Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 32
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation



    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    The PR stuff and messages to other team members is irrelevant to me. All teams go through bouts of unhappy players and eventually everything is worked out -- never exactly how one side or the other or both wants -- and we move on.

    Besides, I don't think Khan has been disrespectful. I think MJD and his agent claim that, but to me it's a sign that they can't get any traction in their hold out and are clamoring to incite fans to pressure the team. That won't work.

    It's a fallacy that MJD is underpaid. He got a $31 million, five-year deal three years ago. But the deal was front loaded. He's been sitting on 2012 and 2013 compensation for three years now, earning interest. Now he wants us to buy the fact that earning just shy of $5 million a year for the next two years makes him underpaid. Sorry, not buying it.

    I'm thrilled the team is responding how it is responding.

    Interesting to note, however, that Ray Rice just signed a front loaded deal. We'll see how that sits with him down the road.
    This sums it up perfectly.




  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,019
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Kahn has also given up 4 home games to set up shop in London. He seems a lot more business oriented than the usual NFL owner who puts winning first, even if they aren't good at accomplishing it. I have a feeling that Kahn is going to own this team for 10 years and then try and flip it after he moves them to a better market. This is the same guy who wanted to buy the Rams but as soon as he couldn't jumped at the next available team. This is an investment which means he's not going to put extra money into it now because winning now doesn't mean anything to his long term plans.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    1,262

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    I don't think the issue is weather or not Kahn disrespected MJD. The issues is weather or not Kahn said something that could be interpreted by a player as disrespect.

    Kahn has every right to disrespect anyone he wants, it just doesn't make good business sense to risk offending a star player. Stick to your guns and don't talk about it publicly. That's what smart owners and smart GMs do.




  4. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    I look at this in this way as the NFL is an industry and every team is a company.

    The owner has the money to pay MJD, but feels that he needs to place his stamp on the team.

    MJD is trying to get paid with the industry standard for his performance, but is aging.

    The mistakes thus far appear to be on the owner's side with the talking in public about this matter instead of handling this in house.

    MJD is looking for that last payday. By all accounts he has earned this considering his environment that in which he still has produced against all odds really.

    I really don't see a solution except for letting him walk via trade. Even that I don't see happening as teams may not be willing to take on this contract right now at MJD's age.

    The owner is not in the wrong really except talking much on the contract. Leave that to the front office.




  5. #20

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    I didn't realize a 27-year old RB with 3 years as full-time starter and another 3 as a change-of-pace back was "old."




  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The Greater Metropolitan Granite Falls, NC Area
    Posts
    2,215

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Excell-
    I find the discussion interesting AND Ravens related, thinking back to situations like Jamal Lewis before he went to Cleve, or when Priest Holmes "jumped ship" to KC.

    But I have to disagree with "Then the same should go for the front office. So, no players should be getting cut. If they overplay their contract and should still honor it, a front office should also honor that contract when they are considering getting rid of an aging player or a player on the decline."

    The contract game (if you will) is not played that way, and ALL of the players (pun intended) know it - draftees, veterans, walk-ons, agents, team owners, general managers, coaches, etc., etc. That's why there is guaranteed money and bonuses. Not that I see anyone on a higher moral ground in that picture, but players get up-front money that is a risk to the team(s) if the player doesn't pan out, while teams try to manage their CAP and use the cutting of "expensive" contract players later in their tenure as well as the "Watch my hands closely as they never leave my arms!" accounting techniques. When it comes down to the bottom line, they all want as much as they can squeeze out of "the other side", and screw the cost to the fans.

    Not that I feel strongly about this, you understand...




  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,405
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    When did they threaten to blow up the locker room chemistry?
    I didn't mean they verbally threatened the locker room chemistry. I meant that he purposely incited a PR situation and purposely pushed his unhappiness into the public discourse.

    I probably should have said that MJD and his agent were "risking," not "threatening," a locker room blow up.

    Your argument seems to be that contract disputes --> unhappy star players --> unhappy locker rooms.

    If that's the case -- if that's the concern -- then MJD is just as responsible for locker room strife as Khan.

    I say that because we all know how this works. 1) Player's agent privately contacts management about new contract. 2) Management informs agent they are not ready to negotiate a new deal with two years left on current deal. 3) It goes back and forth without management budging. 4) Agent tells player to sit-out of camp to "create leverage" and knowing the PR fallout will pressure management to keep star player happy. 5) Press goes to management and asks, "gee, your star player seems unhappy. What are you guys going to do about it? Doesn't this really disrupt your team?" 6) Team forced to respond publicly.

    As I said, all the PR stuff is pointless gamesmanship to me. Talk of locker room effects is pointless to me.

    What it really comes down to is if you feel MJD has a right to feel unhappy. You believe he outplayed his contract. I do not. Or, more to the point, I feel that this is the nature of signing a long term deal, as others have said.

    I used to make the same argument that contracts are too one sided. Owners always have an out -- cutting a guy -- with minor ramifications to the cap.

    Players don't have an out.

    That seems unfair. However, this unfairness is already factored in in the form of guaranteed money. If you don't like the idea then don't sign a long term deal with a big guaranteed bonus. Play for one year deals. Or take less upfront in exchange for player options after three years. Everything is negotiatable and MJB negotiated it away when he took the bones money upfront.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle Cactus View Post
    I don't think the issue is weather or not Kahn disrespected MJD. The issues is weather or not Kahn said something that could be interpreted by a player as disrespect.

