Why Darrelle Revis Will Not Be Traded

[Sperm Edwards]

Normally you're spot on, but really could not disagree more. The whole argument is based around a three year old figure that he's now factually refusing to back down from with the Jets, that he's a meany and will hold out anyway, and then will cut and run as soon as the guaranteed money is up (like teams do - all the time - in the NFL).

 

Worse is that in the scenario where you load up all the guaranteed money to 25+ in year 1 you then fault him for thinking that someone would pay him 25 million to play CB for 1 season! You just paid him 25 million to play football for one season! 

 

I have said repeatedly that if we can re-sign him for a similar deal that he now has that I'd do it.  That IF he wants his rumored request then he isn't worth it.  So I am not basing any whole argument on anything.  If his demands aren't as high as rumored I'd rather extend him.

 

Your last paragraph is arguing to be argumentative. With a cooperative player it's obvious that we'd be loading up more of his money in a year we have more cap room to leave the team more flexibility in a later one.  But Revis is such a baby he takes the position - even with bonus money that is not salary - that everything he's been paid in advance is just a past payment for one season.  Players - most reasonable players - understand that a signing bonus up front is the advancement of a sizable portion of the contract amount and not posture that it was actually a year 1 salary.

 

And you know this.   I know you are this argumentative but not this stupid.

[Bugg]

The last 2 years of his rookie deal, despite being drafted outside the top 10, he was going to make $20M.  He also was advanced salary so he got paid earlier.  But to Revis (and you I guess), that doesn't count.

 

Let's see Revis agree to a contract where he gets a high salary but no signing bonus.  See how far those contract talks get.

Problem regarding Revis's value to another team is given this track record who readlily signs up for another holdout in another year or 2.

 

Further her's not a premier QB, rather he's a  corner. As good as he is, he isn't that much more valuable on a dollar basis above what a JAG corner would be. It's right in front of us; there's a serious gap between Tom Brady and Mark Sanchez, but the marginal utility of between Revis and Kyle Wilson isn't nearly that big a gap. 

 

The libertarian in me hate the salary cap. Irt's craop that these rich guys need to be protected form their own checkbooks. But this is the system in place, and it sucks.

[Maxman]

Normally you're spot on, but really could not disagree more. The whole argument is based around a three year old figure that he's now factually refusing to back down from with the Jets, that he's a meany and will hold out anyway, and then will cut and run as soon as the guaranteed money is up (like teams do - all the time - in the NFL).

 

Worse is that in the scenario where you load up all the guaranteed money to 25+ in year 1 you then fault him for thinking that someone would pay him 25 million to play CB for 1 season! You just paid him 25 million to play football for one season! 

 

I totally disagree that Sperm is normally spot on.

[JADEDGREEN]

So when we lose him, we will get nothing for him.

[Sperm Edwards]

I totally disagree that Sperm is normally spot on.

 

Spot on your blue dress maybe.

[Sperm Edwards]

Problem regarding Revis's value to another team is given this track record who readlily signs up for another holdout in another year or 2.

 

Further her's not a premier QB, rather he's a  corner. As good as he is, he isn't that much more valuable on a dollar basis above what a JAG corner would be. It's right in front of us; there's a serious gap between Tom Brady and Mark Sanchez, but the marginal utility of between Revis and Kyle Wilson isn't nearly that big a gap. 

 

The libertarian in me hate the salary cap. Irt's craop that these rich guys need to be protected form their own checkbooks. But this is the system in place, and it sucks.

 

Try explaining that to people who think we're getting hosed if we don't get another HOF player in return for Revis.  Not everyone wants to surrender high draft picks plus huge amounts of cap room plus his bi-annual headache.  Seems to me there are only 1 or 2 teams willing to even talk to us about him.  Maybe Tampa Bay is the only well-run franchise that sees the value of pouring all those resources (never-ending ones, with the holdouts) into a cornerback.

 

Saving owners from themselves not the only reason for a salary cap.  I don't even think it's the major reason for the salary cap. Even with the revenue sharing, some teams are still much higher revenue teams than others just by virtue of the market they play in, and some owners are just richer than other owners (even though they're all rich).  They don't want to have one team being able to outspend another by so much like in baseball.  Think there are perpetual losers in the NFL? The Pirates who haven't had a .500 season since 1992. And I'm sure there are more examples in MLB or other sports. Notwithstanding special rules for Mannings/Bradys, the salary cap ceiling (and floor) means there will be parity in the NFL.

[Bugg]

Try explaining that to people who think we're getting hosed if we don't get another HOF player in return for Revis.  Not everyone wants to surrender high draft picks plus huge amounts of cap room plus his bi-annual headache.  Seems to me there are only 1 or 2 teams willing to even talk to us about him.  Maybe Tampa Bay is the only well-run franchise that sees the value of pouring all those resources (never-ending ones, with the holdouts) into a cornerback.

 

Saving owners from themselves not the only reason for a salary cap.  I don't even think it's the major reason for the salary cap. Even with the revenue sharing, some teams are still much higher revenue teams than others just by virtue of the market they play in, and some owners are just richer than other owners (even though they're all rich).  They don't want to have one team being able to outspend another by so much like in baseball.  Think there are perpetual losers in the NFL? The Pirates who haven't had a .500 season since 1992. And I'm sure there are more examples in MLB or other sports. Notwithstanding special rules for Mannings/Bradys, the salary cap ceiling (and floor) means there will be parity in the NFL.

Is there really parity? And is  it even a valid justification for artificially suppressing salaries? DOn't think all this player movement is good for anyone. Further it means for the Jets or any crappy team you give up on whole seasons when your window closes. TV revenues mean despite different markets the revenue for each team is close to the same spare basket caes like the Jags. If jerry Jones or Woody Johnson want to spend more than the Rooneys or mars, there's no good reason tos top them. And spending by itself doens't automatically get you into the Super Bowl.

[Scott Dierking]

Try explaining that to people who think we're getting hosed if we don't get another HOF player in return for Revis.  Not everyone wants to surrender high draft picks plus huge amounts of cap room plus his bi-annual headache.  Seems to me there are only 1 or 2 teams willing to even talk to us about him.  Maybe Tampa Bay is the only well-run franchise that sees the value of pouring all those resources (never-ending ones, with the holdouts) into a cornerback.

 

Saving owners from themselves not the only reason for a salary cap.  I don't even think it's the major reason for the salary cap. Even with the revenue sharing, some teams are still much higher revenue teams than others just by virtue of the market they play in, and some owners are just richer than other owners (even though they're all rich).  They don't want to have one team being able to outspend another by so much like in baseball.  Think there are perpetual losers in the NFL? The Pirates who haven't had a .500 season since 1992. And I'm sure there are more examples in MLB or other sports. Notwithstanding special rules for Mannings/Bradys, the salary cap ceiling (and floor) means there will be parity in the NFL.

The thought process of "everyone would love to have a problem like Revis", begins to breakdown when the actual number of suitors lining up for his services is thin.

 

If draft picks are such a "crap shoot" and Revis is such a "given", why is there not a bull rush here? And I understand that the uncertainty of the ACL is in play, but who would not at least look to get their medical staff in to see him?

[Sperm Edwards]

The thought process of "everyone would love to have a problem like Revis", begins to breakdown when the actual number of suitors lining up for his services is thin.

 

If draft picks are such a "crap shoot" and Revis is such a "given", why is there not a bull rush here? And I understand that the uncertainty of the ACL is in play, but who would not at least look to get their medical staff in to see him?

 

This is my point.  We should be choosing from competing offers from 30 teams.  Yet we are not.

[SouthernJet]

I totally disagree that Sperm is normally spot on.

