No mistake about it.... If this team Underperforms then Darrelle Revis and Neil Schwartz are to blame wether he signs at this point or not..... If Darrelle were Nick Mangold he would have been working with the other CB's and battling the WR"s all camp..... Wether he signs or not, this team is already less of what it could be..... Revis will NEVER be loved as a plyer by me.... Sure, I'll root for the best and all for the TEAM but, Revis will always be a selfish me-first Bastard and I hope to never hear a neil Schwartz player getting picked by the Jets - I'm pretty sure I don't have to worry about that.
If what Don said was true, there'd be 0 repercussions to a player receiving a signing bonus this offseason due to the expiration of the CBA. If that were the case, then you could view contracts like a lottery ticket. They wouldn't have to worry about a pro-rated $60m signing bonus since it would all be absorbed this year. That would mean there'd be no consequences to just dumping a massive signing bonus on him. While Revis does want $16m per year, I doubt he'd turn down a signing bonus of say $120m and league minimum for 10 years... Obviously none of that could possibly be true, otherwise teams may have already done that. If you won the lottery, wouldn't you take the lump sum over the yearly payout? And again, all of this is speculation on the idea that signing bonuses are absorbed this year and thus likely not true...
Even if it were possible to do that, why would Woody want to? There is a "50% rule" that prevents such a thing anyway.
Is there a 50% rule under this years expiration rules? The reason Woody would want to do something like that is in the event of a future salary cap it would give the Jets a veteran minimum salary cap hit for Revis even though Revis would've received all the money he could ever dream of. Obviously a provision would have to be worked into such a deal that Revis couldn't hold out again... but in theory if there were no consequence to doing such a thing it would be the optimal way of paying today to save for tomorrow.
You're saying the TEAM screwed LEON!? Just to be clear, when a player doesn't get what he wants it doesn't mean he got screwed... your reasoning is bullshit.
I'm sure the Jets yearly player salary budget doesn't include $120 MM for one player. He'd be a fool to give that much money to a guy who's held out twice in 3 years too - regardless of any provisions. Revis could spend the 120MM and Woody would never see it back. Revis could have a career ending injury tomorrow. Revis could regress to an average CB. http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=generalnewsdetail&pid=42064&pcid=41&rss=1
Mr T and Rex believe we can win without revis.....all we gotta do is come out of the gate strong and Revis is fucked....and will probably shoot his agent
The longer this goes the more I feel the advantage slides to the Jets. I can not fathom a scenario where he does not play at all this season. There is a small, but significant chance that there will be a lockout next season and if that occurs, thats two years out of football for the guy. I do not care who you are, two years out of the game is tough and these are some of his likely prime years of his career. I understand not wanting to play for 1 mil and risking injury, but it would be foolish for him to leave the kind of money rumored that the Jets are offering and risk harming his future long term employment by sitting out potentially two years. If he has not signed by the start of the regular season, the first couple games might tell the tale for the rest of the negotion. Snag even two out of three from Ravens, Pats, and then Dolphins, and his barginning power is limited significantly. If we face Boldin, Moss, and Marshall without him and do even 'okay' then Revis will have way less to stand on.
True enough, though we're talking about a completely theoretical situation not really based in reality. Further at the end of the day the issue has more to do with salary cap implications then it does actual cash. This contract wouldn't be nearly the issue it is if it weren't for the salary cap. Nick Mangold is receiving a record contract for being elite at his position when an equivalent contract in MLB would go to a middle end pitcher like Jamie Moyer. The resources are there to pay the players... its the structure that really matters.
Well you could definitely look at it from the perspective of "Leon had tough luck" or had a "hard break" (literally and figuratively). It doesn't matter how you look at it, the player doesn't have the kind of protections that the team has. The team can move on, players only have one shot at this kind of thing. In Leon's case it went bye bye because he did exactly what the fans here want Revis to do. Maybe screwed was the wrong word for this situation, but I definitely don't believe my reasoning is bullshit. I just think people too easily take sides and just drop an all out assault on the other.
Problem is Leon and/or his agents overvalued his worth. He was a third down specialist back and a solid special teams player. He had an offer on the table and decided to roll the dice and hope for a big season. He got hurt and the Jets still won games. So not only did the injury come into play but so did the fact that they didn't need him to win games. The move Jones to KC and bring in LT to catch out of the backfield which fills the void left by Leon going to Seattle, move Greene up to #1 back, and LT fills in for #2 back with pass catching skills.
So this is what Cimini wrote about awhile back. I'm sure I can find other accounts too. What is this supposed to mean? "According to the Revis camp, the main issue is the signing bonus. Because it's an uncapped year, the Jets could satisfy Revis by writing a huge check. But they're reluctant to pull the trigger, in part, because of the uncertain labor landscape, although Johnson claimed "we can negotiate in good faith" amid the current labor climate. Johnson seemed surprised that Revis rejected the last two offers." http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=5430950&top Here is some more talk about it.. "If the Jets can pay a signing bonus upfront, but treat it as all counting against the cap in 2010 then, while this does nothing to remove the financial risk, it might prevent them from having big cap charges in future years, which is added protection against injury or a dip in form. By using an Albert Haynesworth-style conditional bonus, it appears that they might be able to achieve this. Haynesworth had the right to void his own contract by paying them back the non-prorated portion of his signing bonus, which meant that the decision was his and therefore the bonus is all accounted for in year one." http://www.thejetsblog.com/2010/08/11/salary-cap-update-the-darrelle-revis-brainstorm-project/
We could win every game without Revis. Revis just makes it that much easier. Remember when Jenkins went down last year, most including myself thought that the defense would take a massive step backwards without him... but they found a way. These coaches know what they're doing.
Believe it or not our defense actually got BETTER after Jenkins went down. Not saying our defense will get better without Revis, but still.
I'm not sure this is the case. The Texas Rangers had no cap in place when they overpaid for Alex Rodriguez and yet they paid a severe price over the mid-term when their owner felt that he had too many resources tied up in one player and was reluctant to pony up for high quality support players around the superstar. I would be surprised to find out that Woody Johnson actually had the cash to make the kind of deals that Revis is talking about on a consistent basis. It's much more likely that he might have one such deal in him and then we'd see a reluctance to give those types of contracts in the future. If he has one huge deal in him it better be for a QB, not a CB. This is a bad comparison because the economics of baseball and football are so different. An MLB team only has to pay about 15 regular players in baseball, 14 in the NL, that being the position players, 5 starters and a closer out of the bullpen. An NFL team has to pay 22 starters. An MLB team also has 81 home games in which to recover revenue, allowing a well-run team substantially greater opportunity to differentiate themselves economically from the pack. Finally, an MLB team in a big market has a major source of unshared revenue in the form of local broadcast rights. To say that a middle of the pack pitcher gets paid as much as Nick Mangold is misleading in light of the above. Nick Mangold would make much more money if the Jets only had to pay 16 regulars, controlled their own TV rights and had better ways to differentiate their revenue from that of the majority of NFL teams. The NY, Chicago, Los Angeles and Boston markets are a goldmine in major league baseball and just a really nice bump in the NFL.
