Cimini: Revis Talks Could Heat Up in the Desert

[jack48]

Revis talks could heat up in desert

March, 14, 2013

Mar 14

11:00

PM ET

By Rich Cimini | ESPNNewYork.com

As of now, the Bucs are the only strong suitor for Darrelle Revis, league sources said Thursday, setting up a high-stakes game of poker between them and the Jets.

Senior officials from both teams will be under the same roof at the NFL meetings, starting Sunday in Phoenix. You'd have to think there will be conversations between the two sides as the Revis trade drama (will they or won't they?) stretches to two months.

Both teams have risk; so does Revis. Let's examine:

The Jets: They're taking a deliberate approach, trying to give the impression they're under no pressure to do anything. Technically, they don't because Revis is under contract for another year, but no one really expects it to get that far. The Jets are rebuilding and they want draft picks, so they're willing to listen to offers. They're waiting for an offer they can't refuse -- i.e. the Bucs' first-round pick (13th overall) -- but the Bucs are refusing to part with it, sources said.

If the Jets overplay their hand, they run the risk of alienating the team that wants him the most. They could wait until the summer, when Revis' surgically repaired knee is healthy. In theory, that would make him more marketable, but what kind of market would there be? If they wait until the Week 8 trading deadline, it stands to reason the most interested teams would be contenders, meaning their 2014 first-round picks would be toward the bottom of the round.

The Bucs: First of all, it's risky to trade for a player only five months removed from major surgery, but the Bucs are on board, sources said -- on board at their price, that is. But they want a game changer at cornerback. The Bucs have a terrific safety tandem with Mark Barron and Dashon Goldson, whom they signed for $41 million, but great safeties don't mean much with mediocre corners -- especially in a division with lethal quarterback-receiver combos in Atlanta and New Orleans.

There are some decent cornerback options on the free-agent market, but no one of Revis' caliber. They could draft a cornerback at No. 13, but then you're talking about a learning curve. The Bucs can extend the poker game until the draft, seeing who blinks first. Of course, if they wait, there's always the chance another bidder will get involved.

Revis: The early cornerback market has to be sobering for the Revis camp. The contracts are coming in lower than expected. Sean Smith, one of the top free-agent corners, signed with the Chiefs for only $6 million a year. Obviously, a healthy Revis is an elite player, but it will be hard in this climate to land a deal worth $16 million a year. Of course, it only takes one -- and the Revis camp evidently feels it has that one in the Bucs, who have plenty of cap room and a willingness to spend.

In an ideal world, Revis would rather make his next big score with the Jets, but that probably won't happen. He's looking for greener pastures, and the greenest is located in Tampa. It could be Tampa or bust for Revis, so you can bet there's an increased sense of urgency to make it happen. They're pushing for a Jets-Bucs meeting in Phoenix -- a showdown in the desert to dicuss the future of a player with his own "island."

If the Bucs want him great---but do they really think Freeman takes them to a SB---I don't?

[Sperm Edwards]

Something with more years and a bigger signing bonus. I'm not an NFL GM or a cap guy but teams sign young stars to long term deals all the time there is no reason they had to be in this situation this year.

 

You're saying that they should've let him hold out instead of giving him the deal in 2010? Well he really was badly underpaid at that point. He deserved a new deal. 

 

This is the problem you don't seem to be grasping.  The bigger bonus combined with a longer contract are the 2 things that (when combined) will bite you in the ass, leading to the opposite of your desired effect, and rendering the length of the contract irrelevant. 

 

Say a given contract is agreeable to both parties at $12M/year over 6 years.  No matter what the length of the contract, overpaying in year 1 or year 2 in the form of a bigger bonus will necessarily mean that the rest of the years will have a lower annual payout than $12M.  If there is zero bonus, you can pay the player out at $12M per year every year.  At the end of the 6 years (if the player is not cut and there is no renegotiation pay raise or pay cut or holdout), the player will be paid $12M x 8 years = $72M.

 

But you say you want to pay not only a signing bonus but a bigger signing bonus.  So instead of a $10M signing bonus give him a much bigger one like you requested:  $20-25M.  Now over the remaining 5 years you don't have $60M to pay the player.  Now you've got closer to $35-40M to pay the player since $30-35M has already been paid in year 1.  That's $7-8M/year remaining over the last 5 years.  The first year that his "new money" for the year is only $7-8M, a player like Revis will say he's underpaid and a player of his stature is worth more than the $7-8M he's due to make that year and will hold out.  He will say the huge bonus you paid him does not count because it is in the past and that was for past play.

