Chargers Header
Forum Home News Media Vault Schedule Team Charger Girls Tickets Fan Zone Community En Espaņol Fantasy Football Pro Shop

Go Back   The Official San Diego Chargers Forum > Chargers Talk > Around the NFL
Register FAQ Members List Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Do you think the Chargers made the right decision in not resigning VJ?
Yes they made the right choice in letting VJ go 48 33.10%
Way too early to tell 13 8.97%
No they made the wrong choice and should have matched TB's offer for VJ 72 49.66%
At least they'll get a Bacon, Lettuce, Tomato sammwich for him 12 8.28%
Voters: 145. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 11-08-2012, 01:39 PM
charger1_sj charger1_sj is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thumper300zx View Post
You can spearhead that if you want -- to me, I don't think it's possible. I've already said that
I'll spearhead it right now.

VJ $55M over 5 years. Assuming he plays all 5, average cost: $11M/yr

Meachem $26M over 4 years. Assuming he plays all 4 $6.5M/yr
Royal $14M over 3 years. Assuming he plays all 3 years 4.6M/yr

Average cost per year to retain Meachem and Royal > VJ average cost and that assumes VJ would not take a discount.

Now we get an extra player but we also get 1.5 less years on average.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 11-08-2012, 02:57 PM
Crime Time's Avatar
Crime Time Crime Time is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chatsworth
Posts: 3,635
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charger1_sj View Post
Again I do not believe cost was the major reason. It's always a reason.
The way I read the tea leaves is we didn't want to sign VJ and took a different path.
Looking that info, it's not that we couldn't afford to re-sign VJ, but that we thought we could get better value with other WR's.

There is also the factor of off the field issues, etc. But I think mainly AJ thought he would get better production out of Meachem and Royal, and that Meachem alone might come close to replacing VJ's production.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:04 PM
charger1_sj charger1_sj is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crime Time View Post
Looking that info, it's not that we couldn't afford to re-sign VJ, but that we thought we could get better value with other WR's.

There is also the factor of off the field issues, etc. But I think mainly AJ thought he would get better production out of Meachem and Royal, and that Meachem alone might come close to replacing VJ's production.
At the time I said you don't break up what's working. There's a lot to be said about that.

These moves may turn out to be a painful lesson or AJ could be a genius. A little to early to tell. So far pain is winning.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:07 PM
bolt-thistle bolt-thistle is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charger1_sj View Post
I'll spearhead it right now.

VJ $55M over 5 years. Assuming he plays all 5, average cost: $11M/yr

Meachem $26M over 4 years. Assuming he plays all 4 $6.5M/yr
Royal $14M over 3 years. Assuming he plays all 3 years 4.6M/yr

Average cost per year to retain Meachem and Royal > VJ average cost and that assumes VJ would not take a discount.

Now we get an extra player but we also get 1.5 less years on average.
and now with cap hits on contracts as-is (again, theoretically could have been managed with cap magic)

VJ:
2012: 13
2013: 13
2014: 10
2015: 9.8
2016: 9.8


Royal and Meachem:
2012: 6.375
2013: 11.375
2014: 12.875
2015: 8.375 (no Royal)
2016: -
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:10 PM
charger1_sj charger1_sj is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bolt-thistle View Post
and now with cap hits on contracts as-is (again, theoretically could have been managed with cap magic)

VJ:
2012: 13
2013: 13
2014: 10
2015: 9.8
2016: 9.8


Royal and Meachem:
2012: 6.375
2013: 11.375
2014: 12.875
2015: 8.375 (no Royal)
2016: -
We would not write VJ's contract as is. Tampa did it with salary because they were way under the cap. We would do with bonuses. Thus the first year cap hit could easily be under $5M if indeed the cap was an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:14 PM
andocug's Avatar
andocug andocug is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: vista
Posts: 6,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crime Time View Post
Looking that info, it's not that we couldn't afford to re-sign VJ, but that we thought we could get better value with other WR's.

There is also the factor of off the field issues, etc. But I think mainly AJ thought he would get better production out of Meachem and Royal, and that Meachem alone might come close to replacing VJ's production.
Agreed. Too early to make a judgement IMO. This may be hard to believe but the Bucs and Bolts both started strong last season (Bucs were 3-1 and we were 4-1 at one point) but faded in the middle of the season.

The Bucs and Bolts were both 4-4 midway through last season so we can conclude thus far that the absence/loss of VJ has had no impact on the win/loss column compared to last year.

We saved money by not resigning VJ, which has allowed us to fill other holes on this team. What these teams do in the 2nd half will determine whether they spent their free agency dollars wisely.
__________________
2014 Mock Draft - stay put
1) Nix, NT 2) B. Thomas OG/OT WR 3) Breeland, CB 4) P. Richardson, WR
5) B. Ellington, WR 6) W. Johnson OT/OG 7) Enemkpali, OLB

2014 Mock - trade #25 to MIN for #40* and #72*
2a*) Verrett, CB 2b) Moncrief, WR*) J. Mewhort, OT 3b) E. Ferguson, NT
4) B. Stork, OG/OC, DE 5) B. Ellington, WR 6) C. Marsh, LB 7) Fortt, ILB
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:16 PM
charger1_sj charger1_sj is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andocug View Post
Agreed. Too early to make a judgement IMO. This may be hard to believe but the Bucs and Bolts both started strong last season (Bucs were 3-1 and we were 4-1 at one point) but faded in the middle of the season.

The Bucs and Bolts were both 4-4 midway through last season so we can conclude thus far that the absence/loss of VJ has had no impact on the win/loss column compared to last year.

We saved money by not resigning VJ, which has allowed us to fill other holes on this team. What these teams do in the 2nd half will determine whether they spent their free agency dollars wisely.
That statement does not appear to be true based on VJ's salary vs Meachem and Royal.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:21 PM
bolt-thistle bolt-thistle is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charger1_sj View Post
We would not write VJ's contract as is. Tampa did it with salary because they were way under the cap. We would do with bonuses. Thus the first year cap hit could easily be under $5M if indeed the cap was an issue.
I'm not disagreeing, I'm just calculating out cap hit, since average cost on NFL contracts can be deceptive (back loaded salary years etc). Cap hit means more when looking at roster value.

also looking for both receivers to make up 1000 yards and about 10 TDs between the two of them didn't seem like such a stretch at the beginning of the season.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:33 PM
charger1_sj charger1_sj is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bolt-thistle View Post
I'm not disagreeing, I'm just calculating out cap hit, since average cost on NFL contracts can be deceptive (back loaded salary years etc). Cap hit means more when looking at roster value.

also looking for both receivers to make up 1000 yards and about 10 TDs between the two of them didn't seem like such a stretch at the beginning of the season.
I wasn't looking at it from a hindsight point of view. My opinion at the time was to keep VJ. I would have done it the year we F-Tagged him. Otherwise we should have traded him when we had the opportunity.

I was happy with the addition of Meachem and Royal. But I also thought it was a bad idea to break up what was working. Not sure how this is all going to work out. Right now a bit of a heartache. Nothing new for a Charger fan.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:46 PM
LTALLDAY's Avatar
LTALLDAY LTALLDAY is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SAN DIEGO
Posts: 699
Default

you have to be out of your mind thinking the chargers are better off without VJ
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:56 PM.


© 2012 San Diego Chargers. All Rights Reserved.