Having him and his speed at WR will make guys like Decker and Kerley more efficent and will help them make more plays ,Man if we get him and draft Ebron that is gonna be so sweet
oh so. Decker, Jackson, Kerley, Hill, Nelson, Gates with maybe Ebron and Cumberland at Tight End. that sounds niceeeeeeee
Guy was given a nice fat contract and the team wants to dump him coming off his best year? Major red flag. Draft Brandon Cooks; talent in a 20 lb. heavier package who doesn't appear to be the petulent little diva Jackson seems to be. Whatever his talent (and that he'd open up the Jets' early round draft options), Jackson still strikes me as a "me first" pain in the ass.
Team just spent money to resign Cooper/Maclin and will have to drop a pretty penny on their QB next offseason. You're kidding yourself if you think the Eagles wanting to get rid of Jackson is anything more than a cap move. I'd say 85% cap, 15% the man behind the cap number.
What's amazing to me is that Jackson is just getting into the meaty years of the contract, where he's going to make $10M+ a year, and this is when he's talking about renegotiating? 2012 he makes $11M counting the $10M bonus. 2013 he makes $7M. Now he's in the fat half of the contract with $30M of the $48M overall coming his way in reliable chunks and he's trying to rework the deal? Something is not right there.
They just won 10 games and made the playoffs with Jackson as their leading receiver and giving them #1 production on the year. It doesn't make sense that they'd cut him as opposed to at least paying him the $10M this year to try to get back to the playoffs. This has to be about the renegotiation demand and the Eagles fear that he will be a distraction. You don't rock the boat when it just got near the finish line for the first time in three years last year. Would they cut him after the season? Sure, but paying the $10M this year is a no-brainer for the Eagles.
I agree - I really feel antsy about why the Eagles seem so keen to drop him - he wants a lot but for a top talent teams pretty much always seem able to find the money from somewhere (if they want to).
He realises he is 27 and his contract ends at 30. Simple terms he will be Santonio in 3 years possibly 2 since the 3rd year of his contract is easy to walk away from. Desean wants llong term security with a solid guarantee chunk so when he is cut from just about any team in 3 years, He will be set up. This will be the case with any play maker receiver at this stage in their career.
I don't think it has anything to do with being a distraction. There have been countless reports saying that he is a great teammate and that he is not a cancer at all. I think this falls into them not wanting to pay a guy when they have Cooper, Maclin, Sproles, McCoy, etc. They have so many weapons and so much money into these guys, that they can't see themselves paying another guy.
Maybe they would rather ditch him and the $10 mil and take their chances on Maclin being able to match that production? That's another thing... Maclin is on a one year deal. If he performs well, they are going to have to pay him AND Foles a nice amount of coin to stay.
I guess you never Know. i of course say trade for him, but I can't see idzik paying that 10 mill salary.
Receiving TE is more important. Dominate the running game. Decker-Jackson-Kerley sounds like fun though. As long as Jackson does act like Holmes and actually shows up to play football/catch passes on Sunday
I really don't think the FO wants to deal with another malignant player. I just can't see them putting themselves in this position, but dumber things have happened.
I would do it, for sure. Usually I am of the conservative approach, but I would roll the dice with D-Jax. He's enough of a difference maker to deal with any attitude issues. IMO it would give the Jets the best receiving corps since Coles, Chrebet and Moss. I will get blasted for this, but if they get D-Jax then I would go CB in the first round. I would not go TE in the first with Decker, Jax and Kerley in the mix, Cumberland could fill the secondary role.