Ya, more like 'smudge' on

[SenorGato]

I have said repeatedly that if we can re-sign him for a similar deal that he now has that I'd do it. That IF he wants his rumored request then he isn't worth it. So I am not basing any whole argument on anything. If his demands aren't as high as rumored I'd rather extend him.

Your last paragraph is arguing to be argumentative. With a cooperative player it's obvious that we'd be loading up more of his money in a year we have more cap room to leave the team more flexibility in a later one. But Revis is such a baby he takes the position - even with bonus money that is not salary - that everything he's been paid in advance is just a past payment for one season. Players - most reasonable players - understand that a signing bonus up front is the advancement of a sizable portion of the contract amount and not posture that it was actually a year 1 salary.

And you know this. I know you are this argumentative but not this stupid.

I'm not being argumentative to be argumentative. I am calling bullsh*t where I see baseball. You made up a scenario where he is paid 25 million in one year. You then fault him for claiming he can make 25 million in one year, made up on two fronts (pretending to know how Revis will react - of course not in a favorable way of course because he's not reasonable). It's yet another cartoon, fictional scenario made up to paint Revis as some kind of villain. Meanwhile, you ignore that part of that flexibility this unreasonable player just gave them is tied into the fact that he becomes easier to cut in later years. Why would he even be mad that they went ahead and made him the highest paid player in the league, even for a year, if there's enough garaunteed money behind that first 25? What if there's barely any garaunteed behind that 25 and the team is just using it as a way to cut him sooner (say year 3 of NFL 5/6) rather than later (maybe 5 of 6)?

It's just a BS scenario is all I was saying.

[SenorGato]

This is my point. We should be choosing from competing offers from 30 teams. Yet we are not.

What does this tell you about extending him? Him landing this 16-20 million a year (in cap space) he wanted back in 2010?

[pedro55]

   When you see other CBs getting only $6 million per year, there is a reason why most teams aren't jumping into the Revis mix.   As great as he is, if the guy is asking for $16 million per year and the next closest CB this year is looking at $6 mil,  that's just absurd.    Revis might be 10x better than all those guys,  the problem is Revis doesn't make any team 10x better.  He makes a team better, but not $10 mil per year better.    

 

  This is why the 'super bowl' contenders seem to have disappeared from this conversation.   The only real suitor at this point seems to be the Bucs, a team who hasn't made the playoffs since 2007. And they don't want to give up a #1(13) for Revis.      

 

  In a cap league, even paying Manning $20 Million a year kills a team.  THey want a guy to take a pay cut who just had 11 sacks last year, 17 a few years back,  and he's only making $12 million per year.  There is no doubt Revis is an Elite CB, no doubt he makes a team better, no doubt he's far better than many NFL players.  The problem is this is the NFL, not the NBA,  so if a team is locked into say some $15 million per year contract for a CB, does that guy make his team that much better ?    

 I mean cromarties counts for what, not even $1 Million under the cap this year and will be under 5 Million next.   He got guarantees and all that and is getting paid, but by cap standards,  you got a guy who counts for $4 million next year,  signing Revis to what Revis want counts for $16 million...    Does Revis really make the Jets that much (16 vs 4) better as a team?

[SenorGato]

I think the only people on the planet who take 16 million seriously all post on this board.

What does Sean Smith and Derek Cox's pay have to do with Revis? Lesser players get paid less.

[pedro55]

What does this tell you about extending him? Him landing this 16-20 million a year (in cap space) he wanted back in 2010?

 

  It tells us that the Bucs seem like they will pay him close to what he wants.   This is how it always works in sports.   

Some team will make an offer, whether it's worth it or now.   Chase Daniel got $3 million per year.  Who would think anybody would give that guy that kind of money?       Some owner overvalues players, sees stars, sees a window where they could be super bowl champs, and in the end, it rarely works out that way.    The Bills thought they had the billion dollar defense.  The Bills still sucked    The Eagles thought they had the dream team, they still sucked.    The Jets thought they had a short window, turns out they are rebuilding far quicker than they imagined.   They were a "show up in the first half' away from a Super Bowl in 2010.  They were 8-5 heading to play the overpriced "dream team' eagles in 2011.   THey were 8-6 playing the always fading NY Giants the following week.    Now they are the team who people think are tanking in 2013.    

