Tag:Vincent Jackson
Posted on: September 3, 2010 2:20 pm

Chargers open to more teams in V-Jax trade?

Posted by Will Brinson

There's a little more than 24 hours remaining for Vincent Jackson to either sign a contract, get traded, or end up potentially missing the first six games of 2010.

And the Chargers have reportedly (and, um, finally) decided to allow other teams to talk to Jackson's camp about a trade, according to Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune , who cites a source saying the Chargers would be open to other teams pursuing their Pro Bowl wideout.

It makes sense for the Bolts to put Jackson on the full block, too. By doing so, they increase the pressure on Seattle (who's conveniently shopping T.J. Houshmandzadeh right now) to make a deal, lest someone else swoop in and grab Jackson.

And it gives teams who might have been interested a very small window with which to make a deal -- the greater the pressure, the more quickly a team might cave on its limits for what they'll give up in terms of compensation (to San Diego) and contract (to Jackson).

The latter part of that is interesting as well, since Acee also reports that Jackson would potentially be interested in a one-year, $7 million deal. And if he really wants to play this season, he'll have to be a little less demanding when discussing options with other teams. Otherwise he might just spend the year in street clothes.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow  @cbssportsnfl   on Twitter   and subscribe to our  RSS Feed .
Posted on: August 31, 2010 9:59 am

Hot Routes 8.31.10: No retractions here

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

Lawyers for Chargers WR Vincent Jackson are demanding a retraction from the San Diego Union-Tribune after publishing a story in which it claimed Jackson was receiving financial support from his agents while he’s not in training camp. Pro Football Talk has the story. I’ll refrain from saying anything more, because I certainly don’t want to receive any kind of correspondence from Jackson’s lawyers.

- Buccaneers starting QB Josh Freeman had the cast from his thumb removed , and Tampa Bay says he’s right on schedule to return for the season opener. When your backups are Josh Johnson and Rudy Carpenter, that’s a pretty good piece of news.

- Browns rookie RB Montario Hardesty finally will make his preseason debut Thursday, and to say his teammates are interested in seeing how he produces is a bit of an understatement. Though Jerome Harrison downplays it in this story, I’m sure he’s more interested than just about anybody.

- Former Bengals LB Rashad Jeanty, who was released by Cincinnati on Monday after failing a physical, is known as a good dude in the locker room and a great teammate. But man, his agents are pissed with the team’s training staff. This does not make Cincinnati’s trainers look very good, especially coming on the heels of the Antonio Bryant disaster.

- Before I read this story, I didn’t give credence to the thought that Vikings backup QB Tarvaris Jackson’s No. 2 job might be in jeopardy to Sage Rosenfels. Apparently, coach Brad Childress agrees. He says nothing most likely will change on his depth chart at the QB spot.

- Raiders QB Jason Campbell participated in Oakland’s walk-through on Monday and he performed the same drills as all other quarterbacks. Campbell suffered a “stinger” and a wrist injury during last Saturday’s game against San Francisco.

- Former Cardinals QB Kurt Warner is officially a member of the next season of “Dancing with the Stars.” I don’t think he’ll be the odds-on favorite to win the competition, though. After all, Jennifer Grey from “Dirty Dancing” also is competing.

-Packets OLB Brad Jones likely only will play in one preseason game because the shoulder he injured Aug. 19 still is giving him problems. But despite the fact he’s been fitted with a shoulder harness, he says he feels great about where he stands. In fact, he said his new piece of equipment makes him look a little like Robocop. And as we all know, Robocop was pretty badass.

- It’s a big day for former Ohio State star RB Maurice Clarett, as he’s signed with the UFL’s Omaha Nighthawks . The NFL dream lives on. Not bad for a guy who spent more than three years in prison.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: August 28, 2010 2:52 pm

V-Jax agent says they never demanded $50 million

Posted by Will Brinson

The biggest sticking point in the whole "where will Vincent Jackson play, if at all, this season?" situation is money. That's not surprising, because typically when NFL players aren't showing up to camp, that's why. Jackson appeared with Jason LaCanfora on an NFL Network interview last night and discussed his plans for the 2010 season, saying he would "absolutely" sit out the entire year .

The problem with Jackson's plans, in so far as everyone has understood it, is that he wants $50 million over five years and no one -- or, at least the Vikings and Seahawks, the only two teams who have supposedly inquired as to his price tag -- wants to pay it.

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk did something smart Saturday morning, though: he called Neil Schwartz and asked him about the deets on Jackson's demands. Turns out there's a little more than meets the eye.

