As the 2008 draft approaches, a buzz is returning to league circles regarding the contract given last year by the New York Jets to cornerback Darrelle Revis.
The Jets moved up in round one for the ability to snag the Pitt product, who blew scouts away with stunning speed, quickness, and agility during his Pro Day workout. The Jets landed at No. 14, and jumped on Revis.
The problem arises from the posturing that the Jets did in trying to get Revis signed. The latest revision to the Collective Bargaining Agreement allows teams in the top half of round one to sign the selected player to contracts with a maximum duration of six years. For picks No. 17 through 32 (this year, 31), the max length is five seasons.
The Jets, taking a page from other franchises who have played hardball over contract length (such as the Patriots), insisted on a six-year deal, even after the player taken before Revis (Adam Carriker of the Rams) and the guy selected after Revis (Lawrence Timmons of the Steelers) signed straight five-year packages.
In the end, the Jets got their wish. Sort of. Revis has a six-year deal. But he already has met the modest triggers for voiding the last two years of the contract, shrinking the thing to a four-year, $16 million contract. And that four-year total significantly exceeds the total value of the five-year deals given to Carriker and Timmons.
The Jets can still get their six-year package by buying back the final two seasons. But it will cost $16 million to do so. In guaranteed money.
That works out to $32 million over six years. For the fourteenth overall selection.
Because the first five picks or so involve a different universe of negotiations, the teams with selections No. 6 through No. 16 will now face an extra challenge when trying to hammer a contract with the player whom they pick.
The threshold option will be to do a straight five-year deal, or to agree to a Revis-style deal that likely will force a Fitzgerald-style gun-to-the-head extension after four seasons in order to avoid salary cap problems.
In fact, it’s possible that some agents for the players drafted from No. 6 through No. 16 will use the Revis deal as the benchmark for negotiations. If, as the argument would go, the guy taken at No. 14 in 2007 got that kind of a package, the guy selected at No. 11 or No. 12 or No. 13 in 2008 merits at least the same deal, if not more.
For some teams, the only way around the problem might be to do a straight four-year deal, and then hold the ability to use the franchise tag for years five and/or six. (In hindsight, the Cardinals surely wish they had done that with Fitzgerald.)
Then again, perhaps the best solution will be for the teams that will hold these financially problematic selections to take the position that the Jets did a deal so bad that it should be viewed as an aberration, and thus ignored.
That might work for the Patriots, Ravens, Bengals, Saints, Bills, Broncos, Panthers, Bears, Lions, and Cardinals.
But calling the Jets stupid won’t work for all of the teams that pick in that range; this year, the Jets hold the sixth overall selection.
_2.gif)






April 8th, 2008 at 11:28 am
While the deal the Jets made appears to be stupid, if Revis turns into a pro bowl player by the end of his 4 year deal, then buying back the final two years at $8m per season will be a steal based on the going rate for top corners. Then again, it could also cause a holdout as he’ll probably want at least $25m guaranteed that would come with a new contract.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 11:32 am
The finacial system the NFL uses is stupid and unfair. They let one stupid move by some stupid GM on the hot seat to reset the entire market value every year. The Salary cap is the only thing working in the opposite direction, but the result is big money in the wrong places, and real good veteran players getting almost no money compared to an NBA 12 man on the Memphis grizzle or LA Clippers. The NY Knicks payroll is higher than the Jets even with this stupid contract to Chevis.
Ray Lewis was the highest paid defensive player in the NFL at 50 mil for 7 years of HOF football, one year before Melvin Mora got a 30 million dollar check to play 3 years of 3rd base for the Sorryoles.
The same time Adalius Thomas was the Ravens defensive MVP, but a 6th round pick putting about 500k in the bank for the season.
Rookies who may not even ever play should not be getting huge signing bonus money while guys like Adalius Thomas play great for 5 years at minimum money before they can become a free agent.
There has to be a better way, and it has to be in place before the next CBA. The Owner revenue sharing problems pale in comparison the the players crazy distribution of what should be more than enough money to around.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 11:46 am
This is just another example why the NFL needs to adopt the rookie pay scale that the NBA uses. This would stop stuff like this an would not kill teams for drafting a bust. It would also allow teams to pay veteran guys that have proven themselves in the league instead of having to cut productive veterans.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 11:50 am
If a player is a bust then the Revis deal is brilliant. Super low triggers that even a bust can meet lets you get out of the deal without being in salary cap hell for killing your top half of round 1 draft pick. If the player isn’t a bust, and/or is a franchise-type player then you would probably be looking to extend them with 2 years left on the deal anyway.
