, NFLPA* lawyer and architect of the Brady antitrust action.

    It is currently believed by the league that only an effort by Kessler to overplay his hand will derail a new labor deal. The demands of Mankins and Jackson for free agency or $10 million each, could be exactly what the league feared.

    Indeed, virtually every remaining issue as of Monday morning (with the exception of the league’s effort to close the California workers’ compensation loophole) represented a demand from the players, as developed and communicated by Kessler. Kessler wants $320 million in benefits that weren’t paid in the final year of a labor deal that was overwhelmingly favorable to the players, a claim that borders on the ludicrous. Kessler wants a lump sum for the “lockout insurance” case (something that, in all fairness to Kessler, the league should have expressly included when moving from its proposal regarding the revenue split to the final range of 46.5-to-48 cents). And now Kessler wants at least two of the named plaintiffs to be exempt from the rules that will apply to the rest of the 1,900 players. (Previously, Kessler wasted hours of negotiating time arguing for a franchise tag exemption on behalf of Peyton Manning and Drew Brees.)

    This newest hurdle, advanced in part on behalf of a receiver who should be glad he’s still in the league after a pair of DUI incidents, could have been avoided in March, if Kessler had merely advised his ultimate client, NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith, to ensure that any of the men volunteering to be named plaintiffs would leave their personal agendas at the door.

    Kessler should have advised Smith to tell the men that, if they are going to want something other than the satisfaction of helping their “One Team” of NFL players, then they shouldn’t sign their name to the documents. By failing to ensure that such a commitment would be secured up front, Kessler failed his ultimate client, De Smith, and the men the NFLPA* represents.

    Sure, maybe De Smith should have thought of this on his own. After all, he was a practicing lawyer before he was hired by the players’ union. But Kessler is the man at the wheel of this bus, and Kessler should have realized based on the precedent of the Reggie White case that some of the named plaintiffs would possibly want something for themselves, even if they had no role in the hard work done to settle the case.

    If anything, Ravens cornerback Domonique Foxworth and Colts center Jeff Saturday should get the $10 million each, for spending countless hours out of their normal element for the benefit of their brethren. That contrast between Foxworth and Saturday and Mankins and Jackson makes the current behavior of the latter duo even more offensive.

    And it makes Kessler’s failure to ensure that this wouldn’t happen even more unforgivable. No matter how this all shakes out, we believe it’s time for De Smith to get a new set of lawyers to represent the interests of the players.

    Until then, we call on Mankins and Jackson to publicly drop their selfish demands and get out of the way. (As if anyone listens to what we have to say.) They’ve done nothing to help the process to its current point other than sign a piece of paper. They now need to be prepared to sign another piece of paper so that the process can finally end.

    If they refuse, there’s always the UFL.

    Oh wait. There’s always the CFL.
     
  15. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    I understand how Mankins and VJ could feel they got screwed, although I don't think they really have a leg to stand on in the grand scheme of things, I don't get how Brees and Manning feel that they are so special that they should be exempt for the franchise tag for the rest of their career. I just don't understand what their justification is.
     
  16. Buck Melanoma

    Buck Melanoma Guest

    Ratings:
    +408
    Sounds like VJ's agent is still looking for his cut of last year's pie.

    If I were anyone involved in this scenario, I'd look into body armor. haha
     
  17. HEXEDBOLT

    HEXEDBOLT Don't like it, lump it!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,284
    Ratings:
    +1,887

    That dude even looks like a shyster, hell, sharks would hide from that dude.
     
  18. AnteaterCharger

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

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    The union and the league will not allow two players to **** up all this hard work - they just won't
     
  19. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    I heard one of the shows on Sirius yesterday, had a lawyer who said the players have no ground to stand on. He said it is an class action suit, meaning they are representing a whole class of people, not just themselves. So them demanding things that only effect them, is meaningless to the class of people the represent
     
  20. AnteaterCharger

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

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    But as the named plaintiffs they have to sign off on any class action suit because unless the class representatives settle, the class can not be made whole. There will be some kind of side deal done to satisfy them but if the lawyers put their foot down this entire shebang could be derailed. I don't think it'll happen but there's that issue
     
  21. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    I am no lawyer, so I didn't know that. Thanks for the clarification
     
  22. AnteaterCharger

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

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    The advantage the class has is when there's so damn many of them they can be very persuasive to tell the representatives to fix their **** and fall in line
     
  23. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    All's well that ends well?

