Darrelle Revis Holdout: MERGED

[visajets]

Geez fellow fans fighitng over something neither can control...

[THE ILK]

It seems as if this can be true, but at the same time, so can Cowlishaw's claims. Cowlishaw made it seem like Revis laid down a line for this weekend. In other words, Cowlishaw made it seem that, even if the Jets didn't give Revis the #s he wanted, Revis would take the Jets best offer as of this coming weekend because it is not worth sitting out longer and risking a starting spot in the regular season or the holdout going into the season. It seems more like Revis isn't ready to take the risk of sitting out an entire year when the Jets offer would still have him set for life, not that the two sides necessarily agree on what appropriate compensation would be.

I hope you are right, Revis should get allot of respect back if this turns out to be true.

[DireJet38]

$10/$160 it's $16/$160

This is what I wrote: 10 years/$160 million

[THE ILK]

Geez fellow fans fighitng over something neither can control...

Really?

So you mean to tell me somebody cannot control it, when they accuse somebody else of making up reports and numbers, that obviously exist?

[JustInFudge]

Predicting and reporting are 2 different things. He wasn't predicting it would get done, he was reporting it would get done.

Whatever still doesnt change a thing.

People are acting like the guys career is on the line with this "report". As if ATH wont let him back on the show. If anything, it just gives them more ammo to rag on him with.

[THE ILK]

This is what I wrote: 10 years/$160 million

I know, you are insinuating that it was not $16 mill per for 10 years, continuing to totally ignore the reports.

[jussssstme]

Schefter says he's talked to people who would know, and they haven't been able to verify. Doesn't that make it unlikely?

not if there is a media blackout by the principals. Tim probably got it from not the horse's mouth but someone close.

[DireJet38]

I know, you are insinuating that it was not $16 mill per for 10 years, continuing to totally ignore the reports.

I think you are right in the regard that Revis' camp asked for 10 years/160 million.

But I think that was just a shoot-for-the-moon starting point, with the eventual contract coming down from that ledge.

If Revis' camp doesn't come down from 10years/160 mil, I don't think this gets done — unless the contract is purely propped up by fluff. But Revis seems to want to avoid fluff, which leads me to believe that it will be fewer years with less per year and a larger signing bonus.

[THE ILK]

I think you are right in the regard that Revis' camp asked for 10 years/160 million.

But I think that was just a shoot-for-the-moon starting point, with the eventual contract coming down from that ledge.

If Revis' camp doesn't come down from 10years/160 mil, I don't think this gets done — unless the contract is purely propped up by fluff. But Revis seems to want to avoid fluff, which leads me to believe that it will be fewer years with less per year and a larger signing bonus.

Are you kidding me???

Now you think the $16/$160 is right, but it was just a "shoot-for-the-moon starting point"?

You accused me of smearing him when I brought those numbers up.

Then you said I was making those numbers and the reports up.

Now you say I was right in that regard.

Talk about a walking contradiction! How many sides does your mouth have?

[Sperm Edwards]

If the Jets give him that $25-30M bonus you were offering, I think the deal will be done shortly, too.

That's not an open letter. That's an open mouth.

[DireJet38]

Are you kidding me???

Now you think the $16/$160 is right, but it was just a "shoot-for-the-moon starting point"?

You accused me of smearing him when I brought those numbers up.

Then you said I was making those numbers and the reports up.

Now you say I was right in that regard.

Talk about a walking contradiction! How many sides does your mouth have?

Hey, I'm just going by the report you have been using. I'm not above admitting I was wrong and lending credence to said report. Clearly, someone told Bob Glauber those numbers. Still, I think the report is stale and recycled, meaning it matters very little RIGHT NOW.

I think you are failing to understand the crux of the Revis issue: Guaranteed money.

10years/$160mil doesn't mean much without big time guarantees. This isn't baseball. All that money isn't in Revis' pocket.

And I highly doubt Revis cares about total years/compensation over guarantees — regardless of what ANY report says. In reality, that would be more of a Jets position. After all, it would allow Tanny to do what he does best: mold a contract like Brick's, which has a ton of gray areas and very little black and white.

Revis obviously doesn't want his contract drawn up with gray ink.

