Blog Entry

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Posted on: August 28, 2010 12:22 am
Edited on: August 28, 2010 10:30 am
  •  
 
Posted by Will Brinson

It's a question that has to be reasonably asked, particularly after news broke on Friday evening that Donnie Avery -- the closest thing St. Louis had to a No. 1 wideout -- will miss the entire 2010 season .

It's at least worth considering for a number of reasons. First of all, Jackson, for all his off-field issues, grew into a premiere wideout with Philip Rivers and could potentially do the same with Sam Bradford, if the Rams could justify spending upwards of $10 million a year on him.

The justification there is that you don't want to be forced into lobbing a $50 million investment onto the field with no one to throw to; and honestly, Bradford/Steven Jackson/V-Jax at least has the beginnings of a pretty formidable offensive core, especially if Roger Saffold and Jason Smith can develop.

Secondly, the Rams would at least seem like a team that the Chargers might be interested in talking trade with -- it's likely that their second-rounder (the reported pick needed to swap for Jackson) would be high-value enough to warrant making the swap, and it's hard to make a case for why San Diego wouldn't be willing to speak with St. Louis, who resides in the same division as Seattle, a team that DID get the opportunity to talk with Jackson's agent Neil Schwartz about a deal.

Jeff Gordon of STL Today makes a solid point too : new Rams' owner Stan Kroenke might be willing to pony up some cash on his new franchise. After all, if you have the equivalent of a really expensive Hyundai in his garage right now -- if you're gonna drop that kind of coin on a semi-decent-but-potentially-lame car, why not going ahead and throw some rims on that puppy?

Jackson, of course, will miss at least three games during the regular season, and that's kind of a nightmare. But no one's expecting the Rams to win the Super Bowl, much less contend in the NFC West, so in the long-term, those three games aren't dealbreakers, especially if you can leverage Jackson's issues into a contract with plenty of incentives.

With Jackson seeming quite willing to sit out the entire season in San Diego and lose a year towards free agency, there's no reason to think he'd be upset about having to take roughly 10 paces backwards in terms of pursuing a championship, particularly if it meant he got paid.

And yes, you can expect to read a "[NFL Team] should go after Vincent Jackson" piece every time someone loses their top wideout for the majority/all of the season. With Jackson's status, that's just how things are going to roll.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
  •  
Comments

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2012 11:38 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Ones own using the internet webpage will be observed inside the release aforetime known as to provide. Great personal information you discovered beneficial in the following. Likely to move merely subsequent to repeatedly.



Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2012 11:34 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Components particularly the a single one people defined in this article is usually such as special to my advice! I'm going to thread an internet site website to the almighty post on this internet. My corporation is confirmed my best homepage people will discover that may dramatically beneficial.



Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 17, 2011 9:28 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Your website is explained in a short Super Bowl Jerseys post up to now to travel. Ideal specifics you could in this case. I'm going to overlook for a second time.




Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 17, 2011 9:24 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Article sources including the an a person explained the following may very well be considerably employed to my eyes! I will start off suggest one of the links for this webpage in my little article. Read some of my individuals will recognize that essentially vital.



Since: Oct 3, 2006
Posted on: August 28, 2010 8:16 pm
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Rvrshark you are definitely right the Eagles and McNabb have not always had a big time WR.  I know we're going off topic from the whole Rams thing but I like talking and analyzing football so let me clarify a bit. Through his stretch with the Eagles, McNabb had a RB in Staley but mostly Westbrook who could not only run but catch the ball out of the backfield. He always had a playmaker threat.  From 2004 on Westbrook had 703, 616, 699, 771, 402 and none of those were 16 games.  Westbrook was a bigtime weapon and the skins have nothing even close to that with Portis, Parker, and Johnson.

There were a few guys that McNabb had that you didn't mention, obviously you said T.O. 2004, 1/2 2005, Reggie Brown 2005, 2006, 2007, Donte Stallworth 2006, Kevin Curtis 2007,  DeSean 2008, 2009 and TE's with Celek 2008, 2009, and Maclin 2009.

As good as McNabb is I'm afraid for him this year with the skins, I like him I hope he can make it through without getting killed and get to the Cardinals or some other team to finish out his career,  The skins line sucks, he's got no RB threat, and no matter what you think of his previous corps they were a hell of a lot better then what he's got now.

As good as McNabb is at making chicken salad even Jessica Simpson could figure out they don't even have chicken of the sea...  I can see McNabb coming out of this season with people saying he's finished and going to another team and having a hell of a year. 

The skins by far have the biggest need at WR and VJ would get them there....

And on the Vikings I hear ya that VJ might be too much but for SD it would be the best trade if they could swing it.  I agree he's a pain in the *** that's why I think SD should dump him.  On MN side they are going to be without Sidney for at least 6 weeks and hip surgery can be really tough to recover from.  But you are right I didn't get into the cap I was more looking on the SD side. 

I still didn't see anyone post anything that would convince me that it's worth it to get VJ instead of waiting on AJ Green or Julio Jones



Since: Aug 20, 2007
Posted on: August 28, 2010 4:08 pm
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Yes, the Rams should go for Vincent Jackson now. He is already good, and waiting until next year to grab a receiver when you will have the opportunity for one of those rookies to add on top of Vincent Jackson is not wise. Get someone who will not need a couple years to get up to the NFL speed. Wide receivers are not like running backs in that they take more time to develope. I think with a big target like V-Jax that will cut down on a few sacks that Bradford takes as well and give him a bit more confidence.

Also, maybe next year with V-Jax and Donnie Avery on the same team one of those early draft picks could be spent on an offensive lineman or perhaps an outstanding defensive player.



Since: Feb 25, 2009
Posted on: August 28, 2010 11:37 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

ha you make a good point. I had actually already forgotten about Fred EX



Since: Aug 26, 2009
Posted on: August 28, 2010 10:38 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

SImple......yes.



Since: Aug 17, 2008
Posted on: August 28, 2010 8:47 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

Why would they want Jackson? They have Denario Alexander now!



Since: Mar 17, 2007
Posted on: August 28, 2010 8:27 am
 

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

The problem with the Vikings scenarion (and they actually looked into trading for VJ) is the fact that they have to pay a player with a suspension and a repeat history of DUI's, 50M over 5 years with 30M guaranteed. Considering he's already serving a suspension, the next one would be 8-16 games with Goodell's crusade on repeat offenders. That's not a smart investment, especially for a cash strapped team like the Vikings. Another big hurdle is the fact that Sidney Rice has not yet been extended yet, as well as the fact that Bernard Berrian is already making an average of 7 million per year. The only way they could get Jackson to sign is if they a) caved to his ridiculous contract demands or b) gave him a 1 year offer worth significantly more than the 3m he's already making. The former isn't very prudent especially with the lack of revenue their stadium generates, combined with their uncertain future in MN. The latter isn't a very good option because giving a 1st or 2nd rounder for a 1 year deal on a player that starts the season suspended... well that one's pretty easy to understand now isnt it?

Then again this is just my take on it, as a Vikings fan I will admit that the thought of Rice, Berrian, Jackson and Harvin in a spread formation does sound appealing, if impractical.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com