    Kahn has every right to disrespect anyone he wants, it just doesn't make good business sense to risk offending a star player. Stick to your guns and don't talk about it publicly. That's what smart owners and smart GMs do.
    I do agree with this. While Khan hasn't been disrespectful, in my view, he could have been more coy with the press. Something closer to no-comment would have put the PR ball in MJD's court.

    That said, I'm reading that most fans support the owner. Strange, since he just sold them down river vis-a-vis London.




  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,855
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle Cactus View Post
    Jones-Drew is well within his right to hold out.

    Technically, it's not his right. He's violating his contract, which explains why he is being fined.




  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Holy crap, I forgot that MJD is only 27 lol( I thought he was 29 or so). Forgive me, it's only Thursday and I'm getting weekend brain.




  10. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,812
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    If I were Jax, I'd trade him.

    I get the whole idea of how it's not fair that teams can cut guys for underperforming contracts and players are stuck when they outperform it.

    But on the whole...my belief is that I agree with the young guys who are are stars, yet are still in their rookie deals...not so much vet stars who are pissed 2-3 years into record contracts.

    If a player wants to constantly be at the top pay for his position, he needs to sacrifice some in terms of the length of these deals they sign. If you are elite, and stay elite after signing a 5 year deal, your contract is guaranteed to be passed by quite a bit 3-4 years into it.

    Back to the question though, I would not give him a new deal if he is expecting to break the bank again. The team is still going to be bad, with or without him...he doesn't make Jax into a contender or anything.

    I'd get what I could for him in a trade...draft picks.



    There are plenty of teams out there that would be interested in giving up a 2nd or 3rd rounder for MJD. I doubt he'd garner a 1st round pick given his age. Not one team was chomping at the bit to sent Pittsburgh a 1st rounder for Mike Wallace and he's younger and at a much more premium position than MJD is.

    Miami, Pittsburgh (if they could afford it), Jets, Pats, Lions, Cardinals, Redskins, Bills, Chargers and possibly even the Colts or Raiders might be interested in trading for MJD.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,812
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by Stealthbirds80 View Post
    Holy crap, I forgot that MJD is only 27 lol( I thought he was 29 or so). Forgive me, it's only Thursday and I'm getting weekend brain.
    The pounding he has taken as being the Jags only real source of offense the past 2-3 years is what makes him "old".
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,019
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post



    There are plenty of teams out there that would be interested in giving up a 2nd or 3rd rounder for MJD. I doubt he'd garner a 1st round pick given his age. Not one team was chomping at the bit to sent Pittsburgh a 1st rounder for Mike Wallace and he's younger and at a much more premium position than MJD is.

    Miami, Pittsburgh (if they could afford it), Jets, Pats, Lions, Cardinals, Redskins, Bills, Chargers and possibly even the Colts or Raiders might be interested in trading for MJD.
    Jets have already said they aren't interested. Picks and a new contract makes it way too expensive. I'd love to see what Jones-Drew could do on the Chargers. He'd be perfect for Norv's offense.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  13. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    1,262

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    That said, I'm reading that most fans support the owner. Strange, since he just sold them down river vis-a-vis London.
    That is surprising. They must really be unhappy with the holdout to side with an owner who just moved home games out of the country.
    Last edited by Kyle Cactus; 08-23-2012 at 01:10 PM. Reason: meant to type unhappy instead of happy




  14. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle Cactus View Post
    That is surprising. They must really be happy with the holdout to side with an owner who just moved home games out of the country.
    I think a fanbase that hasn't had much to cheer about recently is getting hoodwinked by preseason success. A casual fan's memory is week to week when it comes to the NFL.




  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,319
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Maurice Jones- Drew situation

    The idea that Jones-Drew played at such a high level, that he deserved such a high contract, should not negate the reality that he is currently outplaying the parameters of the remaining portion of the contract.

    The idea that Jones-Drew is an RB, which is considered a devalued position, should not negate the reality that they are going to once again pound Jones-Drew into the ground, making him a substantial portion of their offense.

    The idea that Jones-Drew used his one possible move for leverage, should not negate the reality that the Owner made the negotiations public with some remarks that we would never hear come from an owner such as the one we enjoy.

    Beau Petard,

    my comment was in response to another poster. I understand where you are coming from. I take the stance if we are going to play this game, play this game, but don't say that it's okay for the owners to play it while the player has to honor his contract. Jones-Drew probably won't get a raise for outplaying his contract (In my opinion) and will find himself cut the minute he starts underplaying it or gets hurt.
    (This directed toward the poster that I was originally responding to)

    I actually believe that this will have a large impact in the locker room. Team chemistry is easy for us to under-appreciate, because the Ravens have so much of it. That is not the case in Jacksonville and there are plenty of players who look to Jones-Drew, who has always been a respected figure around the league and model citizen. The negotiations are one thing, but to say that his absence won't 'move the needle' or 'move the meter', sends a message to the team of how they view their best player and long-time leader. I believe that will affect chemistry in the locker room and that translates to the field.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland