| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Is Desean Jackson a luxury we can't afford? |
| Yes |
|
21% |
[ 3 ] |
| No |
|
78% |
[ 11 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 14 |
|
| Author |
Message |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:12 am Post subject: Is Desean Jackson a luxury we can’t afford? |
|
|
|
With our season really up the creek without a paddle, there are going to be some difficult questions which need answering which I will post at reasonable intervals.
Difficult Question #1 - Is Desean Jackson a luxury we can’t afford?
Note: Afford means 'afford in having' rather than 'afford in paying' - his contract is structured well.
Let me start off with making the note that I don't think Jackson should or will go anywhere, but it is one of the difficult questions we need to consider in the offseason.
In March, Desean Jackson signed a 5 year, $47m contract with the Philadelphia Eagles. This locked him up with the Eagles until the end of the 2016 season. This season, Jackson has put up 691 yards receiving more importantly, he hasn’t dropped a pass. However, he has only 2 touchdowns in the struggling offense and in the game against the Redskins, only had 2 catches for 5 yards. With the Eagles about to enter a new era; for the first time in 14 years without Andrew Walter Reid, is Jackson a luxury we can’t afford to have in the rebuilding stage.
Build around those players we have
The main reason not to do anything silly with Jackson is that we need to build around the talent that we have – McCoy and Jackson are the two main weapons on offense and any young quarterback (be it Foles or a draft pick) will need these two to develop as a player. Moving Jackson through a trade would just open up another hole for our front office and coaching staff to fill in the offseason.
If Jackson a #1 receiver?
I don’t think anyone could doubt that Desean Jackson is a playmaker. His speed is a rare attribute and he has shown on punt returns that he is a danger every time he touches the ball. However, it is difficult to claim that he is a #1 receiver. At 5-9 170 lbs, Jackson isn’t big enough or strong enough to do all the things expected of that #1 receiver. You fear for him if he runs slants; he can’t really go up and out muscle the defensive back for the ball. We have also seen times Jackson to be nonexistent in the passing game where the defense plays Cover 2 and Jackson is negated. Now this could be due to crummy gameplanning and playcalling, but you have to wonder if Jackson can be relied upon to be that 1200 yard plus receiver; or if he should be the complimentary receiver who also returns punts and is used on gadget plays.
Contract and what value could we get?
As mentioned above, Jackson signed a $47m contract. However, only $15m of it was guaranteed. Based on information available, we would take a reasonable cap hit if he were to be traded, but leaves the team who would trade for him with a cap friendly contract.
Who would trade for him? Teams which have a #1 receiver but needs that dynamic threat to get them over the hill. A team with an imaginative offensive playcaller who could get the most out of Jackson would also be beneficial. One team that stands out to me would be Houston. While they drafted Posey and Martin, they haven’t got a real X factor opposite Johnson.
That leads onto what we could receive for him. Given his contract, his return skills and the fact that he is an X factor, a 1st round pick is a minimum.
Summary
So to summarise, with the Eagles about to go through a rebuilding phase, do they cash in one of their chips which, while it might hurt them next year, could give them the additional building blocks to be a real force in the years to come? _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
Last edited by marky_b27 on Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eagles_808 
 Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 24760 Location: Torrance, CA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Even with a new coaching staff, I don't think he's going anywhere. We just need a true #1 WR to pair with him.
We can free up $40M+ from cutting Vick, Bell, Babin, Nnamdi, etc. So by that point, DeSean's contract won't be an issue at all. _________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Eagles_808 wrote: | Even with a new coaching staff, I don't think he's going anywhere. We just need a true #1 WR to pair with him.
