• March 28, 2024

Kolb Not Surprised By Jackson’s Absence: “I had an inclination”

The New York Giants were the focus of the yesterday’s practice for the Birds and they had to get their work done without both DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin in attendance.

Jackson wasn’t there for the second day in a row because he’s got more important things to do like hang out with friends in Atlanta and Los Angeles.¬† Maclin had a problem with his hamstring, so the Eagles trainer shut him down from doing any work with first team offense.

According to ESPN, Kolb wasn’t shocked that Jackson didn’t show up. He told ESPN’s Matt Moseley, “I had an inclination”. Kolb went on to say that he believed Jackson had a good explanation for not being there.

If he had a good explanation he didn’t bother telling the Eagles because they had no idea why he wasn’t there when he didn’t show up on Monday.¬† I asked them and they were just as surprised as I was that he wasn’t there.

This means Jackson is making a statement with his absence and that he has been talking about this issue or making a point to let the guys know he’s not happy.¬† It’s not the kind of problem you want festering with the best player on a young team. This should be taken care of or it’s going to become a problem.

We all know Jackson has been battling his “inner T.O.” and resisting the urge of going off publicly about his contract.¬† He is capable of being a problem but he hasn’t said anything negative in order to give the Eagles a chance to straighten things out.

They should give the speedy wide receiver at least a $10 million dollar bonus in the same way they guaranteed Kevin Kolb $12 million dollars in the next two years for being named the starting quarterback.

Jackson would be a fool to listen to all the excuses from the Eagles about why they can’t give him some money.¬† Obviously they’re telling him that he’s not as important as Kolb.

The truth is that both of them are extremely important to this football team.¬† Imagine being Jackson, one of the most explosive players in the league, who made the Pro Bowl at two positions, yet he’s making less money than nearly every other decent receiver in the league.

Players talk, so you know nearly every guy he’s hanging out with in Atlanta and L.A. are making so much more money than he is, that they make him feel like he’s totally broke.¬† This is going to be a problem.

Jackson is a little guy who could see his career threatened with any type of leg injury because he wouldn’t be worth a dime without his speed.¬† I think the Eagles are creating a problem by not straightening this thing out right now.

Back to the practice, Maclin did get some work on the side, but Jason Avant took over for Jackson at the flanker position and Hank Baskett took Maclin’s place at split end.¬† It’s not the same team without all that speed which the two young receivers bring.

Avant and Baskett will catch almost anything thrown their way but they’re limited when it comes to running away from defenders and opening up area underneath for the tight ends and running backs.

They were also working rookie Riley Cooper in there during the plays.¬† This kid is going to play if he continues to get open and catch the football the way he’s been doing.

As far as I’m concerned, the five wide receivers are in place with Jackson, Maclin, Avant, Baskett and Cooper.¬† I had originally thought one of the other youngsters might have a chance but it’s a done deal.

Kolb has gotten in a groove since the earlier practices and nearly everyday he’s throwing the ball well.¬† This guy is a rhythm passer and when he gets in his rhythm he’s normally on the money.

Michael Vick has also made great progress and said after practice that he knows he can step in for Kolb and the offense won’t miss a beat.¬† Again Vick talked about being patient and that he expects to start again in this league in the future.

Young linebacker Moise Fokou joked with Vick as he was walking through the hall to the locker room, “There was a sniper in the bushes”.¬† Vick didn’t get it at first until Fokou talked about how Vick had fell to the ground loike he had been shot after he took the snap in the Eagles “wildcat” formation.

They had a good laugh and continued walking toward the locker room

GCOBB

Read Previous

Leighton to start Game 6

Read Next

Allen, Graham And Eagles Young Defensive Players Coming Along Fine

0 0 votes
Article Rating
100 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 4:34 am

Gotta return to my old post:

The players should get their fair share of the NFL money pie. There would be no game without them, and the price they pay is incredible. The players are pushed to their absolute limits to play the “game.”

Corey Stringer died of heat exhaustion during training camp. His death is a rare occurrence, but his teammates were exposed to those same conditions, along with every other player in an NFL camp. Mind you, his death didn’t occur while “playing the game.” It happened while “preparing” to play the game.

If I made 100K and my co-workers earned $3 million, I would be very unhappy. DeSean Jackson will earn $470,000 this year, while Larry Fitzgerald earned more than $17 million in 2008. That’s roughly 65% more than Jackson’s salary. Adding insult to injury, Jeffrey Lurie will earn substantially more. Lurie has become a billionaire since taking over the franchise, yet he “penny pinches” on contracts. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with capitalism. It’s the American way. Doctors, lawyers, entertainers and other professions command top dollar, but they aren’t exposed to the pain, suffering and injuries of NFL players.