[Sperm Edwards]

Hey, I'm just going by the report you have been using. I'm not above admitting I was wrong and lending credence to said report. Clearly, someone told Bob Glauber those numbers. Still, I think the report is stale and recycled, meaning it matters very little RIGHT NOW.

I think you are failing to understand the crux of the Revis issue: Guaranteed money.

10years/$160mil doesn't mean much without big time guarantees. This isn't baseball. All that money isn't in Revis' pocket.

And I highly doubt Revis cares about total years/compensation over guarantees — regardless of what ANY report says. In reality, that would be more of a Jets position. After all, it would allow Tanny to do what he does best: mold a contract like Brick's, which has a ton of gray areas and very little black and white.

Revis obviously doesn't want his contract drawn up with gray ink.

After this season, which he was playing under his old contract anyway like an honorable person, Brick gets $35M in guarantees. Absent the new deal, Brick would be looking at 1 year $10M for 2011 and start negotiating a new contract at that time.

And he's not suffering a career-ending injury. If he does he took out an insurance policy. It was a good deal for the Jets and a good deal for Ferguson, no matter what greedy agents around the league spout off.

[JohnnyHector]

Glauber reporting that Revis is "demanding" 10 years/$162 million.... Jets have offered as much as 10/$122m.

We'll have to wait and see who has the real scoop here.

[DireJet38]

After this season, which he was playing under his old contract anyway like an honorable person, Brick gets $35M in guarantees. Absent the new deal, Brick would be looking at 1 year $10M for 2011 and start negotiating a new contract at that time.

And he's not suffering a career-ending injury. If he does he took out an insurance policy. It was a good deal for the Jets and a good deal for Ferguson, no matter what greedy agents around the league spout off.

But do you think Revis will take a similar deal?

[THE ILK]

Hey, I'm just going by the report you have been using. I'm not above admitting I was wrong and lending credence to said report. Clearly, someone told Bob Glauber those numbers. Still, I think the report is stale and recycled, meaning it matters very little RIGHT NOW.

I think you are failing to understand the crux of the Revis issue: Guaranteed money.

10years/$160mil doesn't mean much without big time guarantees. This isn't baseball. All that money isn't in Revis' pocket.

And I highly doubt Revis cares about total years/compensation over guarantees — regardless of what ANY report says. In reality, that would be more of a Jets position. After all, it would allow Tanny to do what he does best: mold a contract like Brick's, which has a ton of gray areas and very little black and white.

Revis obviously doesn't want his contract drawn up with gray ink.

How bad do you want to look today?

You said I was making up those numbers out of one side of your mouth, and now out of the other you said Revis was just using them as a "shoot-for-the-moon starting point"

You said there were no such reports, then today was the only one, so how could it be "stale and recycled" According to you they never existed till today.

I said all along the reason guarantees were not being hashed out was because he was holding out for $16/$160 and the Jets see that as unthinkable.

You accused me of smearing him.

Now by posting the exact opposite of what you have been saying all along, you're not "admitting you were wrong or lending credence to said report"

Congratulations! You went from a head in the sand to a forked tongue head in the sand, I'm very proud of you!

[Klecko73isGod]

Schefter says he's talked to people who would know, and they haven't been able to verify. Doesn't that make it unlikely?

No. It doesn't. It means Schefter's sources suck.

[Sperm Edwards]

But do you think Revis will take a similar deal?

No. I think Mangold's deal will be similar. But that's a guess. Truthfully, Mangold has more leverage than Ferguson had. If Ferguson makes it through the season he can still only negotiate with the Jets. If Mangold does, whether he's a UFA or RFA depending on the new CBA, either way he's free to talk to any team.

But they're all different players. First off, neither Ferguson nor Mangold are sustaining career-ending injuries this year. Only center I can think of that had one was Bentley and that was a freak occurrence upon a freak occurrence. Who was the last star LT to end his career abruptly following a non-chronic type injury?

Revis is definitely in a little different boat because a little bit of lost speed or quickness matters a whole lot more for his game than any OLman's. But ultimately I think no because he's just greedier. If he didn't want the demands you claim to be skeptical about, someone from his side would have denied it long ago because it makes him look bad.

