Beerball Posted September 22, 2011 Author Posted September 22, 2011 I get what you are saying. And maybe the Bills will do that...i doubt it, and so do you(i bet). What happens if you give Freddy some huge contract now? I do doubt it. I don't think that a 'huge' deal is needed. Give the man a decent bump, make him happy. Show him that you appreciate what he has done.
major Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 Pay Johnson, Pay Spiller, Pay Fitz. End of story.
QB Bills Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 They could pay him 20 million a year and still be under the cap. They should give him 5-6 million a year for the next two years. I'd say even then he'd be underpaid.
Ozymandius Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 It's not like Jackson called a press conference or something to voice his annoyance. He answered a reporter's question. And in the same article he did say this: "I'm going to play football," he said. "I come to help this team and get wins. And that's what I'm going to continue to do." He's a great teammate by all accounts and will continue to be so. But he's in an unfair situation and has a right to speak his mind about it, especially when asked directly.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I'm sure it's helpful that reporters are constantly asking him "Hey Fred, still no new contract?"
NewEra Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 <br />You're looking at this rationally. What you want an 'old for a RB' player to do is wait. Wait through 14 more games. Wait through 20+ touches per game. Wait through many other plays where he's called on to block. Wait until he gets injured. Wait while Williams is extended. Wait while Fitzpatrick is potentially extended. Wait while Johnson is potentially extended. Wait while he's risking his livlihood every time he steps on the field. Wait because his last agent was a putz and got taken by the Bills. <br /><br />You want the most important player in terms of effort & ability on this team to wait and you want him to be happy (or at least silent)about it.<br /><br />I know it goes against the grain and I never thought I'd say this about ANY player. Fred Jackson deserves to be extended because of what he has already accomplished as much or more than what he has yet to accomplish. To my mind he is that important to the team (past, present, future).<br /><br />Some decisions deserve to be made for more than business reasons.<br />. Exactly!!! Well put.
BillsVet Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) IIRC, FJ fired his agent not long ago and this isn't the first time he's expressed disappointment in his latest deal. 7.5M for 4 seasons is modest, but I can't see the team putting him ahead of Fitzpatrick or Stevie Johnson. He's got a lot less wear and tear than most 30 year old backs, but giving extensions 2 years into a 4 year deal on a team friendly contract probably (EDIT: won't happen). He'll need to wait his turn. Edited September 22, 2011 by BillsVet
Kelly the Dog Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 IIRC, FJ fired his agent not long ago and this isn't the first time he's expressed disappointment in his latest deal. 7.5M for 4 seasons is modest, but I can't see the team putting him ahead of Fitzpatrick or Stevie Johnson. He's got a lot less wear and tear than most 30 year old backs, but giving extensions 2 years into a 4 year deal on a team friendly contract probably don't help. He'll need to wait his turn. So he waits 2 years until his contract is up and the Bills say, "What? You're a 32 year old back!" Rip up the last two years on his contract. Give him a three year, 15-16 million dollar deal, with 8-10 of it guaranteed. It would be only one year longer than he has now. It would give him some security. It would send the right message to the team and league. And if he is still valuable at 32, give him a final back-up's contract like LT is getting with the Jets while Spiller is in his prime.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 So he waits 2 years until his contract is up and the Bills say, "What? You're a 32 year old back!" Rip up the last two years on his contract. Give him a three year, 15-16 million dollar deal, with 8-10 of it guaranteed. It would be only one year longer than he has now. It would give him some security. It would send the right message to the team and league. And if he is still valuable at 32, give him a final back-up's contract like LT is getting with the Jets while Spiller is in his prime. You know full well that the NFL is a business. This isn't a feel good exercise and owners aren't usually prone to paying players (who are currently under contract) more money because the fans happen to like him. Is there any precedent for a feel good raise in the NFL?
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 You know full well that the NFL is a business. This isn't a feel good exercise and owners aren't usually prone to paying players (who are currently under contract) more money because the fans happen to like him. Is there any precedent for a feel good raise in the NFL? So Chris Kelsay's 5-year $28.2 million extension which is less than one year old… how do you explain that?