One can be employed as a doctor/lawyer for as long 50-60 years, but the average career of an NFL player is probably 5-6 years.

Football in the NFL is a business, and playing ‚Äúthe game‚Äù is a miniscule part of the work. In fact, one could say that playing the games is the payoff after the work. Preparing to play an NFL season is a year-around commitment. It’s much more than a 9-5 job.

Michael Strahan was asked about how injuries affect his everyday life, post-retirement. He spoke of the pain in his hands from having dislocated each finger multiple times. He said that whenever a finger popped out of its joint, he popped it back in and continued to play. It hurt like hell, but his teammates would have laughed him out of the locker room had he come out of the game for “a finger.” A dislocated finger isn’t even considered an injury in the NFL.

The sports hernia that McNabb suffered is excruciatingly painful. Of course, that never stopped Reid from dialing up pass after pass. What choice did he have with no running game?

I can’t even begin to imagine playing on a broken ankle. This is no ordinary game, nor is it an ordinary job. That’s why so few people can play.

Jackson excels, has a short shelf life, is grossly underpaid and could lose it all at any time. In fact, he could lose it while working out in shorts. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to weigh the risk/reward and decide to take a stand, especially when you consider that the owners are making money by the truckload.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 4:35 am

G, you’ve made your point clearly. But there are two big flaws in it. First – you’re comparing Kolb and Jackosn’s contract situations – one got a contract extension – added a year to his deal, and more money. The other hasn’t gotten anything. But Kolb didn’t just get more money – he would have been playing in the last year of this contract – not the case for Jackson. You’re comparing apples and oranges here. Jackson is under contract past the wierd/chaotic unknown of the CBA situation next year. Kolb, who now is the clear starting QB for the team, was going to be playing in the last year of his contract. You don’t start a guy’s tenure as a Franchise QB hopeful with only the current year on his contract. Jackson has a deal. Do you really think that if the CBA/labor deal /unknown situation for next season didn’t exist that things would be the same? I doubt it.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 4:41 am

The second issue is Dax’s absence – isn’t it (timing wise) identical to Asante Samuel? With Asante, the consensus is – he views himself as a star player who doesn’t need the practice time/is good enough that these voluntary camps are really kinda a small deal either way. Jackson also thinks of himself as a star who doesn’t really need these (mostly educational) reps – am I wrong there? Maybe he is ‘making a statement’ by not being there this week, but if so, you are ASSUMING that you know what that statement is. It might be the same statement as Samuel – ‘I’m a star, this camp is to teach the rooks and non-stars, and it’s not a big deal for me, plus they’re voluntary’. IF jackson was trying to send the message that he’s unhappy with the deal to the point that he’s going to be disruptive, why was he here for the whole OTAs until this week? If you’re cutting class to rebel, you don’t just skip fridays. You’re making assumptions Garry, and comparing ‘apples to oranges’. I agree that he should get more money eventually, but this is a unique time financially and contractually/labor wise in the league. And once it passes, he’ll get his extension with big money. You’re injury risk point is valid, he’s small indeed, but that doesn’t wipe out the fact that he’s not in the last year of his contract.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 4:56 am

Drummer, I agree that football take a horrible toll on the players health and shortens life span and quality of life. I think an ethical argument about the sacrifice we expect from these men is necessary and important. I think concussion research and policy reevaluation is equally VITAL. Everyone agrees Jackson is underpaid based on his relative value in the game. He’ll get his pay raise – a huge one – either A) whenever/however the CBA issue is resolved, or B) when he gets his natural contract extension, closer to when his current deal is to expire. But there is no evidence, just speculative assumptions, that his current absence is related to his contract or that he or his agent think it’s worthwhile to try to get more money now.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:04 am

Jackson won’t get anything if he’s injured.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:04 am

Drummer, in the meantime, Jackson does make more significantly more money compared to the time he is at work than people who don’t have the physical toll/violent dangerous risks at their places of work. He may not get paid like a superstar wide receiver, but he does get paid like a football player. Jason Avant takes more hits than DJax, Celek does too. But you’re not complaining that they don’t make a lot of money are you? And also, Strayhan and Jackson are completely different types of players (WR v DL). The long term effects are significantly different for lineman than WRs.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:11 am

Schill, you said everyone agrees that Jackson is underpaid. Does everyone further agree that his career could end at any time?

If I were a 165-lb. athlete playing in a sport where most weigh between 200-350 lbs., I’d doing everything within my power to get paid immediately. There are no guarantees in this business.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:12 am

Drummer – Same goes for – i’m not going to calculate the total of NFL football players right now – what’s different about Jackson? He’s really great at football (no argument there)? Doesn’t that mean he’s getting more money in jersey sales and endorsements than all those others who, also, won’t get jack if they’re injured?

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:14 am

Jackson doesn’t make any money on his Jersey. None of the players do. That’s where the NFL makes big money and the players don’t get a dime.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:17 am

Drummer, he is getting paid immediately, he has a paycheck. Why aren’t you making the same argument for Chad Hall? Why not for Moise Fokou who will be involved in way more contact than Jackson this year?

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:18 am

The deck is stacked against the players. That’s the crux of my argument. The players make very, very little compared to the owners.

The teams share merchandising revenue with each other. A few years ago, however, Jerry Jones and Jeffrey Lurie, among some others, wanted to stop sharing that money. Their teams sold the most jerseys and they wanted to discontinue the long-standing revenue sharing upon which the league was built. In fact, I’d go as far as saying that one of the primary reasons for the NFL’s success is it’s revenue sharing. But these greedy owners, can’t get enough.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:18 am

Those players aren’t Eagles.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:19 am

I care about our locker room being happy.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:21 am

Yes, he’s getting a check. Again, if I were making 100K and my co-workers were making $3 million, I would not be happy, especially when one considers the sacrifices made by these guys, as well as the potential for personal harm.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:31 am

Schill, have Celek or Avant outperfomed their contracts? The Eagles sliced Stacey Andrews contract for under-performing. They did the same thing to Runyan, just because of his age. Why not give Jackson (a pro-bowler at two positions) a bonus. He’s grossly outperformed his contract and is earning 35% of the top receiver’s pay. They can redo Jackson’s contract further down the road. Just give him a one-year extension with a $10 million bonus. There’s no guarantee he’ll survive several NFL seasons to ever see the money he’s already earned. In fact, the odds are against him. He doesn’t even have to suffer a career injury. If he misses 10 games in the next 3 years, his value is diminished.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:35 am

Schill, on what do you base your “long-term affects” reasoning?

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:41 am

Drummer – and so far the only suggestion that the locker room isn’t happy is Garry’s (and some other media folks’) speculation. Neither Desean nor his agent has said they’re unhappy. So what gives?

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:42 am

Back to merchandising. I don’t think it’s right that the NFL can sell a jersey with MY name on it, and whose popularity is based on MY achievement, and I NOT receive one dime. Things are extremely lopsided against the players. Their last bargaining agreement was a joke. I hope they do much better this time around. If they just get a portion of the merchandising, I’ll be happy. I believe they make more money on merchandising than on TV contracts. Granted, the owners make an investment and should see most of the return, but the imbalance is ridiculous.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:44 am

my ‘long term effects’ reasoning is that the vast majority of examples you hear of retired players having harsh physical long term effects of football are lineman, LB and Running backs. Most of the concussion horror stories and ‘playing football extremely limited the life/quality of life of a former player’ were for guys delivering hits, or battling on the line of scrimmage every play – see Andrew Waters. That’s what I was referring to. You’re using that point, which is extremely valid, for a WR.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 5:50 am

Hey, I agree that the Owners get filthy rich and don’t deserve that scale of money, but that’s a fault of American capitalism, same goes for CEOs, Wall St, and the rich in general. If you want a fair world, hey I do to, but the NFL aint one. America aint one. Sounds like finding a communist or socialist society would fit your desires better. I can identify with that. Meanwhile, in this country and society, sometimes things anint fair for periods of time, and you have to either be patient (he will get big money) or accepting. Worst case scenario – DJAX does have a career ending injury. Then he will have to get a different job, if you call that a horrible fate of injustice, than why aren’t you out championing a higher minimum wage or more taxes for the rich? If that were to happen to Desean, it would be a DAMN SHAME. But, his fate would be to be like a normal american – there’s a lot of things worse than that in this world. Have some perspective is all I’m saying.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:50 am

Schill, DeSean has discussed his unhappiness many times, and you know his agent, Rosenhaus, is in his ear. During his rookie year, DeSean talked about his slide in the draft and how it correlated to his contract. He spoke about his work ethic (the reason for his slide), and he said he was going to do everything he could do be the best. He’s lived up to that commitment. Besides, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that if a person is making 35% of his/her peers, he/she would not be happy.

