Tag:Neil Schwartz
Posted on: September 18, 2010 2:41 pm
Edited on: September 18, 2010 2:42 pm

Childress no comments possible V-Jax trade

Posted by Will Brinson

It's just kind of presumed that the Minnesota Vikings are interested in trading for Vincent Jackson, who, if dealt by Wednesday, would be eligible to play in their fifth game. (Also interested/rumored to be interested are the Seahawks, Redskins and Rams, for what it's worth.)

But just because it seems obvious that the Vikes would want Jackson on their squad to help make up for the injured Sidney Rice and the migrained Percy Harvin doesn't mean coach Brad Childress is going to admit it -- according to Jeremy Fowler of the Pioneer-Press , Chilly "deflected" questions about Jackson during his presser on Friday.

"He's really not a guy I'm able to speak about for the fact that he's their property," Childress said. "I wouldn't get into any speculation about anybody on anybody else's roster."

What's the old adage? Where there's a funny looking bald dude desperately trying to blow out the smoke there's generally fire?

Whatever, it seems pretty safe to say that if Childress is refusing to speculate on Minnesota's interest in Jackson (he wouldn't discuss whether or not they'd asked the Chargers for permission to discuss a trade) that there is in fact some interest there. Otherwise he'd just say "No."

The problem still remains, however, that if the Chargers don't want to trade him -- and that seems like a very real possibility; they could end up spitefully holding the Jackson and trying to land a third-rounder in compensation for him leaving -- it doesn't matter who wants him, because he won't go anywhere. And that's a very real possibility.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: September 16, 2010 1:10 pm
Edited on: September 16, 2010 1:45 pm

Report: Vincent Jackson suspension reduced to 4

Posted by Will Brinson

Vincent Jackson's hotly debated suspension (he's locked into three games for a DUI, the roster exempt suspension could cost him an additional three games) is gathering even more discussion according to a report today that the NFL and the NFLPA are negotiating a deal that could allow Jackson to only miss either four or five games if he's traded by the San Diego Chargers.

Adam Schefter reports on Twitter that the two sides are "engaged in settlement talks" to reduce the suspension if the wide receiver is traded. The reduction is key, of course, because Jackson becomes substantially less trade-able if he misses five games (especially to a team like the Minnesota Vikings, who could have Sidney Rice back as early as Week 6) versus four.

Edit/Update: Multiple reports from Jason Cole at Yahoo! Sports and Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune indicate that the NFL and the NFLPA reached a settlement on this issue and Jackson will be able to play, if he's traded to another team, in that new team's fifth game. Meaning: the suspension has been reduced to four games, provided he's dealt.

It would appear then, that the NFLPA didn't believe it would emerge victorious from the hearing with a full nullification of the additional three-gamer. Otherwise, they wouldn't likely be seeking any sort of settlement.

Once a settlement is reached and the full extent of Jackson's suspension is known, you can expect wide receiver needy teams to reach out to the Chargers and try to figure out what it is they want in return for the disgruntled wideout.

Prior to Jackson's additional suspension kicking in, a unnamed team had reached a contract extension with Jackson's camp, but the offer in return to San Diego wasn't enough to entice them to trade him. Presumably, the value in Jackson, with an additional game or two that he'll miss, will go down.

But expecting Bolts' GM A.J. Smith to let V-Jax and his camp get out of this happy and without the Chargers being satisfied with their compensation is silly given the way he's behaved thus far in negotiations .

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: September 10, 2010 2:19 am

Report: V-Jax has hearing set for Sept 16

Posted by Will Brinson

The biggest obstacle for Vincent Jackson to play football in 2010 is the potential for him to miss an additional three games on top of his suspension. (Actually, the Chargers just not wanting to trade him might be the biggest obstacle, but we can't necessarily know they're trying to hose him on that.)

That obstacle may or may not be removed come September 16, when Jackson's issue with his suspension, according to a report from Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk , will be resolved via a hearing in front of Special Master Stephen Burbank.

The hearing will determine whether Jackson's three-game suspension for being placed on the roster exempt list can carry over when/if he's traded; the NFL believes it does, while the NFLPA does not.

Although it may not even really matter -- the Chargers had an opportunity to trade Jackson before the six-game suspension went into effect, and apparently didn't feel they were receiving enough compensation, so they declined to the pull the trigger.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
Posted on: September 6, 2010 10:58 pm

V-Jax agents claim Bolts 'asking for too much'

Posted by Will Brinson

Apparently, Vincent Jackson's agents, Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod, reached a deal with an NFL team other than the San Diego Chargers on a contract.

Problem is, according to Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune , the Chargers and that unnamed team couldn't reach a deal that satisfied what the Bolts wanted in exchange for their Pro Bowl wideout.

“The reason the deal didn’t happen was because the Chargers were asking for too much,” Feinsod said.

Schwartz added that "We have no idea" what the Chargers wanted from the other team.

“From what they told us, they and the Chargers could not work out the trade,” Schwartz said.

Schwartz and Feinsod wouldn't confirm that the deal in place was a one-year, $7 million deal, but it doesn't really matter -- Jackson, because the Chargers weren't satisfied with their return for Jackson, decided to hold off on doing the deal before a Saturday deadline that would have made sure he was ineligible for "just" three games.

Now any team that wanted to make a play for Jackson would need to get some sort of assurance that he's not going to miss the next three. That, of course, assumes the Chargers are even willing to discuss dealing him.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .
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 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 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 .
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com