 

He doesn't give a crap about losing the millions left on his contract.  From his point of view, he just got paid $30-40M over the first year or two.  That's $15-20M/year and with his leverage he wants a repeat of those first 2 years over the next 2.  The team can't just absorb his amortized signing bonus they paid him, every year, and have no player to show for it, and the player knows it.  So your choice as the GM will then be to trade him or give him a pay raise on the remaining years from $7-8M up to $12M.   But the player wants a good amount of that as up-front/bonus money and around we go again.  

 

This is why the owner doesn't want to deal with him, not because he's "cheap" as you put it.   You give the player what he wants and then a year or two later when his compensation ("new money") for the year is under $10M, he holds out again.  Few owners will put up with that, which is why few (one actually) is even really interested in him despite his incredible skill.

 

What is a solution? Well one solution is to play Revis's game, which is as sustainable long-term as the nation's debt since there is a hard salary cap in the NFL.  Option #2 is to put a poison-pill in the contract where Revis will have incentive to play out more of his contract - finish it out, actually - without holding out, as Tannenbaum did with him.  If you make the contract too long, then he'll hold out indefinitely after year 2 because the path to a new deal is too far away.  If you give him a way out after 4 years, by not holding out, then you'll get all 4 of those years because Revis will become an UFA and get his new contract sooner.

 

Giving him a super-high bonus gives him tremendous leverage to hold out after that bonus has been paid.  So you have to put in some disincentive for the player if he holds out (like a long contract that locks him in for half his desired amount, as was done).  Making the term very long after that takes away the player's incentive to finish the term of that contract.  Making it shorter allows the player to see a finish line within grasp, so you have what we have now: Revis wants to hold out after 2 years but sees that he'll make more by playing out 2 more then getting his freedom.  Jets will be forced to renegotiate with him after 3 years, trade him after 3 years (to a team that will give him a giant pay raise), or risk losing him after that 4th year with no compensation.

 

You are presuming Revis wants - and will honor - one contract that he will never hold out from no matter what changes or increases there are in the salary cap for the remainder of his career.  While your position is noble and honorable, it is also naive.  I seriously doubt very much that this is the longest contract offered to Revis anyway.  But it was the one that got him to end his holdout in time for the season to start.

[unbanmadmike1]

This is the problem you don't seem to be grasping.  The bigger bonus combined with a longer contract are the 2 things that (when combined) will bite you in the ass, leading to the opposite of your desired effect, and rendering the length of the contract irrelevant. 

 

Say a given contract is agreeable to both parties at $12M/year over 6 years.  No matter what the length of the contract, overpaying in year 1 or year 2 in the form of a bigger bonus will necessarily mean that the rest of the years will have a lower annual payout than $12M.  If there is zero bonus, you can pay the player out at $12M per year every year.  At the end of the 6 years (if the player is not cut and there is no renegotiation pay raise or pay cut or holdout), the player will be paid $12M x 8 years = $72M.

 

But you say you want to pay not only a signing bonus but a bigger signing bonus.  So instead of a $10M signing bonus give him a much bigger one like you requested:  $20-25M.  Now over the remaining 5 years you don't have $60M to pay the player.  Now you've got closer to $35-40M to pay the player since $30-35M has already been paid in year 1.  That's $7-8M/year remaining over the last 5 years.  The first year that his "new money" for the year is only $7-8M, a player like Revis will say he's underpaid and a player of his stature is worth more than the $7-8M he's due to make that year and will hold out.  He will say the huge bonus you paid him does not count because it is in the past and that was for past play.

 

He doesn't give a crap about losing the millions left on his contract.  From his point of view, he just got paid $30-40M over the first year or two.  That's $15-20M/year and with his leverage he wants a repeat of those first 2 years over the next 2.  The team can't just absorb his amortized signing bonus they paid him, every year, and have no player to show for it, and the player knows it.  So your choice as the GM will then be to trade him or give him a pay raise on the remaining years from $7-8M up to $12M.   But the player wants a good amount of that as up-front/bonus money and around we go again.  

 

This is why the owner doesn't want to deal with him, not because he's "cheap" as you put it.   You give the player what he wants and then a year or two later when his compensation ("new money") for the year is under $10M, he holds out again.  Few owners will put up with that, which is why few (one actually) is even really interested in him despite his incredible skill.

 

What is a solution? Well one solution is to play Revis's game, which is as sustainable long-term as the nation's debt since there is a hard salary cap in the NFL.  Option #2 is to put a poison-pill in the contract where Revis will have incentive to play out more of his contract - finish it out, actually - without holding out, as Tannenbaum did with him.  If you make the contract too long, then he'll hold out indefinitely after year 2 because the path to a new deal is too far away.  If you give him a way out after 4 years, by not holding out, then you'll get all 4 of those years because Revis will become an UFA and get his new contract sooner.

