Unhappy campers (Thomas Jones mentioned)

[SBG]

Several key veterans displeased with contracts

We've hit mid-June, which means NFL fans are about to go through the slowest four-week stretch of the year: the span that stretches from the end of offseason workouts to the start of training camps. But before the slow period begins, there's some unfinished business around the league that's worth discussing. Namely, a handful of disgruntled veterans have expressed their discontent of late. Here are their situations and my thoughts on how they'll be resolved.

1. Deion Branch, wide receiver, New England: He's been with the Patriots long enough to know that the club is reluctant to hand out huge extensions. When it comes to paying role players, they're especially stingy, and that's exactly the situation Branch is in. Yes, he delivers in the postseason. But it's hard to defend a receiver who has been so injury-prone that he's played a full season only once in his four-year career. Even though the Patriots are thin at the position, Branch is about to learn what more established, Pro Bowl-caliber players such as Adam Vinatieri, Ty Law and Willie McGinest have learned in New England: Everybody on that roster is expendable except for one man. That makes it hard to think that Branch will be any happier with his contract when this season begins.

2. Nathan Vasher, cornerback, Chicago: Now this is a player with a legitimate beef. Vasher is a Pro Bowl-caliber player stuck with a backup's salary. I don't think the Bears should pay him megabucks, but he certainly deserves more than the $425,000 he's scheduled to make this season. He picked off eight passes last season. His instincts and smarts make him a perfect fit for the Bears' cover-two defensive scheme. And please don't tell me the Bears have leverage because they signed free-agent cornerback Ricky Manning. If Manning was a legitimate starter, he would still be in Carolina. The Bears will have to pay Vasher sooner or later, and his price tag is only going to increase as time progresses.

3. Ashley Lelie, receiver, Denver: Another receiver who has lost sight of his value, Lelie is determined to hold out until the Broncos deal him. He's making a huge mistake. Even with Javon Walker joining the Broncos in a trade with Green Bay, Lelie could use another season in Denver to prove his value as a third receiver. He then could pursue a nice payday as an unrestricted free agent in 2007. Look, David Givens scored a five-year, $24 million deal and a $6 million bonus in Tennessee, and Lelie's career numbers are very similar. Givens has 158 receptions, 2,214 yards and 12 touchdowns in four seasons; Lelie has 168 receptions, 3,007 yards and 12 scores over the same four-year span. But this has gotten personal, and Lelie will soon discover that his emotions aren't helping him. I'll bet that he'll be in Denver next season.

4. Lance Briggs, outside linebacker, Chicago: This isn't a good trend for Bears fans. Like Vasher, Briggs is trying to turn a breakout season in '05 into a nice extension. And like Vasher, Briggs is an integral part of the defense. Middle linebacker Brian Urlacher may be the headliner, but the cover-two scheme relies on a speedy weakside linebacker like Briggs to make a ton of plays. This dude is such a rising star that Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer called him the best weakside linebacker in football last season. The downside for Briggs? He has to play at least six games this season to qualify for unrestricted free agency. My gut tells me there could be a franchise or a transition tag waiting for him after this season ends.

5. Thomas Jones, running back, Chicago: Here's one disgruntled Bear who really is in a bad spot. Though Jones ran for a career-high 1,335 yards last season, he knows that Chicago drafted Cedric Benson in 2005 to be the feature back. Jones has been thinking about a trade since the season ended, preferably to a team running the West Coast offense. Now that he's avoided the team's offseason workout program, it's clear that he's down to his last desperate moves to making something happen. It won't work. The Bears will sell the public on the notion that it's a great deal to have two talented running backs. In reality, that's only true if both running backs are excited about sharing the load. That won't be the case in Chicago.

Source: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...nfl/index.html

[imported_mega]

2 and 4 have to come before 5 in the list of priorities. TJ is going to be waiting a long time if he expects to get a new contract before Vasher and Briggs.

Not a good thing at all. After last season i thought this would be the year for Thomas. Him and Benson in the spotlight.
He proved with a decent line what he can do. Now this.
To me if the interest is not there from the Bear's and TJ or they can't work this out.
Do something before it gets closer to full work outs.
Reading this they seem to be at a road that don't turn.

[imported_UKCats1]

It is all about the money for everyone anymore.

[SWVA-Football]

Indeed.

[imported_MoonlightGraham]

i disagree. i think thomas is just looking for a place to settle down for the rest of his career. he proved last year that he could be one of the top rushers in the league when he gained over 1300 yards in one season. If he could find a good balanced offense I could see him puttin up a 1000 yards a year, and helpin his team make a run for the playoffs.

[imported_mega]

He can stay on the bears and be the starter. I think the stability is there, hes just unhappy with the fact that Benson is making all the money. Of course, the guys in Arizona could have said the same thing when TJ was making all the money and Pittman was getting all the yards.

[imported_UKCats1]

I have a problem with anyone unhappy about making only 10 or 12 million dollars over four or five years. You are living your dream granted you should be paid but the players are overpaid now. That is why I could care less if any of these players or owners make any money. Both the players and owners need to cut out the greed but that is only human nature and will never happen.

[gcdevil22]

as long as fans pay the money to the owners by going to the games, the prices for players will go up...it's simple negotiation...how much money does a professional team make per year at the expense of the players? a heckuva lot...the more people who go, the more money they make, the more money the players want to be compensated for

the players cannot be blamed for negotiating a contract for millions of dollars, whether the fans like it or not they're worth it...don't believe me? look at attendance and income from the sales of tickets, concessions, parking, etc. and tell me why this money shouldn't go to the players

don't complain about the amount of money players make and then go to see games

[imported_UKCats1]

I can complain because I do not go to the games and do not watch pro sports on tv. That is the problem no one is worth Millions of dollars a year. I refuse to pay 50 to 200 dollars for a ticket to see athletes play a sport. I think it is crazy to have to pay 5 and 6 dollars to see a high school game but schools have to pay for facilities and officals, and equipment. My argument is don't pay these prices and refuse to go to these games and see how fast the salaries and ticket prices come down. You want to know why our cable and satelite bills are so high, it is because of professional and collegiate sports. The networks and cable companies have to pass the cost of their outrageous contracts on somewhere and where do you think that is. No one and I mean no one is worth millions of dollars of year to play a game.