Dorkington Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 He's actually a year and a half younger than Kelsay, whom they just extended thru 2014. At least pay the man Kelsay-type $$$, Ralph, ya cheap foook. I think he should be paid. I just don't expect it to happen.
Wayne Cubed Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 So he waits 2 years until his contract is up and the Bills say, "What? You're a 32 year old back!" Rip up the last two years on his contract. Give him a three year, 15-16 million dollar deal, with 8-10 of it guaranteed. It would be only one year longer than he has now. It would give him some security. It would send the right message to the team and league. And if he is still valuable at 32, give him a final back-up's contract like LT is getting with the Jets while Spiller is in his prime. I agree with this. That being said it's a matter of the Bills getting their ducks in a row. Fitz or Johnson have to come first as far as figuring out their deals. They are both on low paying contracts and theirs are actually up at the end of the year. When they have that sorted, I completely agree with re-negotiating Freddies contract, of which, he has obviously out played. I think Fred and his agent need to understand this.
T master Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 Maybe he should have played out his first contract to become a free agent. He doesn't have any leverage, 30 with 2 years left. I'll bet you if he faked an injury for 2 games & watched the production go down they might take notice a bit quicker . But that's not Fred i don't think he would do that kind of thing he has to much character to do something like that . What will happen though is the Bills will piss him off & he will do what Poz did the first good offer put on the table he'll be gone & loving it while he shreads his old defensive buddies . JUST DO IT ---- PAY THE MAN - HE DESERVES IT !!!!!!!
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) I agree with this. That being said it's a matter of the Bills getting their ducks in a row. Fitz or Johnson have to come first as far as figuring out their deals. They are both on low paying contracts and theirs are actually up at the end of the year. When they have that sorted, I completely agree with re-negotiating Freddies contract, of which, he has obviously out played. I think Fred and his agent need to understand this. Thank you, Wayne. We're actually getting somewhere. It's not clear what message Fred and his agent got from the Bills. There are 3 possible scenarios: 1) The Bills told Jackson that Fitz and Stevie come first and that when they are extended, that he's next in line. IF this is the case, then the Bills have some ground to stand on. 2) The Bills gave Fred a flat out NO. IF so, Jackson has legit reason for being angry/annoyed. 3) The 3rd (but much more remote) possibility is that the Bills lowballed Jackson. Edited September 22, 2011 by San Jose Bills Fan
HalftimeAdjustment Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 Thank you, Wayne. We're actually getting somewhere. It's not clear what message Fred and his agent got from the Bills. There are 3 possible scenarios: 1) The Bills told Jackson that Fitz and Stevie come first and that when they are extended, that he's next in line. IF this is the case, then the Bills have some ground to stand on. 2) The Bills gave Fred a flat out NO. IF so, Jackson has legit reason for being angry/annoyed. 3) The 3rd (but much more remote) possibility is that the Bills lowballed Jackson. It is probably scenario 2 right now, but at the end of the year they might entertain a new, 2-3 year deal. Unfortunately if he gets injured before that he will be out of luck. At that point he should request to be cut or traded. It makes me sad, because he basically got burned by the RFA rules. I am glad you pointed out in this thread that Jackson was a restricted free agent when he signed the current deal. His choices were to play for 1 year at $460K, take this deal (presumably the best offer he received from the Bills), or retire from the NFL. Since then he has exceeded his contract. But, it is rare (not unprecedented) for the team to extend with 2 years left. Especially a 30yr old RB. It's just a bad situation all around. I definitely think they need to handle any players who are expiring at end of 2011 first, regardless.
