Trader Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 If I was a RB who knew I was going to take the punishment of three weeks to start the season in the NFL I would want more money ASAP too. Exactly he is my favorite player on the Bills. He has done everything right came up from nothing has had great production.
The Dean Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I'm not picking sides here, but there have been a couple of comments on here about waiting his turn. But just as a point of order: If the Bills are so busy, then where did they find the time to renegotiate Marcus Stroud's contract? If people think Jackson needs to stand in line, how did Stroud jump to the front with two years left on his deal and three months until training camp? I don't think the Bills are too busy to get Jackson's deal done. Fact is, they don't have to do anything because he's an exclusive-rights player. Excellent point. Perhaps Stroud's deal was negotiated quickly, with Stroud accepting the Bills' first, or second offer, or the Bills accepting Stroud's reasonable counteroffer. One also should consider that Stroud is the starting DT, and the Bills aren't loaded with quality DTs. While I love Fred, and I think the Bills appreciate him, as well, he is a backup RB (yes, he will start a couple of games, at least) a position more easily filled than DT, it seems. Every negotiation is different, IMO.
Ramius Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 We also have no clue whats been offered. Perhaps the Bills lowballed Freddy with a 2 year 4 million dollar deal. But perhaps, Freddy wants 5 years and 25 mil. As for players seeing this and wanting to come to Buffalo, the Bills have shown they are more than willing to extend players that deserve it, like Evans, Stroud, Williams, etc.
VOR Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I'm not picking sides here, but there have been a couple of comments on here about waiting his turn. But just as a point of order: If the Bills are so busy, then where did they find the time to renegotiate Marcus Stroud's contract? If people think Jackson needs to stand in line, how did Stroud jump to the front with two years left on his deal and three months until training camp? I don't think the Bills are too busy to get Jackson's deal done. Fact is, they don't have to do anything because he's an exclusive-rights player. I don't think anyone believes that they don't have time, just that there are higher priority players and money issues. Stroud didn't receive a new deal when he was traded, so he was really #1 in line, or at least 1a or 1b to Peters' 1b or 1a.
Peter Griffin Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 As for players seeing this and wanting to come to Buffalo, the Bills have shown they are more than willing to extend players that deserve it, like Evans, Stroud, Williams, etc. You forgot to mention Schobel and Kelsay
zow2 Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I'm usually on the side of Management in these player/management squabbles....but I really gotta side with Freddie on this one. He's clearly proven himself to be a highly valuable player out of the backfield. The Bills have to keep this guy and reward him. I'd go so far to say that if it came down to Lynch or Jackson, I'd keep Fred. Yes- he has better character but his receiving ability and straight ahead run style is not such a downgrade from Lynch.
Jeffery Lester Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 Freddy deserves what ever he can get. But his agent needs to shut the F... up Buffalo hates negotiating through the media but on this one they will be smart and pay him. He destroys linebackers in the passing game and is Trents favorite target out of the backfield.
stuckincincy Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I'm usually on the side of Management in these player/management squabbles....but I really gotta side with Freddie on this one. He's clearly proven himself to be a highly valuable player out of the backfield. The Bills have to keep this guy and reward him. I'd go so far to say that if it came down to Lynch or Jackson, I'd keep Fred. Yes- he has better character but his receiving ability and straight ahead run style is not such a downgrade from Lynch. I agree, zow. I won't get into Jackson vs. Lynch, but Lynch will be sitting out some games. There's only 16 in the season so I think they'd be foolish not to work out something. Who knows the ins and outs of NFL contracts, but if there is concern about his age, couldn't they offer a fat signing bonus, some incentives, in a 1 or 2 year deal? Everybody likes cash up front...
Leonidas Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 Can you all just relax, please?? If I am not mistaken, Freddy has no choice but to sign the tender and show up for the season. Then next year we tender him for $2M and change, and other teams have the right to negotiate with him. If they choose to sign him we get a first round draft pick. What on earth is wrong with parlaying an UDFA into a 2010 first round draft pick?????? He deserves more money, yes, but you can pay him a $1-2M bonus this year on top of his current salary (after the rookie contracts are signed) and still not sign him long term in light of the rules on signing RFA's. It's not like this isn't being discussed, either... http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...4124&st=500
Virgil Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 No matter what happens now, Jackson's agent is making him look like a bit of an A-hole. I understand the argument, but to instigate these comments from another conversation is just dumb. I'm not a fan of how this is being handled by Jackson. Have the conversations with those who matter and stop trying to create an audience. Tacky
spartacus Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 No matter what happens now, Jackson's agent is making him look like a bit of an A-hole. I understand the argument, but to instigate these comments from another conversation is just dumb. I'm not a fan of how this is being handled by Jackson. Have the conversations with those who matter and stop trying to create an audience. Tacky disagree Jackson deserves more money, much more. the Bills are making it clear that they own Jackson and can (and will) force him to play for far under his market value. the signing of Rhodes pretty much was the final nail in the coffin his career is short It's in his best interest to get paid now looks like the only approach available will be to create a distraction and force the Bills to cut him loose so he can go to a team willing to pay market value. of course, the Bills will play hrdball and probably let him rot on the bench- and continue to wonder why good free agents don't sign with teh Bills
VOR Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 disagree Jackson deserves more money, much more. the Bills are making it clear that they own Jackson and can (and will) force him to play for far under his market value. the signing of Rhodes pretty much was the final nail in the coffin his career is short It's in his best interest to get paid now looks like the only approach available will be to create a distraction and force the Bills to cut him loose so he can go to a team willing to pay market value. of course, the Bills will play hrdball and probably let him rot on the bench- and continue to wonder why good free agents don't sign with teh Bills Life is unfair. Jackson will "only" make $450K to be a backup RB in the NFL, whereas a couple years earlier, he was looking at a fast food career. And the simple fact is that the Bills DO own Jackson. Moreover they saw how great extending a player early went with Peters. And really, players don't care how the Bills are treating Fred Jackson. No EFA gets more than the minimum tender, unless he's a superstar like Antonio Gates was after just 2 years.
spartacus Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Life is unfair. Jackson will "only" make $450K to be a backup RB in the NFL, whereas a couple years earlier, he was looking at a fast food career. And the simple fact is that the Bills DO own Jackson. Moreover they saw how great extending a player early went with Peters. And really, players don't care how the Bills are treating Fred Jackson. No EFA gets more than the minimum tender, unless he's a superstar like Antonio Gates was after just 2 years. sounds like Stew Barber is back running the Bills Successful organizations are successful because they don't treat their people like crap, just because they can tough to extend Fred when he doesn't have a contract -
thewildrabbit Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 disagree Jackson deserves more money, much more. the Bills are making it clear that they own Jackson and can (and will) force him to play for far under his market value. the signing of Rhodes pretty much was the final nail in the coffin his career is short It's in his best interest to get paid now looks like the only approach available will be to create a distraction and force the Bills to cut him loose so he can go to a team willing to pay market value. of course, the Bills will play hrdball and probably let him rot on the bench- and continue to wonder why good free agents don't sign with teh Bills I agree sorta...
Recommended Posts