I'm just sick and tired of this team struggling along and then when they finally get great players tossing them aside because they are worried about paying worse players or seeking players that aren't even here yet. John Riggins to a degree, Hugh Douglas, Keyshawn, John Abraham, soon to be Darrelle Revis.... stop shooting yourself in the foot. When you have a player who's tops in the league at what he does how about you try to hang onto them? It should be pretty obvious. We haven't had a franchise QB since JWN and even he is debated (lets not get into this now), but this franchise sure does act like he's right around the corner and we can't have good players because we might miss out on him. I'd be nice if we could take on that challenge if/when it comes and stick with players that are good in the meantime... At this rate though, even if this team did stumble upon Joe Montana 2.0, I wouldn't be surprised if they traded him away because they were worried about "tying up too much" in one player...
Totally agree, Nagle. I am not going to get into your argument with Brad on specifics. I generally respect his posts, but here and there he attempts to justify bad positions with selective references. Now that is a common approach here, and I have even done it myself (when I felt the basic position was correct and did not have the time or inclination to address every con argument). But to base his position on Revis on the notion that the cornerback position is relatively insignificant in today's game is at best debatable and at worst obviously wrong. The view in any event does not in my opinion justify the kind of selective arguments Brad is making on these last two pages on this thread (without getting into other exchanges of his). The larger point here is that too many are pissed at the player when he gets in a (perfectly understandable) contract dispute with the owner. It's not like the owner is always right, but too many fans see the whole thing as annoying (which it is) and coming from the player, and blame the player for it. They understand that the owner can only pay so much under the cap, and any player, even a good one, who wants market value is also presenting cap issues. We all understand that, but I like you do not get why it is the GOOD players who get bashed because the FO has made too many bad contracts with BAD players. The other problem I have right now with the Trade Revis crowd goes beyond the fact that a trade before June 1 has NEGATIVE cap consequences. It is as you suggest. Not only would it mean giving up a great player (at the same time the Jets are appraently preparing to retain bad and high priced players - see Mark Sanchez). It seems to assume the Jets can get equivalent or even better value in a Revis trade. I don't see that happening. At the best it remains to be seen, and most likely in any case will test the old truism that a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. We all can agree there is a price or alternative situation that would make retaining Revis under a new contract a bad option. But given the other likely variables we know of at this point, I think it will be better to try and keep him.
Question: Assuming we give him a new contract this offseason ... two years from now when he's holding out (again) and wants more money (because he got all his bonus money upfront and now he's just playing for his salary - again), is it okay to ditch him? Or do we have to renegotiate his contract (and give him more bonus money) again? In other words, when is it going to be okay to simply say "enough of this crap every other season" and get rid of him?
If we gave him a contract it would not be a band-aid. It would lock Revis up for his career. No contact is going to allow him to hold out again, I can assure you that.
That's what they said last time. Remember the clause in the current contract that says if he holds out for even one day (this time), he gets three years added on to his contract? How much of a deterrent is that turning out to be?
He can do that because he is the best player on Jets squad. And possibly the best in the history of NFL. He can hold out every two years and ask for more money. That's all right. You can make him the highest paid player in the NFL - maybe THEN he will stop.
I think it's important for the keep Revis side to keep in mind the way his contract is structured, should he play out 2013 and leave as a free agent, he counts $8 mil against the 2014 salary cap. So if you let him get to free agency and the open market, you really have very little leverage.
Law was hurt and not playing in one of the Super Bowls. The reason the Pats won 3 Super Bowls is they found a QB out of nowhere who was playing for peanuts in the first Super Bowl and didn't sign a huge contract until 2005, after the Patriots 3 SB in 4 years run. When you have an all-pro QB playing for peanuts you can afford to pay somebody else a lot more than you otherwise could. However, without the all-pro QB you're not winning anything.
John Riggins had issues that went beyond the field. Hugh Douglas didn't mesh well with Bill Parcells or the flexible defensive front Parcells utilized in 1997 and was planning to use moving forward. Keyshawn turned into John Abraham and Anthony Becht and the Jets definitely made out on the deal. John Abraham had injury issues, particularly by the end of the season, and turned into Nick Mangold. If the Jets were letting guys go in a vacuum I'd agree with you but each of those moves had other factors playing into the main decision. If Darrelle Revis was looking to be the highest paid CB in the NFL he'd stay with the Jets. You know that and I know that and EVERYBODY else who is looking at the situation knows that. What Revis is looking for is the be the highest paid defensive player in the NFL and he's going to leave town as a result of that stance. It's not even a negotiating stance that the Jets could try to find a solution too and keep him becuse even if they came up with a good compromise solution that allowed everybody to save face it would just start the countdown to the next Revis holdout. Again, you know that, I know that and EVERYBODY else who is looking at the situation knows that. Revis is a trophy wife who has priced herself out of the game. It's not that we don't love her it's just that there's only so much you can pay before the cost is too much.
If he's good enough to legitimately demand and ransom the Jets into a new contract at that point then he's the next Champ Bailey (or better) and is worth the money. I'd rather pay Revis what he's worth than stick with Cro and have him ask for Revis-type money after his contract ends in 2 years all because he played similarly to Revis in 2012.
Our team does not need an all-pro quarterback. Would it be nice? Of course, but we just need a game manager. Our defense will keep the game close, and with a smart, ball careful quarterback and a balanced offense, we will be contenders. 2009 & 2010 were evidence of that.
I don't think any real Jets fan wants to see Revis leave. The reality of it is, we can better our team by trading him. Now, there is a possibility that we draft a bust with the pick we receive, but you can't think like that. You have to have confidence in your ability to draft. However, if you sign Revis to an extension, and can trade Cromartie for a 1st, you are that much further ahead. The question is, what is Cromartie's trade value.
This is why I can't believe Tannenbaum was that stupid. You leave a window for you best player an out, and still are holding a significant amount of baggage when he isn't even on the team.
Revis is the best player cornerback in the NFL, and IMO, the best ever. He deserves to be paid his due. That being said, he has more value to our team in a trade. The cornerback position is not an insignificant position by any means, but there are ways to improve your secondary without having elite cornerbacks. Our passing defense was in the top 5 last year without Revis, and the Jets have value in Revis, even hurt or unknown health. If the Jets are able to hit on a pass rusher, or two, our secondary just got that much better. The cornerback do not have to cover for 4-5 seconds, and the ball will go up in bad positions more frequently. Now, if the Jets can trade Cromartie for the same value as Revis, then by all means trade Cro, and restructure Revis's contract.
That is pretty simple. Just put a clause in the contract that says that he must pay back his signing bonus (prorated) back if he holds out. Don't put any fucking voidable years in there though.
You don't need that clause. Barry Sanders retired in 1999 and the arbitrator ruled that a player who withholds his services voluntarily must repay a pro-rated portion of any bonus monies paid to him for the contract.
Brad... when will you learn? Facts around the players matter not. What only matters is, Jets are known for letting talents go. They are fools because of that. So, Jets should do whatever they can - even at the cost of future cap - to hold on to Revis. He is the very best talent on Jets roster. Of course, by doing so, Jets will be almost guaranteed to never compete for the big trophy, but does that really matter? Jets must pay Revis. That's all that matters. I mean, ALL that matters.
Given how he played last year, his contract, and Revis' ACL injury, I just don't see how the Jets could get significantly more value out of Revis than Cro. Hopefully the Front Office concurs. I wouldn't even mind getting only a 3rd for Cromartie given his age, the boost in his performance last year that's unlikely to last, and contract situation. Unless of course the Jets intend to rid themselves of both CB's over the next 2 years, which would really suck.