artmalibu Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 hes top 5 right now. i think that's leverage if you ask me. So, he is under contract till age 32, after that do you think he will be able to demand any amount of money? Maybe he can hold out, and make even less money.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 It is probably scenario 2 right now, but at the end of the year they might entertain a new, 2-3 year deal. Unfortunately if he gets injured before that he will be out of luck. At that point he should request to be cut or traded. It makes me sad, because he basically got burned by the RFA rules. I am glad you pointed out in this thread that Jackson was a restricted free agent when he signed the current deal. His choices were to play for 1 year at $460K, take this deal (presumably the best offer he received from the Bills), or retire from the NFL. Since then he has exceeded his contract. But, it is rare (not unprecedented) for the team to extend with 2 years left. Especially a 30yr old RB. It's just a bad situation all around. I definitely think they need to handle any players who are expiring at end of 2011 first, regardless. Great post in a topic which needed one. It was either The Senator or KTFABD who pointed out the RFA situation. "Unfortunate" and "bad situation all around" are apt descriptions for this situation… except for the fact that the Bills can still do the right thing. They are after all, $32 million under the cap.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 So Chris Kelsay's 5-year $28.2 million extension which is less than one year old… how do you explain that? I can't, for the life of me I can't...........
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I can't, for the life of me I can't........... It is a mystery. Mike, in your earlier post you referred to giving Fred more money as a "feel good raise." While giving Freddy a raise would certainly make a lot of people feel good, I don't like the characterization. I would refer to it as a "merit-based raise." Fred's outperformed the contract by a very wide margin. To me this is about fairness and respect.
White Linen Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 First of all TT, thanks for not taking my obvious annoyance and adding to it… I got a bit heated and appreciate you making a civil and calm response. Fred is my favorite Bills player and the ONE issue I still have with this team is that the triumvirate of Ralph, Littman, and Overdorf in my opinion, cannot be trusted to do the right thing. I'm glad that Nix and Gailey are running the personnel side but very concerned that the same people are making the financial decisions. As for your timing argument, I would rewind to Beerball's comments. Most football players have short careers. You say wait till the end of the season. That's 14 games. What percentage of Jackson's career do you think 14 games amounts to? This is not hockey, basketball, or baseball. We're talking about gladiators with very limited careers. I would say that 14 games is virtually one whole season and I don't think he should wait one whole season to make a request in his pay. You mention Kelsay as getting an extension and imply that maybe Jackson would get one if he just played the "good soldier." You must have missed Fred's comments in JW's article which expresses frustration that his agent approached the Bills (I think you're very misguided if you think the "good boy" act will yield Freddy any results): "We've approached them, and it's not gone the way we would've liked it to," Jackson told The Associated Press prior to practice Wednesday. "I'm annoyed by it. I've been playing at a high level for three straight years now. I would like something to be done about it this year. I want something done that's fair for myself and the team." SJBF I didn't think you were being heated at all, you're just an obviously passionate fan that loves Jackson. An honest debate is all we're having. But I'll submit we agree more than disagree on the entire topic. I'll also say you've said a mouthful about several topics in your response, some of which I think are unrelated. First off you've picked a good one to be your favorite player. I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think he's the best decision making RB the Bills have ever had. Second make no mistake about one thing. Buddy Nix is running this organization. Since Buddy Nix took over (remember just one full off season and one shortened one), finances haven't been an issue in regards to Buddy's ability to make this team better. And he's done a spectacular job. Just one example is Middle LB. Could you imagine if we signed Dansby or Poz for 8+ million and didn't have Barnett? And what the implications of having a contract like that on our hands would handcuff this team? So far Buddy has been true to his word. He said they will keep the good players already on this team, won't overpay for FA's, and will develop through the draft. Freddie, Fitz, and Johnson will be taken care of and shored up long term. Now back to the timing issue. This is where you and I disagree. Obviously for me it's a bigger issue. First off I don't think Nix gives a damn that he went public with his annoyance, so in that regard it's not going to help him one bit. Fred isn't getting a new contract during the season, so I guess he'll have to live with the 14 additional games added to his career life. So for me Good Soldier - Bad Soldier doesn't matter in respect to getting the contract. I just merely stated he didn't act like a "Good Soldier". Teams always want the new contract to take effect the following year. He's a captain and I don't think he acted like one. Would you be ok if Fitz did the same thing? He's in a similar situation. I'd be appalled.
Recommended Posts