Sources: Niners in pursuit of Darrelle Revis

[Lizard King]

He wouldn't accept that then, and he won't accept it now.   He received $32,500,000 his first 2 years, and started hinting about a hold out last year.

 

I'd love to have a happy Revis.  He's never going to be happy.

I have the solution. Send them Revis, we get KC's 34 and Patrick Willis. We cut Harris who makes 2x what Willis makes.

 

BOOM

[whodeawhodat]

What's depressing is they'd have to take the 31st and 34th if that was offered.  It's only a decent deal because of the ridiculous way the contract was structured and Revis' abnormal greed. 

 

It's becoming pretty clear Woody has had enough of the Schwartz and Feinsod show.  I think we all have.

 

In light of the way things worked out it was the perfect contract if we were to keep Revis.  I am not sure why you and unbannedmike seem to think the contract holds them back from signing revis long term.  He was asking for +16MM back when the contract was signed.  He was never going to take 12MM per for 7.  that was the issue.  he wanted 16 per for however long he could get it.  I think since the knee injury he would NOW have to come down off of his 16 per insistence so in that sense it would be easier to sign Revis long term now rather than 3 years ago.  Also, if the jet do trade him, they paid approx 38MM over 3 years so he is at 12.6 avg for the 3 years he spent since his last hold out.  tannenbaum winning.

[JetsFanInDenver]

I understand its two different people. But the thought is still the same. We have a chance to retain Revis, who is a proven elite player while we overpaid for three turds. Well, two turds, and one scumbag.

 

We are where we are because of these 3 contracts and the fact Revis wants to be paid like a QB. Which is great for a team that has a QB and cap space. Not for a team that has netiher.

[whodeawhodat]

SOLUTION:

 

Trade Revis to 9ers

Trade Cro to Hawks

 

get a ton of picks for this draft AND next.

 

I save on Direct TV and i get 1 night EACH at Mons Venus and 2001...

[JetsFanInDenver]

They did fail.

 

The Jets (Tannenbaum) bet the farm on the 2011 season.  They bet the farm on Sanchez turning into an NFL QB.  Sanchez failed, and Tannenbaum failed.

 

Tannenbaum paid with his job.  Now the clean up starts.

 

Hopefully  Idzik has a plan to get the Jets competitive  by 2014.  It appears that not paying Revis, and getting what they can for him is a part of the plan.

 

If the Jets are contenders in 2014 and Revis is with the 9’ers, screw him.  If the Jets are still in the toilet in  2015, then screw Idzik.

 

I’m not a Revis fan, or Revis hater,  I’m a Jets fan.

 

The JETS really bet the farm(so to say) on the 2010 season. 2011 they tried to maintain the nucleus of talent they thought they should have going forward. And the comedy of mismanagement started. Harris got a huge contract, Holmes was signed to ridiculous deal while Braylon was let go, Plax was the answer and so was the douche bag WR who's name i do not want to remember and they had a hard on for Aso but ended up paying Cro a ridiculous amt of money(at that time) and the next off season in his infinite wisdom Tanny thought giving Sanchez an extension was a good idea. Then you add the mediocre drafts and no plan for replenishing the OL and the LB position.

 

The only thing that the JETS was in the past 2 off seasons was not being able to sign Aso.

[Smashmouth]

Bowman and their 2 second round picks

[Smashmouth]

I have the solution. Send them Revis, we get KC's 34 and Patrick Willis. We cut Harris who makes 2x what Willis makes.

 

BOOM

 

I would be happy with willis or bowman but willis is considered an elite talent as well so maybe little in the way of draft picks if we go that route

[T0mShane]

So, would you rather have:

A. An 8-8, 7-9 2013 season with Revis, who leaves at the end of the year?

--or--

B. San Francisco's first and second, whereby (combined with our picks) yields, say, Jarvis Jones, Zach Ertz, Ryan Nassib, and Robert Woods?

[JetsFanInDenver]

The way 49ers are posturing looks like they wanna give as little as possible. Now if only the Seahawks or Green Bay get involved.

[Greenseed4]

Key words here are "at this time"  could very well be posturing.  This whole thing is going to take some time 

 

+1...Revis is playing this year for peanuts.

 

$3M contract and $3M in bonuses.  It's incredibly doable from a one-year rental perspective.  

[Sperm Edwards]

If the Jets would've paid him in 2010, he would've gotten less money than he wants now and he would've been a jet for life. Thats the original sin.

 

Bro, you are on crack if you believe this.  The Jets did pay him in 2010.  Given the pressure and situation at the time, which is conveniently easy to forget now, and given how bad some of his other contracts are, I'm actually impressed with the deal Tannenbaum did with Revis.

 

Revis wanted $16M/year.  We gave him $11.5M.  The reason - the only reason - Revis didn't hold out after year 2 of this deal was that Tannenbaum put that poison pill in there.  It was actually one of Tannenbaum's better moves, that looks even better in hindsight, because without the presence of that clause there is no such thing in this world as a long-term agreement with Darrelle Revis.

 

You can't get what you want just because you want it and naïvely expect that Revis wants whatever you do.  You want to prevent him from holding out after 2 years/$32M? Then you have to give up the right to franchise him after 4 years/$44M.  You can't have both just because you want both.  

 

There is no chance Revis would have signed that contract without removing the Jets' ability to tag him.  He wanted a new contract as soon as possible after signing the last one.  In reality, he wanted to tear up this deal after the first two years were up.  Tannenbaum did a good job ensuring he was not only here for 4 years, but that he couldn't hold out all spring, summer, and fall until week 8 or whatever like other players do.  Revis can't even hold out for 8 minutes.

 

Do you really not remember the Revis posturing about holding out last spring? Only that clause Tannenbaum put in there prevented it.  It's also the reason Revis is not holding out today.  It's also the reason he has trade value as a rental because Revis must play for that new team or lose his free agency rights until the year 2017.

 

If Revis considered the contract he got - $32M in the first 2 years and $12M over the next 2 years after that - to be a band-aid deal that needed reworking after the first 2 years, then explain why he'd want out of a 4 year deal averaging $11.5M per but he'd fully play out a 10 year deal averaging the same.

 

I'm thrilled Tannenbaum has been replaced, but on balance this was not one of his bad moves. 

[SouthernJet]

agree w/Sperm.. no deal is a closed deal w//Revis and Uncle Sean

[Il Mostro]

The way 49ers are posturing looks like they wanna give as little as possible. Now if only the Seahawks or Green Bay get involved.

Or Atlanta, the Cowboys, or the Skins.  There are a lot of teams that Mevi$ could make sense for.

[unbanmadmike1]

Bro, you are on crack if you believe this.  The Jets did pay him in 2010.  Given the pressure and situation at the time, which is conveniently easy to forget now, and given how bad some of his other contracts are, I'm actually impressed with the deal Tannenbaum did with Revis.

 

Revis wanted $16M/year.  We gave him $11.5M.  The reason - the only reason - Revis didn't hold out after year 2 of this deal was that Tannenbaum put that poison pill in there.  It was actually one of Tannenbaum's better moves, that looks even better in hindsight, because without the presence of that clause there is no such thing in this world as a long-term agreement with Darrelle Revis.

 

You can't get what you want just because you want it and naïvely expect that Revis wants whatever you do.  You want to prevent him from holding out after 2 years/$32M? Then you have to give up the right to franchise him after 4 years/$44M.  You can't have both just because you want both.  

 

There is no chance Revis would have signed that contract without removing the Jets' ability to tag him.  He wanted a new contract as soon as possible after signing the last one.  In reality, he wanted to tear up this deal after the first two years were up.  Tannenbaum did a good job ensuring he was not only here for 4 years, but that he couldn't hold out all spring, summer, and fall until week 8 or whatever like other players do.  Revis can't even hold out for 8 minutes.

 

Do you really not remember the Revis posturing about holding out last spring? Only that clause Tannenbaum put in there prevented it.  It's also the reason Revis is not holding out today.  It's also the reason he has trade value as a rental because Revis must play for that new team or lose his free agency rights until the year 2017.

 

If Revis considered the contract he got - $32M in the first 2 years and $12M over the next 2 years after that - to be a band-aid deal that needed reworking after the first 2 years, then explain why he'd want out of a 4 year deal averaging $11.5M per but he'd fully play out a 10 year deal averaging the same.

 

I'm thrilled Tannenbaum has been replaced, but on balance this was not one of his bad moves. 

Why are the only options the contract he got, or a 11.5m deal for 4 years? How about paying him more money longer term? If they would've given him something like 5-6 years 14m per, he's not going to hold out and that would've been less than his price tag is going to be next year in free agency. And if he did hold out he'd have to hold out for 3-4 more years which he wouldn't do. 

[Pac]

Bro, you are on crack if you believe this.  The Jets did pay him in 2010.  Given the pressure and situation at the time, which is conveniently easy to forget now, and given how bad some of his other contracts are, I'm actually impressed with the deal Tannenbaum did with Revis.

 

Revis wanted $16M/year.  We gave him $11.5M.  The reason - the only reason - Revis didn't hold out after year 2 of this deal was that Tannenbaum put that poison pill in there.  It was actually one of Tannenbaum's better moves, that looks even better in hindsight, because without the presence of that clause there is no such thing in this world as a long-term agreement with Darrelle Revis.

 

You can't get what you want just because you want it and naïvely expect that Revis wants whatever you do.  You want to prevent him from holding out after 2 years/$32M? Then you have to give up the right to franchise him after 4 years/$44M.  You can't have both just because you want both.  

 

There is no chance Revis would have signed that contract without removing the Jets' ability to tag him.  He wanted a new contract as soon as possible after signing the last one.  In reality, he wanted to tear up this deal after the first two years were up.  Tannenbaum did a good job ensuring he was not only here for 4 years, but that he couldn't hold out all spring, summer, and fall until week 8 or whatever like other players do.  Revis can't even hold out for 8 minutes.

 

Do you really not remember the Revis posturing about holding out last spring? Only that clause Tannenbaum put in there prevented it.  It's also the reason Revis is not holding out today.  It's also the reason he has trade value as a rental because Revis must play for that new team or lose his free agency rights until the year 2017.

 

If Revis considered the contract he got - $32M in the first 2 years and $12M over the next 2 years after that - to be a band-aid deal that needed reworking after the first 2 years, then explain why he'd want out of a 4 year deal averaging $11.5M per but he'd fully play out a 10 year deal averaging the same.

 

I'm thrilled Tannenbaum has been replaced, but on balance this was not one of his bad moves. 

 

It worked well to prevent a hold out last summer but I believe if not for the ACL Revis would be holding out this summer, clause be damned.  Hell he might hold out even with the ACL.

 

He knows that he'll be able to get more than 6 million and the faux auto-extension waived.  I think Tanny did a nice job of preventing a holdout in the 3rd year but Revis still netted approx 13 mil a year for 3 years and the 16 a year for the first 2 he so desperately craved.

 

If not for the injury he was never playing this year for 6 million.  I still don't think he will.

[rillo]

Isn't he under contract? Or can teams give him an offer sheet? God forbid if he ends up on the pats.

[Sperm Edwards]

It worked well to prevent a hold out last summer but I believe if not for the ACL Revis would be holding out this summer, clause be damned.  Hell he might hold out even with the ACL.

 

He knows that he'll be able to get more than 6 million and the faux auto-extension waived.  I think Tanny did a nice job of preventing a holdout in the 3rd year but Revis still netted approx 13 mil a year for 3 years and the 16 a year for the first 2 he so desperately craved.