"There's no truth to the report that we asked for $50 million over five years and $30 million guaranteed," Schwartz told PFT by phone this morning. "We only talked concepts with the Seahawks, and I specifically mentioned players like [Cowboys receiver] Roy Williams, [Bills receiver] Lee Evans, [Falcons receiver] Roddy White, who we represent, [Dolphins receiver] Brandon Marshall, and [Cardinals receiver] Larry Fitzgerald. No numbers were mentioned."

Now, it's really impossible to know if Schwartz is 100 percent telling the truth; someone told the Vikings and Seahawks that Jackson wanted $10 million a year (which, yes, as we've previously established, is way too much for a guy with off-field issues and potential baggage to demand).

But, as Florio notes, it's entirely possible that it was the Chargers who told the Vikings and Seahawks that Jackson's camp was looking for such a big contract. The logic there is that a) Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune was the one reporting the number, and his sources clearly lie more closely with one side than the other, and b) Schwartz never got permission to speak with the Vikings -- for Minny to find out that Jackson was "too expensive" for them, the information would have most likely come from the Chargers.

The long and short of this is that as much as Jackson may say he's willing to be a Charger this year, there's enough tension/anger/etc between the two sides that things might be irreconcilable.

That's why we're getting numerous PR-looking statements and interviews and actions from both sides. What would be nice is to see a team -- the Rams, perhaps? -- step up, make the Chargers an offer and then hammer out some kind of deal with Jackson. Of course, the fact that whoever is looking to acquire the disgruntled wideout has to negotiate with multiple sides only makes this harder to sift through.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS feed.
Posted on: August 28, 2010 10:29 am

Gilyard the guy to replace Avery?

Posted by Will Brinson

My man crush on Mardy Gilyard has been quite apparent -- it stems, quite stupidly, from his ridiculous talent on Madden '11 . Oh yes, and all the even more ridiculous things he did while at Cincinnati. Either way, though, I've felt like, since the Rams drafted him, that he could be a sleeper to have a big rookie season on a team that'll be chunking the ball a lot.

Turns out, with Donnie Avery now out for the entire 2010 season , he'll get his chance. That's according to Howard Balzer who says that Gilyard has "the chance to show he's more than just a slot receiver."

Laurent Robinson is probably the only other guy who could provide a "No. 1 wide reciever" presence for the Rams, and with he and Gilyard it's really more in the sense of having a warm body there than it is having a legitimate No. 1 wide receiver.

It's why at least gambling on Vincent Jackson -- or seeing if the Chargers are willing to let the Rams gamble on V-Jax anyway -- makes a little bit of sense for the Rams .

Unless they think -- and are correct -- that Gilyard (or Robinson) can be "the guy," in which case the Rams might still be able to exceed the (somehow even lower than they were two days ago) expectations that people have for them in 2010.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: August 28, 2010 12:22 am
Edited on: August 28, 2010 10:30 am

Should Rams target Vincent Jackson?

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 .
Posted on: August 27, 2010 7:50 pm
Edited on: August 27, 2010 7:55 pm

V-Jax on sitting out the season: 'Absolutely.'

Posted by Will Brinson

Vincent Jackson's situation with the San Diego Chargers has grown increasingly awkward as the offseason progressed: the latest development had his agent Neil Schwartz insinuating that the Chargers don't seem inclined to trade him to anyone but the Seahawks, who don't seem inclined to pay Jackson what he wants .

In a sit-down interview with Jason LaCanfora for NFL Network (which LaCanfora mentioned on his Twitter account), Jackson said he would "absolutely" sit out the entire season if necessary. LaCanfora, in a teaser for the full interview on Total Access, asked Jackson what his options would be if the Chargers won't trade him or give him "fair market compensation."

"We're prepared [to sit out the season]," Jackson said. "I've been financially smart, taking care of things like that off the field so I'm ready for the long haul. But again, I miss football. I want to play football, I'm passionate about the game and I wouldn't be training and working as hard as I am if I didn't want to be on the field. So I'm hoping everything works out, but again, I don't hold my breath for anything -- I'm ready for whatever."

Remember, Jackson is going to miss at least three games because of his off-field incidents, and up to six if he doesn't

Asked if he could "see himself in a Chargers uniform in 2010" Jackson seemed, ahem, cautiously optimistic.

"Of course, you know, they have my rights," Jackson said. "That's where I'm still, kind of legally bound right now, and I have no problem putting on that jersey again."