 

 Somebody will pay Revis.  Whether the team actually wins anything, thats another story.

[Sperm Edwards]

I'm not being argumentative to be argumentative. I am calling bullsh*t where I see baseball. You made up a scenario where he is paid 25 million in one year. You then fault him for claiming he can make 25 million in one year, made up on two fronts (pretending to know how Revis will react - of course not in a favorable way of course because he's not reasonable). It's yet another cartoon, fictional scenario made up to paint Revis as some kind of villain. Meanwhile, you ignore that part of that flexibility this unreasonable player just gave them is tied into the fact that he becomes easier to cut in later years. Why would he even be mad that they went ahead and made him the highest paid player in the league, even for a year, if there's enough garaunteed money behind that first 25? What if there's barely any garaunteed behind that 25 and the team is just using it as a way to cut him sooner (say year 3 of NFL 5/6) rather than later (maybe 5 of 6)?

It's just a BS scenario is all I was saying.

 

He's done it before is what I'm basing it on.  He had a contract in the past that advanced future salary in a current year.  Then he held out, stating that doesn't count anymore.  

 

Let's say his demands are unchanged at $16M/year from what he has stated he wanted in the past.  I suggested that if we had a year with extra cap room, like 2014, theoretically we could load up the cap hit for more than $16M in one year ($25M as an idea) so he would count less in a future year.  Problem as I see it is Revis has demonstrated that he will consider $25M as payment for playing one year rather than front-loading an average for that past year AND future year(s).

 

According to your definition of a "BS scenario" then anyone who has a potential idea for the future - one that isn't already written in stone - is describing a BS scenario. Another way of describing what I did is to call it having an idea and guessing as to the outcome of that idea based on past events.

 

And I doubt you're stupid enough to not realize this, therefore you're being argumentative for the sake of being so.  You want Revis back at any price (or so it seems) so any discussion to the contrary is to be mocked.  Nice.

[Sperm Edwards]

What does this tell you about extending him? Him landing this 16-20 million a year (in cap space) he wanted back in 2010?

 

I have no idea what this means.

 

30 teams are not lining up to spend high draft picks, plus meeting Revis's contract requests, plus a (higher potential than most for a) future holdout in a couple of years.  Maybe 1 or 2 teams are, and it's only inquiries as to what it would take, but not actually making acceptable offers, since Revis is still on the Jets.

 

Why aren't 30 teams lining up to outbid each other for Revis? It's no secret that he's available.

[SenorGato]

I have no idea what this means.

 

30 teams are not lining up to spend high draft picks, plus meeting Revis's contract requests, plus a (higher potential than most for a) future holdout in a couple of years.  Maybe 1 or 2 teams are, and it's only inquiries as to what it would take, but not actually making acceptable offers, since Revis is still on the Jets.

 

Why aren't 30 teams lining up to outbid each other for Revis? It's no secret that he's available.

 

30 teams are not lining up, but he's got a gun to the head of the Jets for 16-20 million. Why should this make sense? 

[T0mShane]

It'd be smart for Idzik to wait until Nnamdi signs somewhere for one-year, $9 mil, then go back to Darrelle and offer a 2 yr/$24 mil extension.

[Il Mostro]

It'd be smart for Idzik to wait until Nnamdi signs somewhere for one-year, $9 mil, then go back to Darrelle and offer a 2 yr/$24 mil extension.

 

 

I have doubts as to whether Nnamdi will even get $9 million, but your idea is on target.  Whether they re-sign him or not, a reality based benchmark will be established for top dollar CB contracts.  And it sure as $hit isn't going to be $16 million per.