 

If not for the injury he was never playing this year for 6 million.  I still don't think he will.

 

Wha?

 

If Revis holds out he's locked into the following contract:

 

2013: $6M

2014: $5M

2015: $5M

2016: $5M

 

Actually this IS his contract.  The only "if" is that IF Revis doesn't hold out then he can opt out of the final 3 years.  It's not an auto-extension penalty if he holds out; it's that he loses the right to opt out of his 7 year deal after only 4 years.  And there is no way around it for him.  He is not holding out now and would not have held out under any circumstance.  

 

The only leverage Revis has over the Jets is watching him play out the season without a new deal and signing elsewhere.  Revis isn't fool enough to give that up.  I cannot think of any reason Revis would hold out.  Short of signing a reasonable contract with us and never holding out again, Revis holding out this year would be the just about the nicest thing he could do for the Jets.  His cap number for '13 drops from $9M to $3M and he's now locked up through 2016 for only $5M/year.  

[Sperm Edwards]

Why are the only options the contract he got, or a 11.5m deal for 4 years? How about paying him more money longer term? If they would've given him something like 5-6 years 14m per, he's not going to hold out and that would've been less than his price tag is going to be next year in free agency. And if he did hold out he'd have to hold out for 3-4 more years which he wouldn't do. 

 

 

LOL.

 

Let's see you outline the deal that you think Revis wouldn't have held out under.  How much money up front, how much guaranteed, and how much total paid in year 1, year 2, year 3, etc. that you think would keep him from holding out through year 5 at least (since the Jets have successfully prevented him from holding out for 4 years).  

 

Keep in mind, Revis already had 2 years $20M coming to him when he held out ($5M in 2010 and $15M in 2011).  He also said he wanted $16M/year, and supposedly the Jets (appropriately) lied to him and told him the $16M/year he'd get over the first 2 years was just a band-aid and we'd tear it up if he didn't start to play worse and continue paying him $16M.

 

You are living in Fantasyland if you think Revis wouldn't have held out again as soon as any isolated year's compensation dipped below $10M.   Or do you think he'd agree to a contract with no bonus money and we just pay him $14M each and every year? And what makes you think he would be agreeable to that anyway? Just because you want him to be agreeable?

 

Revis wanted $16M/year.  He got that the first 2 years and was expecting a new deal to up his dollars for years 3+ to that same $16M level.  Absent $16M/year - or the appearance thereof - he wasn't ending his holdout because he refused to return as the 2nd-highest paid CB.

[SpartanJet]

I'm thrilled Tannenbaum has been replaced, but on balance this was not one of his bad moves. 

 

I totally see where you are coming from but in hindsight would it have mattered it Revis held out the whole season?  There are no medals for almost and aside from a few Jets fans who constantly remember the glory days of back to back AFC championship losses it really makes no difference if the Jets went 4-12 or 12-4 they still lost when it counted.  After Revis dogged it in camp/held out of preseason he got injured and was very mortal that season anyway.

 

Anyway I can't help but feel that the Jets had the position of power in 2010 and Tanny gave away a right teams have that was collectively bargained.  I think they would be in a better position to trade Revis if they still had the franchise tag available to them as teams would know they need to deal with the Jets if they want Revis.

[BurnleyJet]

All this is pure speculation, Revis won't be a Jet if we get a 1st and 2nd plus perhaps a conditional pick for 2014. We either keep Revis and Trade Cro, or Keep Cro, and Trade Revis. This broken Team needs to rebuild, and get some young talent on the field. The drop off last year in the secondary was not as noticeable without Revis. The Jets have seen they can live without Revis.

[Il Mostro]

Any way to "band-aid" his deal again and push voiding the contract out one more year?  