[Larz]

can't wait for the "million dollars a game" player to tear a hammy

[jgb]

can't wait for the "million dollars a game" player to tear a hammy

haha now that would be "same old jets"

[SoFlaJets]

Cowlishaw Still Confident that Revis Deal is Near

By E. Weeks on 23. Aug, 2010

Tim Cowlishaw ESPN Interview: Basically to sum it up, he remains confident in his source and still believes the deal will happen on Wednesday. He wasn’t looking for the information but when he came across it, he confirmed it with his source, who “has always been correct.” Cowlishaw heavily implied that the information came from somebody on the Revis’ side of the negotiations. On a scale of 0 – 10, Cowlishaw put his confidence in his source at 8.5 to a 9. “This person is not going to lie or likely to be misled.” However, he seemed to protect himself slightly by saying he knows a new deal is coming, but there is small chance it could happen on a different day than Wednesday.

[DireJet38]

How bad do you want to look today?

You said I was making up those numbers out of one side of your mouth, and now out of the other you said Revis was just using them as a "shoot-for-the-moon starting point"

You said there were no such reports, then today was the only one, so how could it be "stale and recycled" According to you they never existed till today.

I said all along the reason guarantees were not being hashed out was because he was holding out for $16/$160 and the Jets see that as unthinkable.

You accused me of smearing him.

Now by posting the exact opposite of what you have been saying all along, you're not "admitting you were wrong or lending credence to said report"

Congratulations! You went from a head in the sand to a forked tongue head in the sand, I'm very proud of you!

Aight, dude. I'm done. I didn't read your last post, but apologies if you think I had any intention of making this personal.

I just want Revis signed, which is the only reason I came to post in the original thread.

[THE ILK]

Aight, dude. I'm done. I didn't read your last post, but apologies if you think I had any intention of making this personal.

I just want Revis signed, which is the only reason I came to post in the original thread.

Well I could not tell the way you were accusing me, but today you sing a new tune.

Whatever!

[T0mShane]

No. I think Mangold's deal will be similar. But that's a guess. Truthfully, Mangold has more leverage than Ferguson had. If Ferguson makes it through the season he can still only negotiate with the Jets. If Mangold does, whether he's a UFA or RFA depending on the new CBA, either way he's free to talk to any team.

But they're all different players. First off, neither Ferguson nor Mangold are sustaining career-ending injuries this year. Only center I can think of that had one was Bentley and that was a freak occurrence upon a freak occurrence. Who was the last star LT to end his career abruptly following a non-chronic type injury?

Revis is definitely in a little different boat because a little bit of lost speed or quickness matters a whole lot more for his game than any OLman's. But ultimately I think no because he's just greedier. If he didn't want the demands you claim to be skeptical about, someone from his side would have denied it long ago because it makes him look bad.

Call me gay and/or sycophantic, but I love it when Sperm Edwards talks contracts. Always great stuff.

[Kentucky Jet]

@NickSpano i was told they will announce it this week, not def wednesday but probably wednesday. This person has never been wrong.

His latest tweet.

My son just called from Brooklyn and said that he heard on the radio that REVIS will sign shortly and that Mangold will sign tomorrow. Lets hope so. I use to work with a guy named Nick Spano in LI( NCPD).

[RutgersJetFan]

I'm hoping fior a 10-8 round in favor of Tannenbaum.

OK JIM!!! I DON'T KNOW WHAT REVIS IS THINKING!!! HES USING HIS JAB AND MOVING BUT HE'S JUST NOT COUNTERING ANYTHING THAT TANNENBAUM'S THROWING AT HIM!!! JIM YOU GOTTA WONDER WHAT DARRELLE REVIS WAS THINKING. I MEAN HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SEEN THIS?!?!? 4 ROUNDS TO NOTHING. MIKE TANNENBAUM. JIM YOU GOTTA WONDER WHAT THIS DOES TO THE REST OF HIS CAREER.

[SouthernJet]

The show airs on Wednesday. They usually don't use footage after the Sunday before it. Thats why I don't think this has anything to do with Hardknocks. Unless the deal gets done today.

