Jackson free agent next year?

[Rambunctious]

My Team Stream just sent a notice that

The Rams agree to let Jackscon void his contract after 2012 to become a free agent.

Thoughts?

[Rambos]

Rams agree to let Steven Jackson void contract after 2012, become free agent in 2013

By Pete Prisco | Senior NFL Columnist
October 4, 2012 4:36 pm ET


St. Louis Rams fans might be wise to enjoy watching running back Steven Jackson play the next 12 games, starting Thursday night against the Arizona Cardinals, because it could be the end of his career with the team.

Even though Jackson didn't reach the required incentives to void out the final two years of his contract, the team has decided to allow him to void the final year (2013) anyway, which means Jackson will be an unrestricted free agent after the 2012 season.

Jackson has been with the Rams since being a first-round pick in 2004 and has led the team in rushing every year since 2005. He ran for 1,145 yards in 2011 and has 195 yards this season. Jackson is 29 years old and was to have a base salary of $7 million in 2013.

But this is a strange move when you consider the Rams had him under contract and now are willing to just let one of the team's long-time stars walk without even the possibility of trading him or asking him to take a cut this year for letting him out of the deal a year early.

The incentives Jackson needed to reach to void the years, according to a league source, was averaging 1,200 rushing yards and 400 receiving yards from 2008-2011. He hit the rushing numbers, but fell short on the receiving averages. Yet the team agreed to renegotiate his deal in September of this year to allow him to void the final year anyway.

Not surprised at all.

[DE_Ramfan]

He doesn't look like the same RB as he used to be. He can still run hard but gets brought down too easy on some plays. The burst to the hole isn't there either. Watching Richardson run then having Jackson come back in the game is like driving behind an old lady and yelling GO! No one can outrun Father Time (especially when you take all those hits).

[Curly Horns]

It will be interesting to see what Jackson decides. As of right now, I would bet he stays.

[DE_Ramfan]

It will be interesting to see what Jackson decides. As of right now, I would bet he stays.

I imagine they'd release him to save money or try to get him to take a smaller contract because if he comes back I doubt he's anything more than the #2 back or short yardage guy. I wouldn't be shocked if Richardson is the number one before the season is over.

[thoey]

I can see two sides. The Rams let Jax go, give him a chance to hook on with a possible playoff caliber team, hoping he can get himself a ring before he retires.

Or...

He decides that the Rams are that possible playoff team, takes a paycut, and finishes what he started, knowing that he may not be the lead back next year.

Either way, whatever Jax decides, I will root for him. Well, unless that other team is playing against the Rams...

[Bar-bq]

Jackson's been a great back for the rams for a very long time. It'll be a shame to lose him - especially if we're on the cusp of becoming a playoff team in St. Louis. In a lot of ways it won't be as fulfilling when we finally make the playoffs if we do so without SJax leading the way.

Today's victory was a great example of what happens when you can establish a running game. We got it going in the second half and we were able to move the ball and run out of the clock.

[Haste]

InB4 the Pats sign him. Calling it now.

[sjacksonrules]

This is a courtesy to Jackson. He has been a great back for us for years he deserves the right to go test the market if he wishes.

BUT, that doesnt mean we can't offer him a contract knowing he could come back home

[JustSayin]

Are you kidding me? Why does Pete miss the obvious? Not everyone is dumbfounded by this decision to allow Jackson to opt out early. Let's try this "Theory". (Yes this theory is falsifiable.) The Rams have 4 First round Picks over the next two years and Jackson will be seeking a paycheck which in this salary capped league would place more of a hardship on signing these picks. In the "Monumentally stupid" post I made earlier when I talked about Fishers press confrence regarding Kevin Carter and which I did not include in that post because it was trivial to the context at that time I did not mention what else Fisher said regarding the draft choices that also were woven into that deal. Since it is relevant now I will paraphrase what Fisher said about giving up draft choice(s) for Kevin Carter. "You all know that I am very fond of my draft choices...." In sum: perhaps Fisher is looking to signing those high picks and realizes that Jacksons contract will hinder it. This is just my opinion. I hope I am not attacked or insulted as I was in my first post.

[tomahawk247]

Are you kidding me? Why does Pete miss the obvious? Not everyone is dumbfounded by this decision to allow Jackson to opt out early. Let's try this "Theory". (Yes this theory is falsifiable.) The Rams have 4 First round Picks over the next two years and Jackson will be seeking a paycheck which in this salary capped league would place more of a hardship on signing these picks. In the "Monumentally stupid" post I made earlier when I talked about Fishers press confrence regarding Kevin Carter and which I did not include in that post because it was trivial to the context at that time I did not mention what else Fisher said regarding the draft choices that also were woven into that deal. Since it is relevant now I will paraphrase what Fisher said about giving up draft choice(s) for Kevin Carter. "You all know that I am very fond of my draft choices...." In sum: perhaps Fisher is looking to signing those high picks and realizes that Jacksons contract will hinder it. This is just my opinion. I hope I am not attacked or insulted as I was in my first post.

I would have agreed... prior to the new CBA. Now days rookie contracts are very resonable even for a top 5 pick. Jackson's contract wouldn't hinder signing any rookies.

This has more to do with paying 7 million to an RB who is starting to wear down.

[JustSayin]

I would have agreed... prior to the new CBA. Now days rookie contracts are very resonable even for a top 5 pick. Jackson's contract wouldn't hinder signing any rookies.

This has more to do with paying 7 million to an RB who is starting to wear down.

I understand about the CBA however the salary cap is finite and 7 million (if that were to be the deal) is still 7 million off the cap. Your response is reasonable and understandable. What i posted is just my opinion based upon Fisher's fondness of his draft choices. What you posted about paying 7 million to a worn down RB is kind of a corollary to what I said. Certainly there may be more to it however I don't think we can put the money issue anywhere else except at the top of the issue. I just hope Jackson shows us and the rest of the league how bad he wants a fat contract. This year is an audition for him.

Good post and Good point tomahawk247

[tomahawk247]

Jackson won't get a fat contract.

Jackson's future will depend on how the Rams perform this season. If the Rams go 8-8 or better and show promise that they can get into the playoffs in the next couple of years, I think Jackson comes back on a cheaper deal for the next few years.

However he does need to realise he won't get a massive deal, not after all the carries he has made and all the injuries he has suffered. If he doesn't come back to the Rams, he could end up in a situation like with Cedric Benson this year, not signed and waiting for someone to offer him a deal. But he may not get as lucky that a team like Green Bay would be needing an RB.

[JustSayin]

Let me ask you your opinion th247. And I am serious I really want your opinion. Do you detect any adversity between Fisher and Jackson? I know there is nothing in the media about it but I (and this is only an opinion) detect something is not right between Fisher and Jackson.

[TekeRam]

I gotta go with Tomahawk on the suggestion that it's the 2013 1st round picks causing the salary cap crunch next year. They're not. Truth of the matter is, even if we had two top 10 picks(possible, with the Skins defense decimated, RG3 hitting a rookie wall at some point, and for us Amendola getting broke again), that will not cause great financial hardship.

What is causing financial hardship is paying $7M to any running back not named Foster, Peterson or McCoy. That and Sam's giant last-CBA contract. Jax is a great running back, but he is slowing down(much slower than he should have/be, in my opinion, which is great for us) and he's simply not worth that kind of money going forward.

Might we re-sign him for like $2-4M with incentives, sure, but make no mistake, this move was one that is aimed at telling Jackson that we'd release him at the end of the year, so he better treat this as a free agent year and "decide" to void his contract at the end of the year. If he can get the same money elsewhere, great for him. If he can get on a contender, great for him. I hope he re-ups in the only place he's been, but such is life in this era.

Good luck and godspeed Jax.