clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Jones-Drew vs. The Jags: Will there be a winner in this standoff?

New, comments
Getty Images

While I will normally be the first to say that the guys over at NFL.com as a whole don't know squat about the Jacksonville Jaguars, while reading an article over there they did have some pretty valid points regarding our own Maurice Jones Drew and his current holdout from the Jacksonville Jaguars. I won't note every opinion that was mentioned but a few in particular that I seem to be the most likely scenarios...

(click here to read the full article)

Jason Smith - NFL.com

"Another RB holdout? Well, we know how this story goes ...

Chris Johnson, anyone? Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it ...

Here's how your wins and losses go for every RB-specific holdout. There's acrimony, and no deal is done until training camp is well underway. They'll come to terms on a new contract, because they always do, but the running back will rush back to get into true football shape, and either have a nagging groin or hamstring injury as a result. Or it will be a down season because he had to scramble to get ready to play and won't really be in top form until it's too late. That's just how situations like this play out. It's like watching "House" -- every episode is the same. Someone comes in with an illness no one can figure out, nearly dies in the middle, but is saved when House figures it out in the final two minutes of the episode. You'd think teams would find a way around holdouts because they've seen them so often, but they don't.

MJD will "win" because he'll get paid, and the Jaguars will "lose" -- at least this season -- because a protracted holdout almost always means diminished returns for a RB. But because he's only 27, Jones-Drew should have another two or three terrific seasons left after this one."

and

Steve Wyche - NFL.com

"This is tough, but the Jags will win (if failing to acquiesce is the criteria). If Jones-Drew holds out, Jacksonville will lose -- games -- but they've done a decent job of that with him on the roster, leading the NFL in rushing. That is the real guts of this. Though Jones-Drew is arguably the best running back in the NFL and one of the best players in Jaguars history, his productivity hasn't translated into much success. It's the same thing that happened in Oakland with former cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha, an exceptional cornerback for them who never played on a Raiders team with a winning record.

The Jaguars rewarded Jones-Drew handsomely a few years ago and the market has exceeded his value. It's what happens in sports every year. If Jones-Drew, owed $4.45 million this season, holds out, he'll end up losing in the long term because he'll be fined (so he'll earn even less money), the team will be worse (if possible) and he'll continue aging toward the dubious 30-year-old mark that is the symbolic end of the road for running backs.".....
Jags are in a pretty rough spot in the situation if you ask me....Everyone's technically "right" in this situation.
The front office is essentially damned if you do. Damned if you don't. No matter what you kind of have to agree with Gene Smith on this one though...like it or not. Not paying MJD (until next year MINIMUM) is the right move. And next year's contract negotiations will bring many more questions to the table...Stay tuned....

Quick question to all of my Couch GMs! What say you BCC? Pay the man or sound strategic move by not budging when he was essentially pre-paid in his first contact?