DE$EAN JACKSON WILL BE TRADED.

The Eagles also will drop 9 million on the cap with trading away Samuel. Furthermore there is no chance they can trade Jackson for market value (whatever that is considering they don't think he's worth very much) and no team would agree for a trade for Jackson if he's not willing to come down on his contract demands.

Saying that they don't think he's worth 10+ million a year, isn't at all the same as saying they don't think he's worth much. If they have a figure of around 4 or 5 (per year long-term) that's still a value.

Well they think He's worth 9.5 Mil a year so that's much closer to 10 than his 500k he's making now. I think the Eagles are wisely considering to play with the devil they already know rather than trying to get the one they don't. Listen to what the organizational people are saying. I think it's obvious he will back. And if Santonio Holmes is worth 10 Mil a year then Jackson should be pretty close to that himself.

i agree with EZ they will not get anything of equal value for him because they have showed what they think he is worth. the same goes for asante but he will be traded. i dont see cooper being a replacement. i think they would sign a new WR. plus they can still work towards a long term deal.

I don't see Riley Cooper as any trype of replacement. He has yet to show me anything that makes me think he's ready to become an elite NFL player. Hank Baskett showed me more as a player then Riley Cooper. In fact I would take Chad Hall over Riley Cooper. At least Chad Hall is a versatile player.

agreed

Honestly I don't get your beef with Jackson flip, nor do I see why you don't like the fact he wants more money. That just makes him like every other player in the league. Do you think Peyton Manning is looking to turn down that 20 Million he's owed to stay a Colt? As far as Jackson is concerned the guy mad like 500k last season. How many two time pro bowl players in their 4th year do you know make 500k? Jeremy Maclin makes more money than Jackson and still hasn't made a pro bowl, had an impact game in a victory, and still has yet to gain more yards in a season than Jackson.In fact one could argue Maclin regressed last year yet you seem perfectly fine with him even though every receiver drafted in the first round with him outperformed him last season. Just curious.... Will you turn on Shady when he asks for money too?

the shady deal scares the crap out of me

He's a different breed that Jackson. He'll honor his word and his deal, and in the end good things will come to him.

most likely n no denying they r two completely different players but hes gonna wanna be paid alot he knows he made this team go last year n if the same thing goes on he will want as much if not more than MJD and whatever Forte gets this year

I wouldn't be so sure those good things will come from the Eagles. Shady and Jackson have the same agent. You know TO's agent so the play book will be the same. Let's say McCoy has another season similar to last year. What do think McCoy's agent will be looking for in contract negotiations? Think highest paid running back. Do you think for a second the Eagles would be willing to do that, because McCoy was the good soldier?

First, I have no beef with him. I never met the dude, so how could I? While everybody wants to get PAID, some guys are willing to play their way (not pout, and holdout their way) into bigger contracts. We see it every year.

I respect a man who honors his word. When Jackson signed his rookie deal, HE signed it. That was his word. There is no way around that. That is what makes it a contract. The Eagles didn't cut his pay when he dogged it through this season. They can't dock him due to low effort. They also signed a contract.

As for Peyton Manning 1) He took LESS money than Irsay first offered him, (to help keep his team together), and 2) If he stays a Colt his CONTRACT says he's OWED that money. OWED. Very big difference between what your owed and what you'd like.

Maclin never had an impact game in a victory? I guess those TWO touchdown catches in Miracle at the Meadowlands II, weren't impactful during that comeback. And yes, it seems he AND the offense took a step back this year, and no one is fine with that.

LeSean McCoy may end up making my point. He is scheduled to pull in a base of 565K in 2012 (the last year of his rookie deal), 10K more than Jackson's 2011 base (555K).

Let's see how Shady goes about his business this season. My guess is he'll show up for work and put in some work. If the Eagles are then too stupid to pay him, some other team will back a truckful of money up to his front door. That's how this works.

Where I come from you finish what's on your plate BEFORE you get seconds.