FanSince1960
FanSince1960
June 9, 2010 5:51 am

Why don’t you see this kind of behavior in baseball or in the NHL? Why have contracts or rules if they are not going to be obeyed by the players? Who cares if his buds in LA will make more than him? I say anyone who isn’t happy with the millions they are making can get a gig in a different profession. We worry so much about the rights of illegal immigrants. Now we worry about making sure DeSean Jackson gets the millions he is entitled to regardless of his contract. Joke!

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 5:57 am

Schill, I’m just as American as you, and I’m fine with the way things are. Here’s an alternative you didn’t mention. Jackson could hold out or even cause problems ala T.O.

What’s with the championing human rights? Are we still talking Eagles football? I’d like our players to be happy. Happy players run through walls for their organizations and do everything within their power to win championships. At the very minimum, they don’t cause problems.

navyeaglefan
navyeaglefan
June 9, 2010 5:58 am

Mr Cobb (and hoepfully Drummer) – could you please explain to those of us who may be a little unsure of what it means to not have the CBA in place this year exaclty HOW (lets ignore the ‘should they, could they would they’ arguments ) and explain to us what the procedural steps as to how the Eagles can give Jackson the type of salary I think he would earn if the Eagles followed the type of pattern they usually do by locking up younger long term talent early. Despite some of the vitrol being put forth by some of the posters on this site, from what I understand, to extend Jackson they have to offer him a 30% payraise in his salary, and then the rest of the money must be paid upfront as a signing bonus –

Perhaps an explanation to the masses of the rules would (hopefully) make some people realize this has nothing to do with the desire to pay or not pay the man, but more with how the rules right now prevent the Eagles from doing the kind of long term extension they like to do

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:00 am

I’m not talking politics, religion or the state of the world. I’m talking Eagles football. I don’t even care about other teams. I’m strictly talking about the Birds. That’s my perspective.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 6:00 am

Again, is anyone suggesting Asante is away because of $? No? Than how do we know DJax is? We don’t. Garry and Drummer are ‘putting pieces together’, ‘not taking rocket science’ and whatever other euphemism you want to use for ASSUMING. They are jumping to conclusions. We frown upon assuming and jumping to conclusions for a reason.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 6:03 am

Drummer, you were talking about contracts, comparing Jackson’s salary to other players, on other teams in the league. You were talking about merchandising, the NFL, money, and jerseys. You were talking a lot more about things other than Eagles football than Eagles football. You were talking about ‘fairness’ and how much the owners make. That’s economics and business.

KTDawk
KTDawk
June 9, 2010 6:04 am

you both bring up great points. the eagles organization is stingy at times, i am sure everyone can agree on that. this is a business and ultimately these players are employees. I also would assume that if desean jackson was doing anything else in this world as a profession he wouldn’t be close to making 470k/yr, thats probably a fact. However, he did choose this as a profession and is insanely good at what he does and ultimately should be paid that way. He also signed into a binding contract for his services. I believe he has 2 years left on his rookie deal, which means the eagles don’t have to pay him yet and paying the fine for desean is a lot more costly than someone making $8 Mil a year. Desean can not afford to holdout and will get paid but it turns off the FO by holding out. If desean goes about his business he will be a very rich man come this time next year.

Schill i agree with you also, this is all speculation. Not one person has come out and said that this is in fact due to his contract situation.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:05 am

Navy, they can do exactly what they did for Kolb. Jackson can be given a one-year extension with a signing bonus. The obvious difference is that Kolb was in the last year of his contract and he would earned less than his back-up, Michael Vick.

I don’t think the Eagles should give Jackson a long extension. That could eventually hurt our team. However, if you give him a one-year extension (solely to bring him in line with his production), there’s no risk. And because a contract can be redone at any time, if the Birds want to later extend or cut him (as is usually the case), they can do so.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:11 am

KTDawk, I respect your opinions as well. Honestly, I doubt Jacksons absence is due to his contract situation. About a month ago, he went on record saying he was unhappy with his contract, but that he would not be a malcontent and that he would continue to be a leader for this team.