[Sperm Edwards]

30 teams are not lining up, but he's got a gun to the head of the Jets for 16-20 million. Why should this make sense? 

 

I still don't understand the point you're trying to make.  

 

He doesn't have a gun to the head of the Jets for anything.  He wants his contract redone before this season as much as the Jets want it settled before this season.  He will just cost the Jets more space on their cap than it will cost any other teams on theirs.

 

So if it's more expensive (cap-wise) for the Jets to keep him than for another team to come in and steal him away, and if it's a good move for the Jets to retain him at a higher cap number than anyone else would have to deal with, why aren't 30 teams lining up? I keep asking, but you haven't answered.

[Bleedin Green]

by the way he earned that 20 mil and then some those 2 years. You act like it's such a hot deal, Revis was absolutely dominant in 2010 and the Jets didn't want to pay him market value. the fact that he got 10 mil a year isn't relevant when he's worth 4 mil more than that, easy. He outplayed his rookie deal, that's a fact.

 

BUt again this is all going to the past I don't care about that. What will make the Jets better, that's my question. Trading Revis and signing Hakeem Nicks for 11 mil a year? Trading Revis and signing Brian Orakpo for similar? 

 

Absolutely dominant in 2010?  You cannot be serious.  He showed up fat and out of shape to start the season, played decidedly average because of being out of shape, got hurt because of being out of shape, came back and played even worse upon his return (almost single-handedly losing the Vikings game for them if not for a Favre overthrow), before finally getting it together and admittedly having a great second half to the season.  That, however, in no way qualifies as "dominant" and the Jets weren't paying for half a season.  We haven't seen a full season of the Revis that the Jets are supposed to be paying him to be since 2009 (the only time in his career we saw that mind you).  He's still an exceptional player mind you, but that certainly doesn't make him infallible and it'd be quite easy to argue that Revis hasn't earned the $40M+ he's been paid over the past 3 years, never mind the Jets being in any sort of debt to him beyond that.

[SenorGato]

He's done it before is what I'm basing it on.  He had a contract in the past that advanced future salary in a current year.  Then he held out, stating that doesn't count anymore.  

 

Let's say his demands are unchanged at $16M/year from what he has stated he wanted in the past.  I suggested that if we had a year with extra cap room, like 2014, theoretically we could load up the cap hit for more than $16M in one year ($25M as an idea) so he would count less in a future year.  Problem as I see it is Revis has demonstrated that he will consider $25M as payment for playing one year rather than front-loading an average for that past year AND future year(s).

 

According to your definition of a "BS scenario" then anyone who has a potential idea for the future - one that isn't already written in stone - is describing a BS scenario. Another way of describing what I did is to call it having an idea and guessing as to the outcome of that idea based on past events.

 

And I doubt you're stupid enough to not realize this, therefore you're being argumentative for the sake of being so.  You want Revis back at any price (or so it seems) so any discussion to the contrary is to be mocked.  Nice.

 

1. He held out in a year a guy with a 6 year deal is usually a prime candidate to be cut. He was set to make 1 million that year. Darrelle Revis is worth significantly, very significantly, more than 1 million.

 

2. Counting less in a future year in the NFL = easier to cut. Revis wants to be paid. Revis wants to be paid to play football. You (the franchise) choosing to front him 25 in a year is your issue. The problem as I see it is that this is an easy way for an NFL team to get out of the contract sooner rather than later. It's just creating a race between who can **** who first. 

 

3. There's this ridiculous assumption you're making that after TWENTY FIVE ******* million is fronted to him, he will be the one who tries to do the *******. This ties into #2. They'd cut him without thinking twice in the right conditions, and fronting him 25 makes it very possible those conditions are met sooner rather than later. Bart Scott is in year 5 of his FA contract. How's that working out for him? They would have cut him going into 2012, year 4 of 6, if he wasn't a good boy. 