First off Desean Jackson did honor his contract. He came in and played as he was suppose to. That's why he is eligible to become a free agent no so your argument makes little sense there. Second what about verbal agreements? The Eagles first said they wanted to sign a contract with Jackson, but they were stuck due to the CBA, but once the CBA was fixed they would handle the situation. The Eagles also told Jackson they would negotiate with him after he came in from his hold out. They never even offered a contract. Not only that they threw millions at a bunch of players that never played a down for them and never won a game for them almost to spite Jackson. Third don't assume that Shady is just going to play the good guy role here. Last I checked they both have the same agent so you can expect similar contractual situations to occur. Jackson was just playing the Rosenhaus playbook of contract negotiations. I expect McCoy's situation to be similar. Forth NFL contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on. Jackson blows out a knee next year do you think he's getting paid? Mike Vick starts declining as a player will the team "honor his contract?" ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!! So this idea of players need to honor a contract the teams themselves don't is a poor reason to have issue with a player. After all time and time again the team has chosen not to honor contracts and have repeatedly cut players in the middle of their contracts. So if this is your real issue then where's your beef with the team for constantly not honoring contracts? I tell you this. If I were on a team that did what the Eagles did to Lenard Weaver and put an obviously concussed players like Kevin Kolb and Stew Bradley back in games I would be protecting my health to, because the team clearly doesn't care about the players.

Again, I have no "beef" or "issue" with any man I never met.

If a player is injured BTW there is injury insurance which NFL players are REQUIRED to have. (When the NFL would no longer insure Jim McMahon's body, he had to pay an elevated premium to an outside insurer). And yes if a player is injured during the guaranteed portion of a contract, the guaranteed portion is then paid out. (This is the very reason so many player want guaranteed years.)

As for verbal agreements, Karl Malone used to negotiate handshake deals with the owner of the Jazz in the NBA, but those men had a personal relationship AWAY from basketball. It was a special (and rare, mind you) relationship. But in the end even those deals were sealed with ink. What are the odds that Lurie and Jackson go drinking together?

They added talent "almost to spite Jackson"? I guess we didn't need to improve our pass defense from 2010 levels. Generating the pass rush up the gut we've lacked since Corey Simon, could have waited as well I suppose? Steve Smith played for 4 million last year. Jackson won't sign for that, and was threatening to holdout when they signed Smith for less than Jackson is willing to sign for. Smith wasn't spite. He was insurance. The rest was to bolster the roster, because Jackson doesn't play QB, RB, G, or DE.

And since when was cutting a guy dishonorable? It's a condition of EVERY NFL contract. If you cut a guy and he's worth what you were paying him, he stands a chance to make that or BETTER in a bidding war. If he's worth the money he'll make the money. Either here or there.

This VERY situation is taking place in Indianapolis RIGHT NOW. If Peyton Manning can throw a ball, he'll make 17 million next year for someone. The Colts loss will be someone else's gain. It's that simple. Notice the SECOND 100 million dollar contract of Michael Vick's career? It's basic ECON 101 stuff: Scarcity divided by demand yields perceived commodity value. Never fails.

The bottom line here is that he WILL be traded. Whatever his long-term worth is, will have to be worked out by some other franchise.

I would say they did add talent to spite Jackson. Vince Young was completely unnecessary and to give him 5 million to be a backup was crazy. Steve Smith wasn't even healthy and they knew it, Ronnie Brown they knew they were going to rarely use, and so much for a pass rush that got them only 8 victories. Not to mention all the money the dumped on cornerbacks who can't tackle. Bottom line a happy Jackson the Eagles make the playoffs. An unhappy Jackson the Eagles win 8 games. A benched Jackson the Eagles offense sputters and your great hope Riley Cooper disappears. The fact the Eagles may or may not trade Jackson is irrelevant. The fact you think it's a good idea is. How do you consider Jackson didn't uphold his contract? If he didn't then NONE OF THE EAGLES PLAYERS DID OTHER THAN SHADY MCCOY WHO CLEARLY OUTPLAYED HIS CONTRACT. Considering the fact Jackson still out gained the rest of the receivers on this roster every last one of them should take a pay cut. Playing in games you are suppose to play in is honoring your contract. Why do you think it's okay for teams to terminate contracts but it's not okay for players to demand more money especially if they outplay their contract?

http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/news/article-1/Tuesday-Morning-Headlines/558e2ae6-045e-4b93-ba02-1c9f2ff3439d

This link will take you to the Eagles website. Click "Another take" under the headline.

Ask yourself: "Why would they link this article to their site?"