My post has nothing to do with why Jackson was not involved in the OTA this week. I’m merely pointing out MY personal feelings about how the Eagles handle players’ contracts and the possible affects on those players.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:14 am

Schill, I mentioned other players salaries,etc. as they relate to Jackson’s situation. Again, my only concern is the Philadelphia Eagles. I’m on GCobb.com, not the NFL.com, and certainly not WorldNews.com

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 6:19 am

drummer – that solution you just proposed – the one year extension to DJAX, but with enough money to bring him in line with what he deserves is PRECISELY what the 30% rule prohibits. If the rule weren’t there, they would do that. The fact that it isn’t the last year of Jackson’s contract changes the situation – it was for Kolb.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:19 am

Schil, you posted, “Do you really think that if the CBA/labor deal /unknown situation for next season didn‚Äôt exist that things would be the same? I doubt it.”

When Westbrook was grossly underpaid and the Eagles did nothing about it, there was a CBA in place. Why do you doubt it, now?

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:20 am

Sorry, Schill, you’re wrong. The 30% rule applies only to salary, not bonuses.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:25 am

Schiller, you have argued that Jackson received money for his jersey and that the 30% rule applies to bonuses. It seems you’re pro-ownership. Why?

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:28 am

Schill, San Francisco 49ers linebacker Patrick Willis signed a five-year extension for $50 million. He was not in the last year of his contract.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:31 am

Schill, I hope the tone of my post is not misconstrued. I respect your opinions. I read your posts all the time and I love talking Eagles football. As far as I’m concerned, we’re just two Eagles fans sharing some dialogue.

Paul Mancini
Paul Mancini
June 9, 2010 6:41 am

You have to look at D-Jax contract/career as a whole..
He missed out on being a 1st Round Selection (which many scouts had him pegged at) but there were
questions about his attitude and size..Obviously he has answered all those questions and and has handled himself extremely well. Now it will be payback time for him and his agent to recoup some the $$$ that he missed out on to begin with.. I believe if his contract is not re-worked before the season starts, that he will asked to be traded after the 2010 season.. The real monkey wrench in this situation is the fact that there is not CBA in place and until there is, most teams are not going to
get locked into giving long-term deals to many players outside of the Manning’s,Brady’s of the NFL.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:43 am

Teams are unwilling to pay substantial signing bonuses because that money is guaranteed. Under no circumstances can the team recoup it. For example, Ben Rothlisberger’s suspension comes at a lost to the Steelers. They paid him a signing bonus based upon the number of games he would play over the life of his contract. Now, the number of games he will play has been reduced, but the bonus hasn’t. The same holds true for players who might suffer injuries.

The Eagles are reluctant to give Jackson a large bonus because if he were to suffer a career-ending injury, they would still have to pay him. My argument is that he’s already earned that money.

The flip side of the coin is that if Jackson were to suffer a career-ending injury right now, they could cut him and pay him nothing.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 6:44 am

Drummer – 100% agreed on your post about the tone, no harm sensed or intended, and I just hope that others don’t misread us either. – As to your recent points – Didn’t westbrook get the money eventually? And wasn’t that not about his rookie contract? I was wrong about the jersey money – I stand corrected, but Desean is making lots of endorsement money, only because he’s a better/more exciting player than others. I may be wrong about the 30% rule, it sure is complicated and I must have been confused. But here’s the thing. I still haven’t heard a word or mention of action on the part of Rosenhaus and I think maybe it’s because if the Eagles were to do what you said for Desean, it would complicate the later negotiations when they give him a real extension. Yeah, the injury risk is a factor, but Rosenhaus is a business man who I believe weighs risk/reward and is advising Desean to hedge his bets for a nice big fat good ole’ contract extension negotiation once all this CBA bullcrap is behind everyone. It seems like Drew doesn’t want to jeopardize any of that, and a one year/bonus deal would give the Eagles a lot of leverage there. I think that through all of our discussions, it’s clear that this isn’t just a case of the Eagles being cheap. This is a really complicated situation, I think Rosenhaus and Jackson would say the same thing.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:48 am

PM, why does it have to be a long-term deal? A one-year extension would suffice. No monkey wrench there. You’d only be paying a guy what he has already earned. Again, they have had no problem taking money from guys who didn’t perform. Why is there a problem escalating a payer’s play based on his production? They wouldn’t do it for Westbrook, either. There was no problem with the CBA at that time.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 6:50 am

How much endorsement money is Jackson making? Who’s he endorsing?