 

4. Fine, BS was harsh. It's a deal meant to create the similar conditions as his last deal, fine, and then fault him for the situation playing out exactly the same.

 

OTOH, I do want Revis back at any price. I think the numbers played with here are generally inflated and then spun to make him look bad for wanting to get paid, much like this scenario. Seriously, HE'S the one who reacts negatively to 25 million? It's a little over the top. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1. He held out in a year a guy with a 6 year deal is usually a prime candidate to be cut. He was set to make 1 million that year. Darrelle Revis is worth significantly, very significantly, more than 1 million.

 

2. Counting less in a future year in the NFL = easier to cut. Revis wants to be paid. Revis wants to be paid to play football. You (the franchise) choosing to front him 25 in a year is your issue. The problem as I see it is that this is an easy way for an NFL team to get out of the contract sooner rather than later. It's just creating a race between who can **** who first. 

 

3. There's this ridiculous assumption you're making that after TWENTY FIVE ******* million is fronted to him, he will be the one who tries to do the *******. This ties into #2. They'd cut him without thinking twice in the right conditions, and fronting him 25 makes it very possible those conditions are met sooner rather than later. Bart Scott is in year 5 of his FA contract. How's that working out for him? They would have cut him going into 2012, year 4 of 6, if he wasn't a good boy. 

 

4. Fine, BS was harsh. It's a deal meant to create the similar conditions as his last deal, fine, and then fault him for the situation playing out exactly the same.

 

OTOH, I do want Revis back at any price. I think the numbers played with here are generally inflated and then spun to make him look bad for wanting to get paid, much like this scenario. Seriously, HE'S the one who reacts negatively to 25 million? It's a little over the top. 

 

Hardly over the top and hardly that far-fetched.  You must have a really short memory.  Jets paid him about $25M in 2011 and he wanted to hold out in the spring of 2012, unless you forget his "no comment"/"we'll see" stuff that spring.  

[SenorGato]

I still don't understand the point you're trying to make.  

 

He doesn't have a gun to the head of the Jets for anything.  He wants his contract redone before this season as much as the Jets want it settled before this season.  He will just cost the Jets more space on their cap than it will cost any other teams on theirs.

 

So if it's more expensive (cap-wise) for the Jets to keep him than for another team to come in and steal him away, and if it's a good move for the Jets to retain him at a higher cap number than anyone else would have to deal with, why aren't 30 teams lining up? I keep asking, but you haven't answered.

 

We both are not understanding each other here. The obvious answer to your question is that the Jets aren't letting him be a steal. It's fair value+ or go home. The last part about the higher cap number to remain a Jet is yet another necessary assumption to keep the greed storyline going. It's based on that a 3 million dollar bonus exists and then further assuming from there that Revis wants that PLUS the 16+ million you keep saying he wants. 

[pedro55]

1. He held out in a year a guy with a 6 year deal is usually a prime candidate to be cut. He was set to make 1 million that year. Darrelle Revis is worth significantly, very significantly, more than 1 million.

 

2. Counting less in a future year in the NFL = easier to cut. Revis wants to be paid. Revis wants to be paid to play football. You (the franchise) choosing to front him 25 in a year is your issue. The problem as I see it is that this is an easy way for an NFL team to get out of the contract sooner rather than later. It's just creating a race between who can **** who first. 

 

3. There's this ridiculous assumption you're making that after TWENTY FIVE ******* million is fronted to him, he will be the one who tries to do the *******. This ties into #2. They'd cut him without thinking twice in the right conditions, and fronting him 25 makes it very possible those conditions are met sooner rather than later. Bart Scott is in year 5 of his FA contract. How's that working out for him? They would have cut him going into 2012, year 4 of 6, if he wasn't a good boy. 

 

4. Fine, BS was harsh. It's a deal meant to create the similar conditions as his last deal, fine, and then fault him for the situation playing out exactly the same.

 

OTOH, I do want Revis back at any price. I think the numbers played with here are generally inflated and then spun to make him look bad for wanting to get paid, much like this scenario. Seriously, HE'S the one who reacts negatively to 25 million? It's a little over the top. 

 

   Mario Williams got paid $16 million per year.  If Revis thinks he's the best defensive player in football and he thinks he should be paid as such,  how is it odd that's what he's asking for?        Flacco just got a $20 million per year contract because he thinks he's worth it.  Nobody else really thinks he's the best QB in the NFL, but he's now paid more than the rest.  

 

  And you forget there are agents involved.   Agents can be a-holes.  They can be greedy.  If Revis's agent thinks Revis can get $16 million per year, regardless of the market, they are going to try hard as hell to get that money.       And at this point it seems the Bucs are ready to pay Revis whatever he wants.   Smart move or not, the rumors sound more like the Jets want the 13th pick, the bucs don't want to give that up. It doesn't sound like the Bucs don't want to pay Revis.

 

  The CB market this year seems closer to the $6 million mark, but remember Champ Bailey gets paid what, $11-12 million per year,   if Revis thinks he's the best, why would he accept a salary less than that?

[Sperm Edwards]

We both are not understanding each other here. The obvious answer to your question is that the Jets aren't letting him be a steal. It's fair value+ or go home. The last part about the higher cap number to remain a Jet is yet another necessary assumption to keep the greed storyline going. It's based on that a 3 million dollar bonus exists and then further assuming from there that Revis wants that PLUS the 16+ million you keep saying he wants. 

 

How are the Jets not letting him be a steal?  If a #2 and a conditional #4 that can turn into a #1 is bad value for the Jets, then conversely it is great value (i.e. a steal) for the team making that offer.  So if it's such an awesome deal for Tampa, why wouldn't any of 30 other teams jump in to out-bid Tampa until the "appropriate" value for Revis is reached?

 

 

When he last commented on it, he has said that's what he wanted.  If his price tag is that high he can enjoy a career elsewhere.  If his price tag is millions less than that, I'd love to have him back and finish his career here.

 

But presently, you are the one assuming Revis has a lower asking price than he's stated he thinks is appropriate.

[Scott Dierking]

Whenever I hear any fan say: " I want xxx player back at any price", I cringe.

[SenorGato]

Hardly over the top and hardly that far-fetched.  You must have a really short memory.  Jets paid him about $25M in 2011 and he wanted to hold out in the spring of 2012, unless you forget his "no comment"/"we'll see" stuff that spring.  

 

Kind of a major snag, no? In reality he did not hold out, but he did deliver a couple of memorable lines for the soap opera he stars in. I'm sure the NFL wanted just a quiet, easy, storyless Spring to give it's customers a break...Also, 18 of that 25 was a bonus that, from what it sounds like he triggered through being Revis. 

 

He played 2012, made less than 12, and we're in the situation everyone expected to be in when he signed in 2010.  

[bitonti]

this thread kinda got away from the major point which is that Revis situation is really complicated and it's tough for the Jets to get value for this player right now. The fact remains this thread is 7 pages long and the Jets are in a staring contest with the 1 suitor (we know about) who is actually serious. I applaud Idzik for not getting ripped off. All the Revis haters are gonna have to cool down and realize this guy isn't going anywhere for less than a 1st rounder. to paraphrase Ivan Drago if he walks he walks. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Kind of a major snag, no? In reality he did not hold out, but he did deliver a couple of memorable lines for the soap opera he stars in. I'm sure the NFL wanted just a quiet, easy, storyless Spring to give it's customers a break...Also, 18 of that 25 was a bonus that, from what it sounds like he triggered through being Revis. 

 

He played 2012, made less than 12, and we're in the situation everyone expected to be in when he signed in 2010.  

 

No it is not a major snag.  Everyone knows he would have held out if Tannenbaum didn't put that poison pill in his contract.  Otherwise why give an answer other than "of course!" to reporters asking if he's going to show up to camp week after week leading up to it? And that on top of the while the leaks to the media about how this was only supposed to be a band-aid contract that the Jets were supposed to tear up after 2 years.

 

You seriously doubt Revis would have held out prior to 2012 if he wasn't contractually trapped into showing up? You're either the only person on earth who believes that or just being argumentative for the sake of being so. I suspect the latter.

[SenorGato]

How are the Jets not letting him be a steal?  If a #2 and a conditional #4 that can turn into a #1 is bad value for the Jets, then conversely it is great value (i.e. a steal) for the team making that offer.  So if it's such an awesome deal for Tampa, why wouldn't any of 30 other teams jump in to out-bid Tampa until the "appropriate" value for Revis is reached?

 

 

When he last commented on it, he has said that's what he wanted.  If his price tag is that high he can enjoy a career elsewhere.  If his price tag is millions less than that, I'd love to have him back and finish his career here.

 

But presently, you are the one assuming Revis has a lower asking price than he's stated he thinks is appropriate.

 

Bold: That trade did not go down, we will never know the actual compensation and I have zero reason to trust reporters in a rush to be the one who breaks the story. Ryan Dempster was gone for Randall Delgado according to the Twitterverse. Carlos Marmol was gone for Dan Haren according to the Twitterverse. Anibal Sanchez was a Cub according to the Twitterverse.  I take the basic info - the Bucs were interested and probably talks got hot and heavy for a minute. If the Jets were actually going to let him be a steal wouldn't he be a Buc? 

 

He lasted commented on a price 3 years ago. Presently I am assuming that something said three years ago before he tore his ACL is fairly irrelevant. THE ONLY THING making the comment relevant is the individual talent level that puts him into conversations a lowly,non-impact CB should never be in according to 1950's football convention. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Bold: That trade did not go down, we will never know the actual compensation and I have zero reason to trust reporters in a rush to be the one who breaks the story. Ryan Dempster was gone for Randall Delgado according to the Twitterverse. Carlos Marmol was gone for Dan Haren according to the Twitterverse. Anibal Sanchez was a Cub according to the Twitterverse.  I take the basic info - the Bucs were interested and probably talks got hot and heavy for a minute. If the Jets were actually going to let him be a steal wouldn't he be a Buc? 

 

He lasted commented on a price 3 years ago. Presently I am assuming that something said three years ago before he tore his ACL is fairly irrelevant. THE ONLY THING making the comment relevant is the individual talent level that puts him into conversations a lowly,non-impact CB should never be in according to 1950's football convention. 

 

So why isn't anyone beating that? And if that lowly # is all that's been leaked (true or not), why isn't Idzik's office being flooded with calls from every team?

 

And he didn't last comment on it 3 years ago.  He directly (or indirectly through leaks) commented on it last year this time when he didn't want to show up to camp.  And I don't have any articles handy but think he alluded to it again when Super Mario got that idiotic deal from Buffalo.  

 

The only thing he wanted less than showing up to camp that was to stay locked into the 7-year deal without the ability to void it after 4. 

[SenorGato]

No it is not a major snag.  Everyone knows he would have held out if Tannenbaum didn't put that poison pill in his contract.  Otherwise why give an answer other than "of course!" to reporters asking if he's going to show up to camp week after week leading up to it? And that on top of the while the leaks to the media about how this was only supposed to be a band-aid contract that the Jets were supposed to tear up after 2 years.

 

You seriously doubt Revis would have held out prior to 2012 if he wasn't contractually trapped into showing up? You're either the only person on earth who believes that or just being argumentative for the sake of being so. I suspect the latter.

 

All you're saying is that this could have happened last year instead of this year before the ACL injury from my angle. Revis knew that poison pill was in there when he signed. He answered the reporters questions. Those answers become lines in the soap opera. 

[jetsjetsjetss]

so from what i hear on these forums revis gets 1m tommorrow. If he isnt traded by then is it safe to assume we are keeping him?