lemonej Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Per Ian Rapport of NFL Network Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 A lot a people seem to love this and I don't get it. Jackson's about a year away from being what Michael Turner was this year. He had one 100 yard rushing game this year (against the Cardinals) along with games of 21/53, 11/29, 18/55, and 21/48. His longest carry of the year was 46 yards and second longest was 23. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 A lot a people seem to love this and I don't get it. Jackson's about a year away from being what Michael Turner was this year. He had one 100 yard rushing game this year (against the Cardinals) along with games of 21/53, 11/29, 18/55, and 21/48. His longest carry of the year was 46 yards and second longest was 23. Cuz it is the Falcons. They could sign Jerome Bettis and media would freak out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Seems like they just signed Michael Turner again after releasing him. Move doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You'd think they'd try to get younger at that position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Seems like they just signed Michael Turner again after releasing him. Move doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You'd think they'd try to get younger at that position. Yup, you and Dawhiz are right, just a lateral move that may have saved them some money??? Possibly?? He woulda been an upgrade in Green Bay so I'm happy he didn't go there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Yup, you and Dawhiz are right, just a lateral move that may have saved them some money??? Possibly?? He woulda been an upgrade in Green Bay so I'm happy he didn't go there. Turner's cap hit for 2013 was $8 million. Cutting him saves $5.5 of that. I don't see numbers for Jackson yet, but it's a 3 year deal which likely lets them spread some of the hit out, and I can't imagine he'd take more than a $5 million hit to bring in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Exactly!!! He woulda been an upgrade in Green Bay so I'm happy he didn't go there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Contract was 3 years for $12 million, so more financially friendly than Turner's contract, though I remain skeptical about how productive he'll be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 My litmus test for this is: Where would he go in a fantasy draft? As a result, this doesn't really worry me that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 My litmus test for this is: Where would he go in a fantasy draft? As a result, this doesn't really worry me that much. Actually, from what I've heard on NFL Network, they are projecting his numbers to jump up considerably. Jackson is way better than Turner. Jackson has 8 straight 1,000 yard seasons, and averages 40 receptions a year while Turner has 70 receptions for his entire career. This is a pretty decent upgrade for them. I would rather see him go to ATL than GB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Actually, from what I've heard on NFL Network, they are projecting his numbers to jump up considerably. Jackson is way better than Turner. Jackson has 8 straight 1,000 yard seasons, and averages 40 receptions a year while Turner has 70 receptions for his entire career. This is a pretty decent upgrade for them. I would rather see him go to ATL than GB. And he's still probably going to be about the 20th ranked RB if you're doing a fantasy draft. It just doesn't concern me much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted March 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 The key for this whole deal to work is that it is believed that Jackson will be able to gain more yards than Turner did with a sub par run blocking OL. I think that this may blow up in their face. Like Jason says this doesn't worry me as much as what is going on in Seattle and Frisco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.