Paul Mancini
Paul Mancini
June 9, 2010 6:57 am

Westbrrok was well underpaid for 2-3 years and then way overpaid for his final 2 years..
(I don’t think he offered to give any of it back) Both the player and teams are at risk with these
long-term,big $$$ contracts.. I see the NFL moving away from longer term deals for most players
I also see Agent D Rosenhaus try to “Stick It” to Philadelphia every chance he can…

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 7:05 am

Drummer, Wesbrook did get that money. Remember? Not sure how to figure out Desean endorsement money, but he can make that money due to his stellar play while others who aren’t ask good/exiting cannot.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 7:07 am

Drummer – check out this quote from a Daily News (paul domowitch) article on 5/27/10 : “But Willis was the 11th pick in the 2007 draft and had a much higher base salary to work from than Johnson, who was the 24th overall pick in the ’08 draft, and Jackson, who was the 49th pick in that same draft. The Eagles were able to do a short extension with Kolb, who only had 1 year left on his rookie deal. But there’s no reason for Jackson or Johnson to be interested in short deals right now.

Jackson is scheduled to earn just $470,000 in base salary this year, Johnson $550,000. The only way to get around the 30 percent rule and pay both players what they’re worth would be to give them enormous signing bonuses. By enormous, I’m talking in the $30 million-to-$40 million range. Minimum.

There are two reasons the Eagles and Titans aren’t going to do that. One is the increased injury risk involved because of the small size of the two players. The other is the language in the current CBA restricting forfeiture of signing bonuses if a player gets into a Michael Vick-like mess.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 7:08 am

There you have it my friend. Giving Desean the 10 mil that Kolb got wouldn’t come close to giving him fair value based on his play. So he/drew are going to wait for their big payday because it’s the smart thing for them to do.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 7:09 am

Wherein Rosenhaus is concerned, I believe there are two issues.

1. When he represented T.O., he was not the agent for T.O.’s original contract. T.O. fired his agent and hired Rosenhaus. Therefore, Rosenhaus received no pay for representing T.O. He needed T.O. to get a new contract so that he could get paid. Obviously, T.O. is not the sharpest pencil, and was probably easily manipulated into manufacturing a trade (although, he was actually cut). Undoubtedly, Rosenahus told him to calm down once he got to Dallas. He didn’t want T.O. to get cut. Thus, we got to witness, “Sniff. Sniff. He’s my quarterback.”

2. Rosenhaus can’t make any noise if Jackson does not allow him to do so. Again, Jackson has said that he would honor the contract and be a leader of the team, despite his unhappiness with his pay. That’s why I don’t think his absence is related to money.

Rosenhaus, like other agents, probably could care less about Jackson. It is my opinion that if he had his way, Jackson would be a hold out. After all, a holdout would be to Rosenhaus’ advantage. There’s no threat of a player being injured while holding out and it speeds up the process of obtaining a contract. If 165-lb. Jackson’s career ends tomorrow, however, Rosenhaus loses a huge payday. Quite frankly, if I were a betting man, I’d bet that Jackson will get injured this year. This is a big-man’s game and everyone gets injured. Jackson was injured last year, after being only touched (by NFL standards).

I believe Jackson is an honorable man, much like Sheldon Brown, and he will honor the contract. I applaud him for that.

I only wish the Eagles were just as honorable and would do the “right” thing.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 7:12 am

Schill, they could pay Jackson right now and still extend him in his last year.

schiller
schiller
June 9, 2010 7:22 am

Drummer, they could, but they can’t pay him what his play has earned him, and for both him and drew, keeping things as amicable as possible with the team is the best business move for them so they can maximize that eventual extension.

drummerwinslow
drummerwinslow
June 9, 2010 7:24 am

That Daily News Article actually supports what I’ve been saying.

“There are two reasons the Eagles and Titans aren‚Äôt going to do that. One is the increased injury risk involved because of the small size of the two players. The other is the language in the current CBA restricting forfeiture of signing bonuses if a player gets into a Michael Vick-like mess.”

1. Jackson is small and therefore “likely” to be injured.

2. Rothlisberger-type situation

What wasn’t said in the article is that you can give him a 1-year extension with a $10 million signing bonus. (Just to pay him what he’s already earned.) Then, in the final year of his contract, if his production has continued, you give him a $20 million payday.

The article say the Eagles are scared to pay because he is likely to be injured. If he’s likely to be injured, how will he ever get the money he has already earned? The deck is stacked against him.

I’m not interested in the Eagles paying for his potential. I’d like to see them pay for what he has already done. Again, they’ve got no problem taking money from players. If memory serves, Runyan took several pay cuts.