[Lizard King]

The holdout prevention clause was nothing to pat Tannenbaum on the back for. You guys are ignoring that it was a worthless concession on the agent's part after we forfeitted the franchise tag. The franchise tag is the only leverage that matters because it would have locked Revis up for years to come, but just like everything else, Tannenbaum gave them that too. Tannenbaum is like the Jets personal Jimmy Carter, he had no backbone whatsoever.

[unbanmadmike1]

LOL.

 

Let's see you outline the deal that you think Revis wouldn't have held out under.  How much money up front, how much guaranteed, and how much total paid in year 1, year 2, year 3, etc. that you think would keep him from holding out through year 5 at least (since the Jets have successfully prevented him from holding out for 4 years).  

 

Keep in mind, Revis already had 2 years $20M coming to him when he held out ($5M in 2010 and $15M in 2011).  He also said he wanted $16M/year, and supposedly the Jets (appropriately) lied to him and told him the $16M/year he'd get over the first 2 years was just a band-aid and we'd tear it up if he didn't start to play worse and continue paying him $16M.

 

You are living in Fantasyland if you think Revis wouldn't have held out again as soon as any isolated year's compensation dipped below $10M.   Or do you think he'd agree to a contract with no bonus money and we just pay him $14M each and every year? And what makes you think he would be agreeable to that anyway? Just because you want him to be agreeable?

 

Revis wanted $16M/year.  He got that the first 2 years and was expecting a new deal to up his dollars for years 3+ to that same $16M level.  Absent $16M/year - or the appearance thereof - he wasn't ending his holdout because he refused to return as the 2nd-highest paid CB.

I'm not a lawyer, I'm not sure exactly how exactly the fine print should have worked in that contract but the fact is that when that deal was signed EVERYONE knew that the Jets were putting themselves in a horrible position in 2013. You're telling me it would've been IMPOSSIBLE for them to make the deal any more fair to him long term and not have set up this lame duck year in 2013? I find that hard to believe that it couldn't. The guy isn't sitting out 3-4 years if he's making 14-15M a year in a long term deal. 

[Lizard King]

I'm not a lawyer, I'm not sure exactly how exactly the fine print should have worked in that contract but the fact is that when that deal was signed EVERYONE knew that the Jets were putting themselves in a horrible position in 2013. You're telling me it would've been IMPOSSIBLE for them to make the deal any more fair to him long term and not have set up this lame duck year in 2013? I find that hard to believe that it couldn't. The guy isn't sitting out 3-4 years if he's making 14-15M a year in a long term deal.

Right on. They should have let his ass rot on the couch all year, he would have come around by week 8 because he would have paid millions back to the team at that point.

[Sperm Edwards]

I'm not a lawyer, I'm not sure exactly how exactly the fine print should have worked in that contract but the fact is that when that deal was signed EVERYONE knew that the Jets were putting themselves in a horrible position in 2013. You're telling me it would've been IMPOSSIBLE for them to make the deal any more fair to him long term and not h ave set up this lame duck year in 2013? I find that hard to believe that it couldn't. The guy isn't sitting out 3-4 years if he's making 14-15M a year in a long term deal. 

 

Yes he is, if he's already pocketed enough up front so any one particular year he's only making another $8M or so of new money.  That is what Revis does.  He pockets bonus money and pretends that it doesn't count.

 

Truth is, this was one of Tannenbaum's better-constructed deals.  Nothing is "impossible" just as it is not "impossible" for Revis to not opt-out of those last 3 years.  So it's possible but it's unlikely with a capital "U" and we all know it.

 

If you don't have a solution - even with the benefit of hindsight that Tannendouche didn't have - then stop complaining.  We signed him to a 4 year extension and got him to go 4 years without holding out during his playing prime.  We did a lot better than you think.  The problems that muddy the waters are that Revis busted up his knee and that he wants to be paid like an all-pro QB.

 

There is only 1 way to guarantee Revis not holding out and it's the way Tannenbaum did it: put a poison pill in the contract.  But neither Revis nor his agent are going to just sign that, so you have to give something back of equal value: the ability to franchise tag him if Revis opts-out after 4 years.