Jackson also discussed his teammates, stating that he's been in contact with multiple players such as Philip Rivers and Antonio Gates and "all the guys have been very supportive." Jackson also added that he wasn't offended by Rivers' statement about the team moving on, pointing out that Rivers "has to get guys going in the right direction and make sure the team's not worried about who's not there."

However, he said there has been "no direct contact [with the front office] since the end of last season" and that he's "not even sure" if they want to trade him. Jackson told LaCanfora that there's been no attempt by San Diego to offer him any sort of long-term deal and when said he'd never asked for a trade.

"I have not," Jackson said. "Because that's not really my job -- my job is to play football. I've always been told you just take care of stuff on the football field and the rest will take care of itself. I belong [in San Diego], I think it's a good fit for us, but the league is a fly-by-night kind of thing and I'm ready to go wherever fits best."

Jackson offered "no excuse" for his second DUI and said he "made a poor choice" and that he could guarantee to another general manager that there would be "no off-the-field issues" with him in the future.

Given Jackson's demeanor and statements, it seems pretty safe to say that Jackson, if he's not bluffing about the "absolutely" thing, might not see the football field during 2010.

After all, it certainly appears that GM A.J. Smith doesn't intend to cave and give Jackson a long-term deal any time soon.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS feed.
Posted on: August 25, 2010 9:17 pm

Agent questions Bolts intentions to deal V-Jax

Posted by Will Brinson

We recently threw out the possibility of the Minnesota Vikings pursuing Vincent Jackson in a trade, following Sidney Rice's surgery on his hip. One of the problems, though, was that Jackson's contract demands were probably going to be too high. In fact, that ended up being the chief deterrent to Minnesota chasing him in a deal with San Diego.

Well, maybe.

Turns out, according to Jackson's agent Neil Schwartz, as related to Jason LaCanfora of NFL.com , the Vikings couldn't even get in the door when it came time to talk trade. Apparently, the only team the Chargers decided to let talk with Schwartz were the Seahawks.

"After the initial story came out, I got calls from four or five other teams asking about Vincent," Schwartz said, "but I told them I didn't have permission to talk to them about that player and they had to call San Diego."

According to LaCanfora, Schwartz, following the Vikes' decision to ink Javon Walker, went to the Chargers VP Ed McGuire and asked for

"I asked for that list of teams, but he wouldn't tell me," Schwartz said. "So I asked him, 'What are you guys asking for a trade?' And he said, 'I'm not telling you.'

"At that point, I said, 'Ed. It doesn't sound like you guys want to trade Vincent.'"

And that's where we stand now -- except things could get hairier if the Chargers don't find a new home for Jackson by September 4, because at that point he'd be subject to the roster exempt list (along with Marcus McNeil), in which case he'd miss the first six games of the season; three for his suspension and three for the roster-exempt status.

So sayeth the NFL -- the NFLPA on the other hand, according to LaCanfora and Schwartz, don't agree. Which means we could see some sort of arbitration coming, not to mention a larger void in an already fractured relationship.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: August 25, 2010 10:32 am

Minnesota deems V. Jackson too expensive

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

Our own Will Brinson had a pretty good idea Tuesday when he wondered if the Vikings – facing the loss of WR Sidney Rice for at least half the season because of hip surgery and WR Percy Harvin for the time being because of migraines – would try to acquire disgruntled San Diego WR Vincent Jackson.

Turns out that was a move actually discussed.

The Vikings apparently looked into the possibility of trying to trade for and sign Jackson – he’s got to be a better option than Javon Walker, right? – but Minnesota ran into the same problem that the Seahawks found when they asked permission to talk to Jackson. It would cost way too much money.

Here’s some analysis from Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune.

Acee writes, “several league sources said in recent days that no one is willing to promise $10 million a year to a player with Jackson’s baggage and inexperience. Jackson has led the NFL in yards per catch over the past two seasons, but two seasons is a relatively small body of work to deserve such a mega contract. Moreover, Jackson has been arrested twice for driving under the influence, something that led to him being suspended the first three games this season.”

Jackson, you’ll recall, declined to sign his restricted free agent tender offer of more than $3 million from San Diego and seems committed to sitting out much of the season. Coming off his best season as a pro (68 catches, 1,167 yards and nine TDs), he’s still only made one Pro Bowl in his four-year career. If he wants a five-year, $50 million deal (with $30 million guaranteed), he’s going to have to wait.

Nobody is going to pay that kind of money for a guy who still has plenty of question marks attached to his name.

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

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