    Report: Vincent Jackson will be a Charger, won’t hold up a deal
    Posted by Michael David Smith on July 19, 2011, 6:22 PM EDT


    Any talk that Vincent Jackson could use his status as a named plaintiff in the players’ antitrust lawsuit against the owners to hold up a settlement and keep the lockout from ending may be little more than posturing.

    That’s the word from Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune, who reports that Jackson wants to remain in San Diego and would be willing to play for the one-year guaranteed salary that comes with the franchise tag.

    In an appearance on XX Sports Radio in San Diego, Acee was emphatic that Jackson and the Chargers will work things out: “Vincent Jackson will be a Charger, and that’s the bottom line,” Acee said.

    If Jackson is a Charger, he’ll be a well-paid one. The Chargers franchised Jackson in February, and the franchise number for wide receivers this season is expected to be a salary of $11.3 million. That may be enough to make Jackson happy to spend another season in San Diego.
     
  24. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    Twitter

    Seems to backup KA's (bless his constantly-speculating little heart) stance from yesterday that sources close to VJ say that he'll play on the franchise tender if he has to.
     
  25. Savage Lizard

    Savage Lizard Charger fan at 7000'

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,853
    Ratings:
    +984
    Exactly! Jackson and his advisors were idiots, and no matter how much Denver hates A.J., that hasn't changed.
     
  26. Savage Lizard

    Savage Lizard Charger fan at 7000'

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,853
    Ratings:
    +984
    A.J. played within the CBA as it existed. It could be that the Chargers have never had any interest in signing Jackson long term and wanted to get one more bargain season out of him. Again, A.J. was within his rights under the CBA at the time. Just because Jackson, his agents (who get a cut of a renegotiated deal), and you think A.J. should do what the player wants, he's not required to.
     
  27. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    Maybe we'll just trade his ***. I wouldn't mind except we won't get equal value.
     
  28. Savage Lizard

    Savage Lizard Charger fan at 7000'

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,853
    Ratings:
    +984
    Well, in Manning's case it's simply that he's a Manning. His little brother pulled the same sh_t in 2004.
     
  29. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    Report: NFLPA* will recommend no special treatment for named plaintiffs
    Posted by Mike Florio on July 19, 2011, 11:34 PM EDT


    After a hectic day of reports that had its roots in an ominous item on Sunday from Ron Borges of the Boston Herald, Borges now shovels dirt onto the storm of something other than dirt (but also brown) that he kicked up when suggesting that Patriots guard Logan Mankins would seek free agency or compensation in exchanging for agreeing to settle his portion of the Brady antitrust lawsuit.

    Specifically, Borges reports that the NFLPA* has decided not to pursue special treatment for the named plaintiffs in the Brady case.

    “After some debate over possible special relief for at least some of the 10 player-plaintiffs, it was determined it would be too cumbersome to try and work out individual deals,” Borges writes. “Since the bulk of plaintiffs were well-placed NFL veterans, the best way to go, it was decided, was to stick simply with the larger deal negotiated between the NFLPA and the league’s owners.”

    The assertion comes after Borges, via Twitter, openly supported the ability of the 10 players to strike their own deal. Based on Borges’ latest, it’s a decision that actually has been made by the NFLPA* (a trade association that technically has no say in the matter), and not by the 10 named plaintiffs, who supposedly controlled the lawsuit.

    The development represents the most graceful possible abandonment of efforts by the NFLPA* to get special treatment for four or more of the named plaintiffs. Whether due to the backlash from the 1,890 players who were listed on the complaint or the flat refusal of the league to do anything for men who, for the most part, did nothing to advance the case or negotiate the settlement, the issue — the apparent brainchild of NFLPA* lawyer Jeffrey Kessler — is now dead.
     
  30. HollywoodLeo

    HollywoodLeo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    15,214
    Ratings:
    +2,423
    Oh Joy, another Vincent Jacks/AJ thread.

    We need this like we need a kick in the nuts.
     

Share This Page