 

The guy pocketed $24M in 2010 and then - quite openly - wanted to hold out in 2011.  Tannenbaum's contract structure stopped that from happening.  So forget not being able to franchise tag him in year 5 because he would have been holding out 2 years before we reached that point.

 

The guy would hold out of anything under $16M once the guaranteed money is over.  He wants to continually play the game of pocketing bonus money and then the first time any one year's "new money" is less than another CB's compensation, he wants to hold out. 

[unbanmadmike1]

Yes he is, if he's already pocketed enough up front so any one particular year he's only making another $8M or so of new money.  That is what Revis does.  He pockets bonus money and pretends that it doesn't count.

 

Truth is, this was one of Tannenbaum's better-constructed deals.  Nothing is "impossible" just as it is not "impossible" for Revis to not opt-out of those last 3 years.  So it's possible but it's unlikely with a capital "U" and we all know it.

 

If you don't have a solution - even with the benefit of hindsight that Tannendouche didn't have - then stop complaining.  We signed him to a 4 year extension and got him to go 4 years without holding out during his playing prime.  We did a lot better than you think.  The problems that muddy the waters are that Revis busted up his knee and that he wants to be paid like an all-pro QB.

 

There is only 1 way to guarantee Revis not holding out and it's the way Tannenbaum did it: put a poison pill in the contract.  But neither Revis nor his agent are going to just sign that, so you have to give something back of equal value: the ability to franchise tag him if Revis opts-out after 4 years.

 

The guy pocketed $24M in 2010 and then - quite openly - wanted to hold out in 2011.  Tannenbaum's contract structure stopped that from happening.  So forget not being able to franchise tag him in year 5 because he would have been holding out 2 years before we reached that point.

 

The guy would hold out of anything under $16M once the guaranteed money is over.  He wants to continually play the game of pocketing bonus money and then the first time any one year's "new money" is less than another CB's compensation, he wants to hold out. 

What about a large amount of guaranteed money that is spread out over the contract? What about escalators in the deal making him the highest paid CB if anyone passes him? There had to have been a way to avoid whats going on this year. And i don't believe that if Revis was signed long term that he would've sat out whole seasons during his prime that wouldn't have even made him a FA because he wouldn't be accruing more years. He never actually missed a game so it's an open question if he would have. 

[Sperm Edwards]

I totally see where you are coming from but in hindsight would it have mattered it Revis held out the whole season?  There are no medals for almost and aside from a few Jets fans who constantly remember the glory days of back to back AFC championship losses it really makes no difference if the Jets went 4-12 or 12-4 they still lost when it counted.  After Revis dogged it in camp/held out of preseason he got injured and was very mortal that season anyway.

 

Anyway I can't help but feel that the Jets had the position of power in 2010 and Tanny gave away a right teams have that was collectively bargained.  I think they wouldi be in a better position to trade Revis if they still had the franchise tag available to them as teams would know they need to deal with the Jets if they want Revis.

 

C'mon.  If you want to play the "in hindsight" game I can do a lot better than worrying about how a Revis extension was worded. It's also a cop-out.  In hindsight we didn't win anything therefore every single player we paid over the required league minimum was a waste if you want to play that game.

 

We were very close to going to the superbowl in January of 2011 on the backs of the team's defense.  6 months later, with almost the entire roster returning, GM SpartanJet would have let his best defender sit out instead of hammering out a reasonable deal that was agreeable to both sides?

 

You would have more credibility playing the "in hindsight" game if the roster was depleted and we had no cap room and what looked like a likely loser season turned out to be just that.  But when we extended Revis we were considered a realistic contender, and it's not like that has been the norm for this franchise for the past few decades. 

GM SpartanJet in the summer of 2010, 6 months after losing the AFCCG by 1 score:  "Revis has finally agreed to a 4 year $46M contract with language in it that prevents him from holding out until the contract is over.  I have decided to tell him to shove it up his ass because I own a time machine and know for a fact that we still won't win a SB."