 

Giving him a super-high bonus gives him tremendous leverage to hold out after that bonus has been paid.  So you have to put in some disincentive for the player if he holds out (like a long contract that locks him in for half his desired amount, as was done).  Making the term very long after that takes away the player's incentive to finish the term of that contract.  Making it shorter allows the player to see a finish line within grasp, so you have what we have now: Revis wants to hold out after 2 years but sees that he'll make more by playing out 2 more then getting his freedom.  Jets will be forced to renegotiate with him after 3 years, trade him after 3 years (to a team that will give him a giant pay raise), or risk losing him after that 4th year with no compensation.

 

You are presuming Revis wants - and will honor - one contract that he will never hold out from no matter what changes or increases there are in the salary cap for the remainder of his career.  While your position is noble and honorable, it is also naive.  I seriously doubt very much that this is the longest contract offered to Revis anyway.  But it was the one that got him to end his holdout in time for the season to start.

Well the US doesn't have a hard "salary" cap thank goodness so paying Revis 12M per or something like that would be less sustainable in the NFL (thats not something I would advocate) ... I appreciate what you're saying here but I still don't know how you can know that Revis would've held out if he had 3-4-5 years left on his contract seeing as, once again, he has never missed any games due to a holdout and the idea of a hall of fame player sitting out games in his prime just isn't something that happens all that much. He would've had zero leverage and the Jets would've had more time and leverage in their ability to deal him rather than the situation they are in now when they are basically forced to trade him for 40 cents on the dollar and be happy that they aren't losing him for nothing at the end of the year... Even the poison pill you're talking about is a short term patch that only really matters for this offseason.

 

We'll never really know what would have happened now but I don't think the Jets could've been thinking anything other than "he's going to leave after 2013 if we don't trade him after 2012" when they signed that deal in 2010 and not "this deal will keep him as a Jet for the rest of his prime years."

[Sperm Edwards]

Well the US doesn't have a hard "salary" cap thank goodness so paying Revis 12M per or something like that would be less sustainable in the NFL (thats not something I would advocate) ... I appreciate what you're saying here but I still don't know how you can know that Revis would've held out if he had 3-4-5 years left on his contract seeing as, once again, he has never missed any games due to a holdout and the idea of a hall of fame player sitting out games in his prime just isn't something that happens all that much. He would've had zero leverage and the Jets would've had more time and leverage in their ability to deal him rather than the situation they are in now when they are basically forced to trade him for 40 cents on the dollar and be happy that they aren't losing him for nothing at the end of the year... Even the poison pill you're talking about is a short term patch that only really matters for this offseason.

 

We'll never really know what would have happened now but I don't think the Jets could've been thinking anything other than "he's going to leave after 2013 if we don't trade him after 2012" when they signed that deal in 2010 and not "this deal will keep him as a Jet for the rest of his prime years."

 

He never missed any games due to a holdout because the Jets ultimately gave him a contract he accepted.  Not because he would never hold out.

 

He would hold out because he would have tons of leverage and the Jets would have very little.  

• A huge bonus already paid to him (your idea) means you are relying on his honor to show up.  
• Jets have paid him a ton and that means massive cap charges for a player who is holding out, and whose presence you relied upon when acquiring your other teams' players.

The only way out of that is to show him a path to a new contract in the absence of a holdout: play for 4 years and then you're a UFA and the Jets can't franchise tag you.  That is what shifted the leverage and is why Revis showed up in 2012 despite being unhappy with his compensation.

 

It was not a perfect deal, but I don't believe a perfect deal existed for both parties.  If there was such an obvious, better deal for both sides where there would be no holdouts for several years then there is little reason to believe either side would balk at it.  Tannenbaum may have been an imperfect GM but he isn't duh-duh stupid, and neither are Revis's agents.

 

Don't discount that Revis probably didn't want to be locked in for too long.  Even though the opposite has taken place, it was generally assumed that there would be inflation at his position so what seemed like a high salary in 2010 wouldn't have been as high in 2013, 2014, etc.  Revis wanted to always be the highest-paid CB and locking him into a very long-term deal removes his ability to ensure such.

[Maxman]

Good luck if you go to the Bucs.  You will live in the shadow of Ronde Barber for eternity.

[SenorGato]

Good luck if you go to the Bucs.  You will live in the shadow of Brad Johnson for eternity.

 

Fixed.