What you still aren't taking into account is the fact Desean Jackson is now in control of this situation. That means no team will trade for Jackson if he's not willing to sign a long term deal with them. So the Eagles can't just go to Buffalo or Arizona and try an trade Jackson. They will only be able to trade him to wherever he wants to go. On top of that teams know the Eagles are in a bind so the best they might get is a 3rd round pick. That might even be pushing it for some teams considering the fact of signing Jackson will be an expensive proposition. It also could be time consuming. Finally why should teams even take a chance trying to trade for Jackson when there are other viable players on the free agent market? Why waste a pick trading for Jackson and trying to sign him when a team can just sign Vincent Jackson or Marcus Colston? It will be just as difficult for the Eagles to trade Jackson as it has been for them to sign him. Worse case scenario. Jackson plays his tail off next season and go gets paid from another team money the Eagles should have paid him a long time ago. Best case scenario Jackson gets traded for a 3rd round pick. Of course in my opinion the best case scenario would be to resign the guy to a 4 year deal and move on from this nonsense. The Shady deal is coming up and will need to be dealt with.

I fully agree with everything you said here. I don't think they'll do better than a third rounder. I think the idea is not to let him walk for nothing.

Franchising him locks in his rights for the Eagles and any team that trades for him for at least this year. The difference with another team (Cleveland, San Fran, St. Louis, Washington) is they may not mind giving him his terms, so that LTC is much easier to reach for them than it is for the Eagles who clearly won't make that commitment now.

Colston, Bowe, Vincent Jackson, etc. if they want to steer clear of teams like a Washington, Cleveland, Seattle, or Minnesota, can do so. If traded De$ean HAS to go wherever for at least a year, at which point that team can throw money at him.

But it goes without saying that there won't be a LTC here, at this point. At this point it's all just damage control.

I understand all you need is one dumb GM to make a trade, but let's be real. If you were a GM in the NFL would you trade for Jackson if you weren't sure he was going to resign? Would you give up even a 3rd for that?

Your question assumes that Jackson is trying to be an obstruction to getting a LTC somewhere. The question assumes that he has a destination in mind already. He doesn't have to sign the franchise tender, at which point I doubt the Eagles would fight to keep him.

It's in Jackson's best interest to go where he can get that LTC, and that place is ANYWHERE but here. If he signs the tag, and then won't be moved he only risks damaging his stock, if he's injured, or has another year where he can't focus himself.

The iron is hot NOW.

If I'm a GM in Jacksonville where they have a young QB, trouble selling seats and Falcons CB's calling my WR's "F***** jokes", I go as high as a second rounder.

If I'm Jeff Fisher and I want to give Sam Bradford a new toy to go with Brandon Lloyd and open things up for Steven Jackson, I go as high as a Third rounder.

If I'm Dan Snyder and I need to sell seats, improve my sad sad SAD WR corp, and want to take from a rival a guy who still gives my fans nightmares. Third rounder.

There are other scenarios out there as well. and if you package Jackson with something else, say Asante Samuel (who I'm not sure is moving now) the sky is the limit. That's 18 million in cap space, AND a possible first rounder. (Detroit, St. Louis, Jacksonville, Minnesota, and Cleveland are all teams that have this player need combo, and someone to catch in their division.)

So yeah. I guess I could see a parting with a third rounder.

I am making a assumption here, but I don't think Jackson signs a longterm deal with any team he doesn't think is a contender. Multiple player NFL deals rarely happen and if I were to bet, then I would bet Jackson has a much better chance of being an Eagle next season than Asante.

Something else I had not considered. If the Eagles decide to Franchise Jackson it would be difficult for them to both trade him and sign one of the Free Agent wide receivers (though I don't think this is even a consideration). If by some chance they do sign on of these guys (highly unlikely) all of Jackson's trade value immediately goes away similar to how Asante Samuel's trade value went away last year. If the Eagles are truly interested in letting Jackson go and signing a free agent they will not franchise him.

Apparently the Patriots and Wes Welker are having contract difficulties. I guess that means he will be Franchised and traded as well.

I doubt it. Welker isn't the type of player that you give 10+ per year to, expecting him to give opposing DC's headaches. My guess is his deal will look like 28 to 30 over 4 years, and will be hammered out before the Draft.

Welker is too important to Tom Brady (Wes, Tom ,and their ladies are on a vacation together in Costa Rica), for the Pats to mess with that chemistry. This deal will get done.