[Sperm Edwards]

What about a large amount of guaranteed money that is spread out over the contract? What about escalators in the deal making him the highest paid CB if anyone passes him? There had to have been a way to avoid whats going on this year. And i don't believe that if Revis was signed long term that he would've sat out whole seasons during his prime that wouldn't have even made him a FA because he wouldn't be accruing more years. He never actually missed a game so it's an open question if he would have. 

 

Outline it.  How much bonus money are you giving him and when are you giving it? If you're not paying Revis $32M over the first 2 years he's not signing.  If you're not going to construct it the way Tannenbaum did with a poison pill, then he's going to hold out as soon as his average compensation dips below $16M.

Also that's a stupid contract and further, we are in no worse a situation today than if we'd handed Revis a contract with that language.  I the Jets want to make him the highest-paid CB right now he'd take it.  How are we worse off?  You're not making much sense.

 

You can choose to believe that Revis wouldn't hold out if his deal was for longer than 4 years, but that doesn't make it so.  You can also choose to believe Sanchez is a top 10 QB and the Jets are holding him back.  But choosing to believe that doesn't make it so either.

 

If given the opportunity to squeeze more money out of his employer, Revis will do it.  I've got no love for Tannenbaum and I'm actually pretty impressed with how he handled the situation.  He knew Revis was going to be a problem so he goes out and gets Cromartie and then drafts a CB in round 1 to take away as much leverage as possible.  Wilson was a crappy pick but no one knew it at the time, Revis included.  

[unbanmadmike1]

Outline it.  How much bonus money are you giving him and when are you giving it? If you're not paying Revis $32M over the first 2 years he's not signing.  If you're not going to construct it the way Tannenbaum did with a poison pill, then he's going to hold out as soon as his average compensation dips below $16M.

Also that's a stupid contract and further, we are in no worse a situation today than if we'd handed Revis a contract with that language.  I the Jets want to make him the highest-paid CB right now he'd take it.  How are we worse off?  You're not making much sense.

 

You can choose to believe that Revis wouldn't hold out if his deal was for longer than 4 years, but that doesn't make it so.  You can also choose to believe Sanchez is a top 10 QB and the Jets are holding him back.  But choosing to believe that doesn't make it so either.

 

If given the opportunity to squeeze more money out of his employer, Revis will do it.  I've got no love for Tannenbaum and I'm actually pretty impressed with how he handled the situation.  He knew Revis was going to be a problem so he goes out and gets Cromartie and then drafts a CB in round 1 to take away as much leverage as possible.  Wilson was a crappy pick but no one knew it at the time, Revis included.  

We KNOW Sanchez isn't a top 10 QB, this Revis stuff is pure speculation. That being said, they should've given him something like 105 for 7 years with something like 80% of it guaranteed over the life of the deal and not as a bonus. That gives him a cap hit of like 12-13m per year and he gets his long term security. Now you might say he wouldn't sign something like that but we have no way of knowing, he would've been the highest paid defensive player in football. But this is the kind of deal they would've given him if they really wanted him to be a jet for life, they knew exactly what they were getting into in 2013 and I'm sure they have planned to trade him/let him walk since that time. 

[Sperm Edwards]

We KNOW Sanchez isn't a top 10 QB, this Revis stuff is pure speculation. That being said, they should've given him something like 105 for 7 years with something like 80% of it guaranteed over the life of the deal and not as a bonus. That gives him a cap hit of like 12-13m per year and he gets his long term security. Now you might say he wouldn't sign something like that but we have no way of knowing, he would've been the highest paid defensive player in football. But this is the kind of deal they would've given him if they really wanted him to be a jet for life, they knew exactly what they were getting into in 2013 and I'm sure they have planned to trade him/let him walk since that time. 