No way HBO can cut up footage the day of and put it in their show for 10pm. Sure, they could replay footage of a presser, but to build in a story line and narrative leading up to it? I don't know, maybe they can - EY could probably answer that question better.

rumor was that it would be a Live airing as Hard Knocks opened Wed. Live footage of signing.

I think maybe this guy got a rumor that a deal was imminent, but his source didnt realize the deal was Mangolds , not Revis's.

[NIGHT STALKER]

OK JIM!!! I DON'T KNOW WHAT REVIS IS THINKING!!! HES USING HIS JAB AND MOVING BUT HE'S JUST NOT COUNTERING ANYTHING THAT TANNENBAUM'S THROWING AT HIM!!! JIM YOU GOTTA WONDER WHAT DARRELLE REVIS WAS THINKING. I MEAN HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SEEN THIS?!?!? 4 ROUNDS TO NOTHING. MIKE TANNENBAUM. JIM YOU GOTTA WONDER WHAT THIS DOES TO THE REST OF HIS CAREER.

Not to worry, Ali lived with his jab most of the time and played rope a dope (which this is turning out to be) until he saw an opening...

[s dubb]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/tcowlishaw/stories/082410dnspoblogtimrevis.80685c2d.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

An article about Revis from Cowlishaw.

Heres an interesting quote from the piece.

" Getting predictions wrong, yeah, I've done that two or three times. Two or three thousand times, I mean. Throwing stuff against the wall with no idea whether or not it might stick? Not a real good way to maintain any shred of credibility. "

So basically it covers his a*s either way. In the meantime he generates some pub. I think this guy is full of sh*t!, he's generating a buzz and getting his followers up on twitter. That quote pretty much solidifies his stance if he's wrong.

[Jbro22]

1. rumor was that it would be a Live airing as Hard Knocks opened Wed. Live footage of signing.

2. I think maybe this guy got a rumor that a deal was imminent, but his source didnt realize the deal was Mangolds , not Revis's.

1. Where did you see that?

2. Cowlishaw already said he was not talking about Mangold and that he was talking about Revis. And followed that up with "I'm not stupid."

[Jbro22]

http://www.dallasnew..._medium=twitter

An article about Revis from Cowlishaw.

Heres an interesting quote from the piece.

So basically it covers his a*s either way. In the meantime he generates some pub. I think this guy is full of sh*t!

I hope he was making it all up, gets real lucky and by some coincidence Revis signs on Wednesday. Boom, Cowlishaw goes down as a legend. For a day.

[SouthernJet]

1. Where did you see that?

2. Cowlishaw already said he was not talking about Mangold and that he was talking about Revis. And followed that up with "I'm not stupid."

dont remember..it was somewhere in the many articles I have read today on this subject. Its really distracted me during my work meetings. I have had to say "uhhh, can you repeat that question" several times today.

[T0mShane]

1. Where did you see that?

2. Cowlishaw already said he was not talking about Mangold and that he was talking about Revis. And followed that up with "I'm not stupid."

I'm betting on Cowlishaw here, and I'm betting the news came to him via the agents for Revis. Those guys are going to torture Tannenbaum with this for as long as they can.

[gangreenman]

I'm betting on Cowlishaw here, and I'm betting the news came to him via the agents for Revis. Those guys are going to torture Tannenbaum with this for as long as they can.

How would this be torturing Tannenbaum?

[gangreenman]

My son just called from Brooklyn and said that he heard on the radio that REVIS will sign shortly and that Mangold will sign tomorrow. Lets hope so. I use to work with a guy named Nick Spano in LI( NCPD).

What radio station?

[Bleedin Green]

So basically it covers his a*s either way. In the meantime he generates some pub. I think this guy is full of sh*t!, he's generating a buzz and getting his followers up on twitter. That quote pretty much solidifies his stance if he's wrong.

I read that completely differently from the way I think you're taking it. I think he's admitting to having been wrong on predictions in the past plenty of times, but then clarifying that this is not what it is, thus the second part of his comment. His point is that while everything he's said in the past may not have been 100%, that doesn't mean he's wrong now, as he's reporting this as news from a source, not as a prediction and that he wouldn't report it as news if untrue as he would lose all credibility.

So I think as opposed to covering his a$$ he's doing the opposite and saying regardless of what people may think or his past record, he's standing by his report.