Rams' Janoris Jenkins in contract dispute over the rookie's financial advisory

[RealRam]

Everybody involved in this fiasco looks bad IMO.

So true my friend, so true!

I'm still hoping this doesn't turn into one of JJ's "Greatest Hits" With the Rams.


PS: Any current interviews out there with J?

[swatter555]

If JJ truly did go back on a verbal agreement, I don't agree this is swept under the rug on day one of training camp. He will have a short leash, shorter than normal even for a guy with a spotty past.

[Fortuninerhater]

Some of you guys are beyond belief. What will it take for you to understand that Fisher is completely in the wrong on this, so says the NFL itself.

Doesn't matter if you hate Jenkins, his agent, his financial advisor, his mom, his girlfriend, his babies mamas, his pastor, his dog, his fifth grade teacher, his dreadlocks, his tatoos, or the fact that he's a Ram. It doesn't even matter that I think Marc Bulger is the biggest thief in Ram's history.

Jeff Fisher and the Rams organization are the sole driving force behind this debacle.

But somehow, some of you still have arguements that support his wrongdoing. Makes me think that you think there was nothing wrong with the bounty scandal and Greg Williams should be calling our defense.

Bottom line is "WRONG is WRONG," no matter who the subject is. And in this case, it should be crystal clear by now to anyone with reasonable understanding, who's out of line.

Some have said we need to reserve judgement until all the facts are in. Well I've got news for you, there is only one fact in this case that matters, and that is that what the Rams have attempted to do, is NOT ALLOWED by the NFL.

Let me say that again so the people in the back can hear me.......THE NFL's CBA SAYS, JEFF FISHER'S TACTIC, IS NOT ALLOWED?

End of story, is it not?

Wait a minute, strike that last question.

[Fastcat]

I think Marc Bulger is the biggest thief in Ram's history.

I totatally agree with everything besides the above statement. At least Bulger played more than 4 games for us. Drew Bennet has to take this crown. He didnt even top 400yrds in his rams CAREER! And i cant recall him finishing a whole game either. I dont believe he ever made it to the second half of any game. Then he gets cut and retires at the ripe age of 30.

[sb2sb2sb]

Some of you guys are beyond belief. What will it take for you to understand that Fisher is completely in the wrong on this, so says the NFL itself.

Doesn't matter if you hate Jenkins, his agent, his financial advisor, his mom, his girlfriend, his babies mamas, his pastor, his dog, his fifth grade teacher, his dreadlocks, his tatoos, or the fact that he's a Ram. It doesn't even matter that I think Marc Bulger is the biggest thief in Ram's history.

Jeff Fisher and the Rams organization are the sole driving force behind this debacle.

But somehow, some of you still have arguements that support his wrongdoing. Makes me think that you think there was nothing wrong with the bounty scandal and Greg Williams should be calling our defense.

Bottom line is "WRONG is WRONG," no matter who the subject is. And in this case, it should be crystal clear by now to anyone with reasonable understanding, who's out of line.

Some have said we need to reserve judgement until all the facts are in. Well I've got news for you, there is only one fact in this case that matters, and that is that what the Rams have attempted to do, is NOT ALLOWED by the NFL.

Let me say that again so the people in the back can hear me.......THE NFL's CBA SAYS, JEFF FISHER'S TACTIC, IS NOT ALLOWED?

End of story, is it not?

Wait a minute, strike that last question.

Thank you, I don't understand how people don't get this on the forum here. It is like they know Jenkins history, so they are quick to blame this whole situation him. Whereas, if you fault him on this, it is at most 10%. Where 90% or higher lies with the Rams and Fisher.

[gap]

Some of you guys are beyond belief. What will it take for you to understand that Fisher is completely in the wrong on this, so says the NFL itself.

Doesn't matter if you hate Jenkins, his agent, his financial advisor, his mom, his girlfriend, his babies mamas, his pastor, his dog, his fifth grade teacher, his dreadlocks, his tatoos, or the fact that he's a Ram. It doesn't even matter that I think Marc Bulger is the biggest thief in Ram's history.

Jeff Fisher and the Rams organization are the sole driving force behind this debacle.

But somehow, some of you still have arguements that support his wrongdoing. Makes me think that you think there was nothing wrong with the bounty scandal and Greg Williams should be calling our defense.

Bottom line is "WRONG is WRONG," no matter who the subject is. And in this case, it should be crystal clear by now to anyone with reasonable understanding, who's out of line.

Some have said we need to reserve judgement until all the facts are in. Well I've got news for you, there is only one fact in this case that matters, and that is that what the Rams have attempted to do, is NOT ALLOWED by the NFL.

Let me say that again so the people in the back can hear me.......THE NFL's CBA SAYS, JEFF FISHER'S TACTIC, IS NOT ALLOWED?

End of story, is it not?

Wait a minute, strike that last question.

Thank you, I don't understand how people don't get this on the forum here. It is like they know Jenkins history, so they are quick to blame this whole situation him. Whereas, if you fault him on this, it is at most 10%. Where 90% or higher lies with the Rams and Fisher.

I don't disagree with "Let me say that again so the people in the back can hear me.......THE NFL's CBA SAYS, JEFF FISHER'S TACTIC, IS NOT ALLOWED?" but I don't agree with all of your post.

If it was against the CBA for Fisher to use this tactic, it was also against the CBA for the agent to use this tactic. The Agent used this tactic to advance his player's selection, and by that, increase his salary. If the agent had said no, or pointed out it was against the CBA, the RAMS would not have selected him at that point. So by not saying, "No", the agent is as guilty as Fisher.

The agent has no more ability to say, "I didn't know" than Fisher does. Both are responsible for knowing all the rules, so they are both to blame. The fact that the agent/player is backing out now, because it is against the rules, does not make them any more honorable.


gap

[r8rh8rmike]

If it was against the CBA for Fisher to use this tactic, it was also against the CBA for the agent to use this tactic. The Agent used this tactic to advance his player's selection, and by that, increase his salary. If the agent had said no, or pointed out it was against the CBA, the RAMS would not have selected him at that point. So by not saying, "No", the agent is as guilty as Fisher.

The agent has no more ability to say, "I didn't know" than Fisher does. Both are responsible for knowing all the rules, so they are both to blame. The fact that the agent/player is backing out now, because it is against the rules, does not make them any more honorable.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Spot on post. Fisher is not the only one in the wrong here. If Jenkins' trio of Shareef, the sarge, and DeLuca are such top notch, capable advisors, how did this happen in the first place? As gap mentioned, are they not supposed to be experts in advising Jenkins, with the responsibility of knowing all the factors that affect him?

There is plenty of blame to go around in this situation.

[Rambos]

Ding! Ding! Ding! Spot on post. Fisher is not the only one in the wrong here. If Jenkins' trio of Shareef, the sarge, and DeLuca are such top notch, capable advisors, how did this happen in the first place? As gap mentioned, are they not supposed to be experts in advising Jenkins, with the responsibility of knowing all the factors that affect him?

There is plenty of blame to go around in this situation.

Not sure if it's spot on as far as making Fisher look better. Fisher knows the rules, he's the one that asked the agent to agree to terms that he knows are not within the rules. If he did not know he should have and once it was made public that he asked he should back off his position IMO.

We know the agent did not ask to break the rules first, Fisher did. As far as the agent not being top notch, well one could make a case he is, by agreeing to terms that he knew Fisher and the Rams could not enforce. The agents job is to negotiate on behalf of his client, not remind Fisher and the Rams when they are asking for something that can't be upheld.

Keep in mind Mike, Fisher is the one asking for the advisor to be hired not the agent. Also we don't know if Fisher when setting the terms was not clear and just asked for an advsior to be hired and not his hand picked advisor.

[r8rh8rmike]

Not sure if it's spot on as far as making Fisher look better. Fisher knows the rules, he's the one that asked the agent to agree to terms that he knows are not within the rules. If he did not know he should have and once it was made public that he asked he should back off his position IMO.

We know the agent did not ask to break the rules first, Fisher did. As far as the agent not being top notch, well one could make a case he is, by agreeing to terms that he knew Fisher and the Rams could not enforce. The agents job is to negotiate on behalf of his client, not remind Fisher and the Rams when they are asking for something that can't be upheld.

Keep in mind Mike, Fisher is the one asking for the advisor to be hired not the agent. Also we don't know if Fisher when setting the terms was not clear and just asked for an advsior to be hired and not his hand picked advisor.

Spot on post by gap. It isn't about making Fisher look better, it's about all parties taking their share of blame for this unfortunate fiasco. No way does the Jenkins' advisory team get let off the hook here. They helped to make this a messy situation for their client, who by the way, has yet to be signed, or see the terms of a contract that is most likely going to include big time deferred money, and restrictive clauses. We'll see how well Shareef, the sarge, and DeLuca represent Jenkins when it's all said and done. Should be interesting.

[Rambos]

Spot on post by gap. It isn't about making Fisher look better, it's about all parties taking their share of blame for this unfortunate fiasco. No way does the Jenkins' advisory team get let off the hook here. They helped to make this a messy situation for their client, who by the way, has yet to be signed, or see the terms of a contract that is most likely going to include big time deferred money, and restrictive clauses. We'll see how well Shareef, the sarge, and DeLuca represent Jenkins when it's all said and done. Should be interesting.

He will get signed soon enough and I'm sure deferred money, and restrictive clauses are not new to the terms. I'm not too interested in how JJ agents represent him to be honest. I'm more interested in how Fisher represent the Rams. Again I'm a Fisher supporter glad he is here. But he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and needs to pull back on his potions and get JJ signed. Then support JJ and help him grow up and play some good ball for us.

[r8rh8rmike]

He will get signed soon enough and I'm sure deferred money, and restrictive clauses are not new to the terms. I'm not too interested in how JJ agents represent him to be honest. I'm more interested in how Fisher represent the Rams. Again I'm a Fisher supporter glad he is here. But he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and needs to pull back on his potions and get JJ signed. Then support JJ and help him grow up and play some good ball for us.

I'm all for putting this behind us, getting Jenkins signed, and getting him ready to play, but I won't accept the notion that this is all Jeff Fisher's fault and that everybody else involved is a poor innocent caught up in the situation.

[Nick]

If Fisher insisted on the unallowed pre-condition, he holds part of the blame. If the agent agreed to the unallowed pre-condition, he also holds part of the blame. If one or both of them knew at the time it wasn't allowed but still agreed to it, that's even worse.

If they didn't know, then the second they found out the pre-condition was not allowed under the CBA, let alone the second both the league and the NFLPA got involved, it should have been off the table. Period.

But if you believe the Jason Cole article, Fisher is still pushing for the inclusion of the pre-condition as part of Jenkins' deal with the team, despite the league and the NFLPA contacting the organization to inform them that it isn't allowed. To me, if that's true, that's the biggest alarm sounding in the entire story.

It's one thing to say you didn't know (even if you did) and back off the agreement once you're alerted to it not being allowed. It's another thing to be told you aren't allowed to do it by the league and player's union, to have people in your organization telling those who are inquiring that you understand you can't do it, only to still insist on doing it.

I really hope that's not an accurate report by Cole, because if it is, that kind of indifference to the rules even in the face of authority would be rather concerning to me.

You can tell it's the offseason when the number of ifs in a given post reaches the current amount.

[MauiRam]

He will get signed soon enough and I'm sure deferred money, and restrictive clauses are not new to the terms. I'm not too interested in how JJ agents represent him to be honest. I'm more interested in how Fisher represent the Rams. Again I'm a Fisher supporter glad he is here. But he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and needs to pull back on his potions and get JJ signed. Then support JJ and help him grow up and play some good ball for us.

Getting caught with one's hand in the cookie jar implies one is caught in the act of stealing. Although Fish apparently went outside what is allowable according to the current CBA, I don't see that he was trying to steal anything, or deceive Janoris. Rather he was trying to apply some overt leverage he hoped would help stave off foolish decisions on JJ's part - rightly or wrongly. Fisher's area of expertise is coaching - not contractual matters as is evidenced by this entire issue. I'd substitute "caught with his pants down" over the cookie jar analogy.

Did Janoris's "agents/advisors" agree or advise JJ to agree to Fisher's request in order that the Rams would draft him in the second round - knowing the request couldn't be enforced? Well, presumably they are being paid to represent JJ's interests, so probably they did .. Deceptive? Absolutely. Which is why Jeff Fisher will likely leave negotiations and or pre-contractual agreements to Mr. Demoff in the future.

[Fortuninerhater]

I totatally agree with everything besides the above statement. At least Bulger played more than 4 games for us. Drew Bennet has to take this crown. He didnt even top 400yrds in his rams CAREER! And i cant recall him finishing a whole game either. I dont believe he ever made it to the second half of any game. Then he gets cut and retires at the ripe age of 30.

You may be right, but Bulger stole a whole lot more over a much longer period of time.:

[Rambos]

Getting caught with one's hand in the cookie jar implies one is caught in the act of stealing. Although Fish apparently went outside what is allowable according to the current CBA, I don't see that he was trying to steal anything, or deceive Janoris. Rather he was trying to apply some overt leverage he hoped would help stave off foolish decisions on JJ's part - rightly or wrongly. Fisher's area of expertise is coaching - not contractual matters as is evidenced by this entire issue. I'd substitute "caught with his pants down" over the cookie jar analogy.

Did Janoris's "agents/advisors" agree or advise JJ to agree to Fisher's request in order that the Rams would draft him in the second round - knowing the request couldn't be enforced? Well, presumably they are being paid to represent JJ's interests, so probably they did .. Deceptive? Absolutely. Which is why Jeff Fisher will likely leave negotiations and or pre-contractual agreements to Mr. Demoff in the future.

Fish apparently went outside what is allowable according to the current CBA, No Fisher DID go outside of the current CBA... Fact.

Rather he was trying to apply some overt leverage he hoped would help stave off foolish decisions on JJ's part - The only foolish decisions I see being made here is when, a member of the Competition Committee goes out of the rules to try and Leverage as you put it a player. Fisher did this to get leverage on a rookie to manage or control him and his poor decision making process. I agree Fisher should consult the Les and Demoff when it comes to contacts.

I agree with your "caught with his pants down" because it is more fitting, Fisher should be embarrassed that he would request a pre-draft verbal agreement. When he knows it not allowed. A Rams source said last week: "We know there can't be any pre-conditions to the contract." If you know that why ask?

Look I like the JJ pick and I like Fisher... Fisher made the pick now coach him up and mentor the kid. No need to try and control his every move. I'm starting losing faith in the pick if Fisher feels his needs to take extra ordinary steps to keep him in line. I bought into the statements we did our research on JJ and this stuff is behind him. But now I'm not so sure.


This is good for killing time until camp opens up through...