 

I really don't need to respond to this.  You want to guarantee a CB $84M over 7 years while finding fault with someone who got him in here for 4 years while guaranteeing only 1/3 of that amount? No player in NFL history at any position had been guaranteed half that amount (to the best of my knowledge) and you not only want to set that bar but want to double the previous record for guaranteed money?

 

And you still haven't outlined bonus money and how much he's pocketed by the end of year 2, year 3, etc.  Like all things, the devil is in the details.

 

He doesn't want to just be the highest paid CB.  He wants to be paid higher than anyone else has been paid before.  In his mind, Asomugha set the bar at $15.5M so Revis therefore needed to get $16M because he's better than Nnamdi.  His stance was that he was not showing up if he wasn't getting $16M/year.  He got it from the Jets (for the first 2 years) and it seems he expected us to tear it up after those 2 years were up to give him $16M/year again for the next couple of years.

[unbanmadmike1]

I really don't need to respond to this.  You want to guarantee a CB $84M over 7 years while finding fault with someone who got him in here for 4 years while guaranteeing only 1/3 of that amount? No player in NFL history at any position had been guaranteed half that amount (to the best of my knowledge) and you not only want to set that bar but want to double the previous record for guaranteed money?

 

And you still haven't outlined bonus money and how much he's pocketed by the end of year 2, year 3, etc.  Like all things, the devil is in the details.

 

He doesn't want to just be the highest paid CB.  He wants to be paid higher than anyone else has been paid before.  In his mind, Asomugha set the bar at $15.5M so Revis therefore needed to get $16M because he's better than Nnamdi.  His stance was that he was not showing up if he wasn't getting $16M/year.  He got it from the Jets (for the first 2 years) and it seems he expected us to tear it up after those 2 years were up to give him $16M/year again for the next couple of years.

The alternative is what they are facing, To lose 3 years of his, and probably the rest of his career, for either question mark draft picks, or nothing. And BTW they should still sign him long term but reality based thinking says they won't.

[bitonti]

He doesn't want to just be the highest paid CB.  He wants to be paid higher than anyone else has been paid before.  In his mind, Asomugha set the bar at $15.5M so Revis therefore needed to get $16M because he's better than Nnamdi.   

this is pre-injury talk. We don't know what Revis' current salary demands are. We are assuming they are huge but you can't take a quote from 2010 and apply it to 2013 contract talks. Especially when the 15.5 guy was such a bust.  the market has changed, both in what teams will pay and what Revis is worth. Had he not gotten injured and made his 4th All Pro team, yeah maybe this is still valid. As it stands Revis' next contract is likely to be in the 12-13 range, regardless of what team gives it to him. Because don't forget he missed 13 games last year and historically ACL tears are tricky for CB. I believe he will come back stronger than ever but there is a demand to be made that his case to be highest defender ever is not relevant. 

[Sperm Edwards]

The alternative is what they are facing, To lose 3 years of his, and probably the rest of his career, for either question mark draft picks, or nothing. And BTW they should still sign him long term but reality based thinking says they won't.

I'm sure if they offered him $60M for 3 years in Feb 2014 that he'd take it. Now it's the same as your 7 year $105M deal and with nowhere near the assumed risk as you outlined.

If he accepts $48m it's cheaper than your deal.

You just made Tannenbaum look more shrewd than you and you have the benefit of hindsight.

[jorge o8]

i say a 1st the 34 pick and next years 3rd. but if im the the jets i will hang on to him and week 5 somebody will give us two 1s

[unbanmadmike1]

I'm sure if they offered him $60M for 3 years in Feb 2014 that he'd take it. Now it's the same as your 7 year $105M deal and with nowhere near the assumed risk as you outlined.

If he accepts $48m it's cheaper than your deal.

You just made Tannenbaum look more shrewd than you and you have the benefit of hindsight.

They aren't going to do that just because like they wouldn't give him long term security in 2010. Thats pretty much my point.