We can free up $40M+ from cutting Vick, Bell, Babin, Nnamdi, etc. So by that point, DeSean's contract won't be an issue at all. |
It's not about the money, it's about the fact that a cynic could call him a gimmick. A very good gimmick, but someone who can and has been shut out of games. _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Blahman88 
Joined: 30 Mar 2006 Posts: 21769 Location: DA BRITUSH IZLES
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Na, DeSean is on a reasonable price, and is playing very well, we can save cap by ridding ourselves of others. _________________
^Officially endorsed by Jon Dorenbos
| RandyMossIsBoss wrote: | | I would do the same but I know better then to start beef with the EBB. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eagles_808 
 Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 24760 Location: Torrance, CA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| marky_b27 wrote: | | It's not about the money, it's about the fact that a cynic could call him a gimmick. A very good gimmick, but someone who can and has been shut out of games. | Get him a true #1 WR, who generates real attention from opposing defenses, and DeSean's gimmick becomes an asset. _________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Did any of you actually read all of it - the cap issue isn't the problem. It's the fact that we could use Jackson to make our team better in the long run. _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Eagles_808 wrote: | | marky_b27 wrote: | | It's not about the money, it's about the fact that a cynic could call him a gimmick. A very good gimmick, but someone who can and has been shut out of games. | Get him a true #1 WR, who generates real attention from opposing defenses, and DeSean's gimmick becomes an asset. |
That was what I was kind of arguing, but it's something we need to consider.
If we, say bring in Norv Turner as OC, he just doesn't use short receivers. Then what? _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Blahman88 
Joined: 30 Mar 2006 Posts: 21769 Location: DA BRITUSH IZLES
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| marky_b27 wrote: | | Did any of you actually read all of it - the cap issue isn't the problem. It's the fact that we could use Jackson to make our team better in the long run. |
You don't get rid of a weapon like that, you build around it, it stretches the field. A true No.1 opposite will open space for him. _________________
^Officially endorsed by Jon Dorenbos
| RandyMossIsBoss wrote: | | I would do the same but I know better then to start beef with the EBB. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eagles_808 
 Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 24760 Location: Torrance, CA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Blahman88 wrote: | | You don't get rid of a weapon like that, you build around it, it stretches the field. A true No.1 opposite will open space for him. | QFT _________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Blahman88 wrote: | | marky_b27 wrote: | | Did any of you actually read all of it - the cap issue isn't the problem. It's the fact that we could use Jackson to make our team better in the long run. |
You don't get rid of a weapon like that, you build around it, it stretches the field. A true No.1 opposite will open space for him. |
Which is what we need, but will it come this year???? _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eagles_808 
 Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 24760 Location: Torrance, CA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| marky_b27 wrote: | | If we, say bring in Norv Turner as OC, he just doesn't use short receivers. Then what? | Isn't Eddie Royal a Charger right now?
I'm sure if we hire someone who "doesn't use short WRs," they'll find a way to use DeSean somehow. _________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Eagles_808 wrote: | | Blahman88 wrote: | | You don't get rid of a weapon like that, you build around it, it stretches the field. A true No.1 opposite will open space for him. | QFT |
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm also in the keep and build round Jackson and McCoy corner, but as I said, it is a difficult question which may be raised in the future. _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky_b27 
Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 17006 Location: Nottingham, England
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Eagles_808 wrote: | | marky_b27 wrote: | | If we, say bring in Norv Turner as OC, he just doesn't use short receivers. Then what? | Isn't Eddie Royal a Charger right now?
I'm sure if we hire someone who "doesn't use short WRs," they'll find a way to use DeSean somehow. |
Eddie Royal can go over the middle.
Jackson has a sick note preventing him
 _________________
| oland11 on America's use of Fahrenheit wrote: | | I know. We're stupid. |
| RainbowCarebear wrote: | | Again bloody fool him Howie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eagles_808 
 Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 24760 Location: Torrance, CA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| marky_b27 wrote: | | I'm also in the keep and build round Jackson and McCoy corner, but as I said, it is a difficult question which may be raised in the future. | We have more difficult questions to answer though Marky. That is the point I'm trying to make.
Do we keep Roseman as GM?
Who will be a our HC?
Who will be our QB?
What do we do with the defense?
Can we employ a competent safety duo?
What do we do with the O-line?
Those are bigger issues than "should we build around McCoy and Jackson," IMO. _________________
insignia by McNabbNo5 | #championCHIP | #Sparkles
Last edited by Eagles_808 on Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Blahman88 
Joined: 30 Mar 2006 Posts: 21769 Location: DA BRITUSH IZLES
|
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Trade Maclin if anything, for Bowe......why not _________________
^Officially endorsed by Jon Dorenbos
| RandyMossIsBoss wrote: | | I would do the same but I know better then to start beef with the EBB. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|