Gale Gilbert Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I like it that someone called out the FO about their comments about character. I think that 4 years, $10 million is too much for a backup RB who will be 32-33 when the deal is up. The Broncos and Patriots screwed the market with Buckhalter and Taylor. 4 years and $6 million is fair amount to offer - and go up to $7 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I like it that someone called out the FO about their comments about character. I think that 4 years, $10 million is too much for a backup RB who will be 32-33 when the deal is up. The Broncos and Patriots screwed the market with Buckhalter and Taylor. 4 years and $6 million is fair amount to offer - and go up to $7 million. I hear ya about the age fact. You could do a 4 year 10 million dollar deal with 6 gauranteed. pay him 3 and 3 then drop down to 2.5 and 1.5. That way if he looses his talent you can cut him the last two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0-7-77/...ract-front.html Maybe its just me but his agents comment came off like an a$$. Calling out the orginaztion when hes not the biggest priority since hes an RFA they can negotiate with him at a later date once they wrap up everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 How can he be a holdout when practice has not even started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 The front office should pony up with Jackson. He is a solid number two and deserves pay commensurate with skills and attitude. As I have said before, who cares, it is Ralph's money and he has plenty plus we are solid under the cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I think the most important thing to realize about that article from Tim is that, apparently, we Bills fans don't like when agents don't talk to/negotiate through the media, and we don't like when agents do talk to/negotiate through the media. Nicely put, dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I can't believe this is even an issue. It is becoming more apparent that you need two quality backs to succeed in this league. We have concerns at quarterback, o-line, d-line, linebacker, tight end, safety. We don't have to worry about wide receiver, defensive back, and running back. I am getting sick and tired of the front office screwing with the areas that we shouldn't have to worry about. PAY THE GUY, he is worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Why bother to lock up players like Jackson for reasonable multiyear contracts when the Bills don't have to when they will just hold out for more a couple years later (see Peters, Jason)? You are lumping Fred Jackson with Jason Peters--- ? Shame on you. Fred Jackson did everything that is asked of him and then some. I am done with the Bills if he does not get signed. I will adopt the Steelers. A real NFL franchise. absolutely disgusting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Meh he's a rb, easily replaceable. Guys like Fred Jackson are a dime a dozen. Edit: Let me clarify, before I get jumped on by some people here. Jackson is 28 years old. While he's a nice player, and of good character ilk, the fact is he plays a non priority position, where a glutton of comes come and go every year. The odds of finding another player the calibre of Fred is relatively easy. A 4 Year 10 million dollar contract is nice, however maybe Jackson want's more in line with starting rb money. That money could be better served to address weak areas of the team such as depth for the defensive front 7, or the oline, or a te etc etc. If Jackson wants to walk, because the Bills don't pay him, than the bills should explore the option of trading him, if another team deems him valuable, while he's a rfa. It's a business, and like any business money should be spent to make your business stronger. Not spent because a guy is loyal or swell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Buffalo needs to pay this guy...he has earned it in every fashion and is not only a top No. 2 RB in this league, but could likely be a top back as a full time starter. The Bills have all the leverage here. Fred is an Exclusive Rights FA. He is Bills property. He will play for what they give him or not at all. He just lost my respect by allowing his agent to come out with this crap. As another player pointed out, even if the Bills gave him what he wants now, whats to stop him from coming back and demanding more if he has a good year ? You know he won't offer to give some money back if he struggles. Its a Business and the negotiations are not simply based on Fred Jackson. Its the basis of the CBA and its about not setting a bad precedent. Buffalo has the hammer. Don't be shocked if Fred ends up being forced to play out the year at the Tender amount he received ($460k) or so. I also think he and his agent (and lots of fans on this board) are over estimating his value. He is a good complimentary back. He does not have the size or skill to be an every down back and will never be paid as such. I like Fred as a #2 back. A Kenny Davis type. He can do well in spot duty, but God help the Bills if he is the every down back for more than a few games. He needs to tell his agent to STFU. Ralph is the type to hold a grudge. Piss him off and you will play for the minimum or sit at home. Good luck making even $460k outside of football Freddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 What is the problem with giving Jackson a 4 year 10 million dollar deal? Exactly! I'm not saying this Deal should be done already...But the fact that there is clearly hard feelings on Freddie's part is the most rediculous joke...My confidence in the ability of the Folks running this thing in Buffalo is waning in a BIG way...How do you piss off a Player like Jackson? It make NO sense...The guy truly was a candidate for Team MVP last year...He was! I'm not saying he was the Team MVP...But he was probably top 5...Right? How many times did Freddy give the Bills great Field Position when Teams were kicking away from Roscoe or Leodis? We know the impact he had on the running game...I don't know...I'm a Fred Jackson Fan...Big time...And you're gonna get him at a bargain rate...I just don't get it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 You are lumping Fred Jackson with Jason Peters--- ? Shame on you. Fred Jackson did everything that is asked of him and then some. I am done with the Bills if he does not get signed. I will adopt the Steelers. A real NFL franchise. absolutely disgusting! Done with the Bills if they don't sign Fred Jackson? Seriously? Fred Jackson is going to make you give up on the Bills. Wow. I say Good Riddance to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Meh he's a rb, easily replaceable. Guys like Fred Jackson are a dime a dozen. Edit: Let me clarify, before I get jumped on by some people here. Jackson is 28 years old. While he's a nice player, and of good character ilk, the fact is he plays a non priority position, where a glutton of comes come and go every year. The odds of finding another player the calibre of Fred is relatively easy. A 4 Year 10 million dollar contract is nice, however maybe Jackson want's more in line with starting rb money. That money could be better served to address weak areas of the team such as depth for the defensive front 7, or the oline, or a te etc etc. If Jackson wants to walk, because the Bills don't pay him, than the bills should explore the option of trading him, if another team deems him valuable, while he's a rfa. It's a business, and like any business money should be spent to make your business stronger. Not spent because a guy is loyal or swell. As a Running Back you may be right...As a Team contributor I think Players like Jackson are indeed VERY rare...What He offers the Team as a whole, at the Salary he will be willing to play for, is invaluable...Freddie is WAY more than a back-up HB...If that's all He was then I would understand the Bills stance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 What is the problem with giving Jackson a 4 year 10 million dollar deal? In simple terms the Bills recognize that it all adds up. One could argue that at his age (older by NFL standards) Jackson should not get a front loaded contract that pays him $2.5 to $3 million per year. While he is good and a sentimental fan favorite Jackson is not outstanding. Arguably the Bills could replace him. With that said, Jackson has proven himself and has been a team player so the Bills would do him and themselves justice by offering him a fair market value contract. This is especially true given Lynch's situation. While we all hope Lynch has learned his lesson one could speculate that he will do something stupid again and end up sitting for a long time. The Bills are better with jackson on the team and they need to sign him to an appropriate and fair deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasBB Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Why bother to lock up players like Jackson for reasonable multiyear contracts when the Bills don't have to when they will just hold out for more a couple years later (see Peters, Jason)? Rephrasing -- I find this an idiotic statement ... Jackson had not held out yet from any mandatory attendance. He has not indicated that he will hold out. If I'm not mistaken, he did at least make an appearance recently. Peters just not very bright -- unfair comparison. Peters is the exception. Not too many players hold out with 3 years remaining on their contract. Jackson stands to gain nothing in a hold out as he's in his final year anyhow if Buffalo doesn't lock him in. Jackson is making his statement now by missing voluntary workouts. When it matters and when they become mandatory, I think he'll be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasBB Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Very simply put, the Bills have underpaid for the fine services of Fred Jackson. Despite his age, he doesn't have a lot of NFL wear-and-tear. The guy has legs and he will for at least 4 more years probably. Why not do the right thing and the smart thing and keep him under contract long enough that he retire a Bill. He's not only a fan-favorite, but he is GOOD. He's an excellent compliment to Lynch. He's a high-character guy AND excellent on the field. Amen to Jackson's agent calling out the Bills front office for dicking around with Jackson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladiebla Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Why not do the right thing and the smart thing and keep him under contract long enough that he retire a Bill. He's not only a fan-favorite, but he is GOOD. Plus he really wants to do that as he indicated at the end of last season. Thx Tim another great article, love reading your insights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Frankly, I don't understand the connection that his agent was making from the comments of Brandon to his client. It's quite a stretch. I was just about to post something similar. I think it was actually a bit of a cheap-shot (and I know cheap-shots). Totally uncalled for. I think the most important thing to realize about that article from Tim is that, apparently, we Bills fans don't like when agents don't talk to/negotiate through the media, and we don't like when agents do talk to/negotiate through the media. The wall is very fickle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 I'd rather give Dominic Rhodes, even though he's 30 and has a DUI under his belt, a 4-year $10M deal, than Fred Jackson. He's proven himself, as have Taylor, Buckhalter, and most of the rest of the backup RB's to whom Fred is comparing himself. He's been in the league 2 years and just started producing last year, and he's expecting $2.5M a year? Are you serious? The Bills literally own him this year, and next year they can tag him for $1.5M and basically take him off the market since it would cost a 2nd rounder to get him, and no one will give that for him. And the Bills have bigger fish to fry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Does Jackson or his agent read the paper (or The Stadium Wall for that matter?) The Bills are in limbo with Peters, they approaching the draft and, depending if any trades are made, may have more rookies to sign. So the Bills may not have a clear idea how much cash they will have for Jackson right now. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts