What's your opinion of the Steven Jackson situation?

[Nick]

See, now that sounds like a fair offer and a solid starting point in negotions.

But if it really is the starting point in negotiations, should the Rams have waited until the night before camp to extend that to Jackson?

I certainly do not feel that my implication in this thread was anymore sarcastic than your implication in the other thread was condescending.

Then I apologize if you found my post to be condescending. That was not my objective. I hope to continue this debate in a more civil tone, and perhaps without a side debate on semantics.

I think I've made it clear that I don't feel a conclusion can be drawn about the fairness or acceptability of a contract when all we know is where that contract places him among other players. You disagree, and that's fine.

Do you suppose every other RB and their respective agents are all stupid and sign contracts with crappy nuances or finer details? Or that Jackson and his agent are just that much smarter than everyone else at finding the crappy details?

No, I would think that the respective agents of other running backs carefully examine the entirety of the contract offer so that the details of the deal are agreeable to them. Some details that work for one player may not be agreeable to another. I don't think that makes one set crap, but they just have different objectives.

It's the agent's job to get the best deal for his/her client as possible, and I would think that means looking at more than just where the total value of the deal ranks in accordance with other players at the same position before advising his client to sign the deal.

So, before we get out the rubbing alcohol and sterilize the site from all conclusions....Would it be safe to conclude that Jackson is holding out of camp, pissing the FO off, and putting an end to future negotiating over 2 million dollars?

I can see where one could feel that way. Could that not be turned around on the organization as well, though? Could one not also say that the organization has shut down negotiations with their star player, the face of their franchise, over two million dollars? I think it could.

Ultimately I think both parties have contributed to where we are right now, but the fact of the matter is someone is going to have to budge in order to get things moving again. While I understand why Jackson chose to hold out, there is a limit to how long I think that holdout should last. I'll be disappointed if in two weeks time there still has not been any progress on this front.

[thoey]

Isn't 2 millions dollars the same amount we lost Bruce over?

[Curly Horns]

I can see where one could feel that way. Could that not be turned around on the organization as well, though? Could one not also say that the organization has shut down negotiations with their star player, the face of their franchise, over two million dollars? I think it could.

In my opinion the short answer is NO.

If the circumstances were different then yes.

The Rams came to Jackson to start negotiating on a new deal while he had 1 year remaining on the current contract. It has yet to be reported that this was anything more than an offer somewhere in the middle of negotiating. Nothing has been reported that this offer was a final "take it or leave it" offer. Yet Jackson decided to hold out rather than return the good faith the Rams had shown by reporting to camp and continue negotiating. Now, I would assume, he has done nothing more than piss Zyg off and set negotiations back to God only knows how far.

[moloch41]

But if it really is the starting point in negotiations, should the Rams have waited until the night before camp to extend that to Jackson?

Well, I think the statement that the Rams made about negotiations not being able to continue until he reports to camp answers that. Why wouldn't they just say that they made their offer and he needs to report if that was their line in the dirt?

[moloch41]

In my opinion the short answer is NO.

If the circumstances were different then yes.

The Rams came to Jackson to start negotiating on a new deal while he had 1 year remaining on the current contract. It has yet to be reported that this was anything more than an offer somewhere in the middle of negotiating. Nothing has been reported that this offer was a final "take it or leave it" offer. Yet Jackson decided to hold out rather than return the good faith the Rams had shown by reporting to camp and continue negotiating. Now, I would assume, he has done nothing more than piss Zyg off and set negotiations back to God only knows how far.

I completely agree with this entire statement- rep points for you!

[Nick]

Well, I think the statement that the Rams made about negotiations not being able to continue until he reports to camp answers that. Why wouldn't they just say that they made their offer and he needs to report if that was their line in the dirt?

I'm not saying that was their line in the dirt. What I'm wondering is, if that offer really was the starting point for negotiations, why it wasn't made back in June when Jackson got his new agent? Why wait until the night before camp to give Jackson their initial offer?

Or was this offer the result of lengthy negotiations through the summer months? According to the PD, the Rams hadn't approached Jackson about an extension as of May. It just seems risky for them to wait until the last minute, hours before camp, to give Jackson's camp their proposal IMO.

[JimH52]

Typical of Rams season to have a key player hold out. Can ANYONE please think about the Fans for a change?

[moloch41]

I'm not saying that was their line in the dirt. What I'm wondering is, if that offer really was the starting point for negotiations, why it wasn't made back in June when Jackson got his new agent? Why wait until the night before camp to give Jackson their initial offer?

Or was this offer the result of lengthy negotiations through the summer months? According to the PD, the Rams hadn't approached Jackson about an extension as of May. It just seems risky for them to wait until the last minute, hours before camp, to give Jackson's camp their proposal IMO.

Well, IMO, going to him about a contract extension a year before his contract was due up was plenty of time.

[r8rh8rmike]

Well, IMO, going to him about a contract extension a year before his contract was due up was plenty of time.

Obviously not in terms of getting anything finalized. I agree with Nick, why in the world would you wait until the zero hour before making an actual offer to get things going (if that's the case)?

[moloch41]

Obviously not in terms of getting anything finalized. I agree with Nick, why in the world would you wait until the zero hour before making an actual offer to get things going (if that's the case)?

Wouldn't the zero hour actually be a year from now when his contract actually ends? They are under no obligation to make an extension while he is still under contract. What they did was good faith, Jackson's tactics are not.

[r8rh8rmike]

Wouldn't the zero hour actually be a year from now when his contract actually ends? They are under no obligation to make an extension while he is still under contract. What they did was good faith, Jackson's tactics are not.

The Rams knew full well that players use the threat of a holdout during training camp as leverage in negotiations that are not going smoothly. If they had made an offer earlier, there could have been some give and take without any training camp deadline the next day to complicate things.

[moloch41]

The Rams knew full well that players use the threat of a holdout during training camp as leverage in negotiations that are not going smoothly. If they had made an offer earlier, there could have been some give and take without any training camp deadline the next day to complicate things.

It's a sad state of affairs when we start thinking that teams need to start resigning players more than a year before their contracts run out or they aren't doing their jobs.

[Nick]

They are under no obligation to make an extension while he is still under contract.

Correct, but it's in everyone's best interests if they do. The last thing the Rams need to do is alienate their most marketable player.

What they did was good faith, Jackson's tactics are not.

I applaud the Rams for their desire to extend Jackson's contract months before he hits free agency. But waiting until the eleventh hour before training camp to give Jackson an offer for consideration does not strike me as a tactic that's in good faith.

[r8rh8rmike]

It's a sad state of affairs when we start thinking that teams need to start resigning players more than a year before their contracts run out or they aren't doing their jobs.

It is a sad state of affairs, but why not deal with the reality of the situation and be proactive in trying to facilitate a deal as early as possible? If what has been reported is accurate, the Rams made a tactical error IMO.

I'm certainly not absolving Jackson of any blame here because he's responsible for a great deal of it, but the Rams and Jay Zygmunt have had their part in creating this mess too.

[Fortuninerhater]

In my opinion the short answer is NO.

If the circumstances were different then yes.

The Rams came to Jackson to start negotiating on a new deal while he had 1 year remaining on the current contract. It has yet to be reported that this was anything more than an offer somewhere in the middle of negotiating. Nothing has been reported that this offer was a final "take it or leave it" offer. Yet Jackson decided to hold out rather than return the good faith the Rams had shown by reporting to camp and continue negotiating. Now, I would assume, he has done nothing more than piss Zyg off and set negotiations back to God only knows how far.

FORTUNINERHATER:
Ferter, you have been a Ram fan for a long time, and you know, like I know that the Rams have been notoriously cheap when it comes to negotiating contracts.

If they had turned over a new lease, Jackson would already have a new extension. So don't pretend like the front office has a history of negotiating in good faith when in fact, they're just the opposite.

Look no further than, Eric Dickerson, Marshall Faulk, and Jerome Bettis. Of the three only Faulk worked out, and that probably had something to do with the fact that they had just traded for him.

All are Hall of Fame material, but Dickerson and Bettis still got treated like walk-ons at the local university.

So if I'm Jackson, looking back at the Rams history of lowballing, I wouldn't trust them either. With the Rams track-record, who's to say that they wouldn't just string him along all season, and then franchise him next year.

Message to Jackson: I don't blame you for using your leverage. I'd do the same thing. If the Rams won't pay you, believe me, somebody will.