The only way it’s a bad deal is if the player is a ‘regular’ nfl player… not a game changer, but a guy who will either just be the starter, or be your best backup. Then you’re going to cut him loose.
But if you’re, say drafting a QB in round 1… then that type of deal is great. With the bust-rate they have going you’d almost love for them to meet the triggers and be able to walk away without much cost. If they’re worth a damn you’ll extend them before the big $ years anyway. If they’re only so-so then they’re probably not what you wanted from a first round QB.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 11:59 am
What I don’t understand, and maybe Florio can explain it, is why hasn’t this been fixed. Obviously the owners want to change it, so it seems like the NFLPA must be the one holding it back. But, wouldn’t the Players Assosication want the veterans and solid players to get more money, rather than making several first round busts rich each year?
Is there an actual reason it hasn’t been changed, or does Upshaw just not want to look like he gave into something the owners wanted, regardless of whether it is good for the league?
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
The NFLPA should be forced to field a team. That would turn the light on for the union bosses who who believe it is the owners obligation to line the pockets of the underachieving unemployable.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 8th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Not to put words in Florio’s mouth (or anywhere else for that matter), but if memory serves, he’s posted in the past that the current pay system is heavily agent-driven. It’s in their financial interest to have high-profile rookies sign megadeals. And since they have an in with union leadership….
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Breaking news: Life is not fair. I find it strange that we care about”Total Strangers” make for a living. I think it’s a lottery for the athleticaly gifted. Draft smart and you won’t get burned. Ask Adalius Thomas if he’s broke now. It all evens out. We fans are just jealous that we will never be paid like this and we don’t get to retire in our 30’s. Yes I would like to see change to the rookie pay scale, but only becuase the top 10 picks can finacially handcuff an already stuggling football team.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 8th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
This is dealt is NOT a bad deal for the Jets or Revis. Basically the Jets are paying Revis mid-first round money for the first 4 years of the deal. If Revis is the franchise corner they expected him to be (when they moved up to draft him) then the 8 mil per for years 5 & 6 is slightly under market value. Remember, top corners in the league are signing at or near 10mil per year right now (and that figure will be well higher than that 4 years from now). So although it seems like a huge salary to be committed to, it is no where near the situation of the Fitzgerald-Cardinal fiasco (where Fitzgerald’s salary is well outside the average for top WRs). If Revis is not the probowl corner the Jets expect him to be, they simply walk away after 4 years without any huge loss.
THE REAL PROBLEM IS THAT THE LEAGUE NEEDS A ROOKIE SCALE! They need to stop over spending on unproven rookies and allocate those funds on proven players. Expect this to be one of the top priorities during the next CBA negotiation,
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
April 8th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
You explained yourself why we care. We love football and bad buisness is bad for football.
As far as Adalius goes, he got a nice chunk of money in his 6th or 7th season at age 30. He was the team player rep as well as team MVP during the last CBA and publicly stated on his radio show that even as a player rep of his entire team’s roster he had absolutly no vote or say in any of the issues on the table.
Life is not always fair, but is better when it is. When people have no interest in being fair or playing by the rules, there will be conflict within and division that weakens and theatens the thing we fans have come to really like enough to read some internet hack’s rumour mill on a daily basis.
Fan interest is what it is because of what info is given to them and how. They really should not know how much players make, but they do becuase the owners use that info as leverage in the public opinion.
Fans don’t really care exactly how much money it is they just know it is way more than they will ever see and somehow because of that one players contract the team is somehow being exploited by the very terms they offered in the first place.
NFL teams are never actually “handcuffed” by a bad rookie deal. Bad and cheap owners intentionally take cap hits by cutting players “under contract” and just pocket the cash for taking a “cap penalty”
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
April 8th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
This goes back to what I have been saying for years. They need to stip paying these kids so much money and movie to a standard ized rookie contract program. #1 gets “x” amount base salary and anything above that is laid out in performance incentives no play, no pay. You suck the team does not suffer having to pay yo for sucking and no guaranteed money. You lower the base through the first 5 picks by a percentage per pick. Then it is a set amount for 6-16 and so on. These guys have proven nothing at the NFL level. They are not entitled to anything. If they want big money they need to earn it on the field. I feel sorry for teams that have the number one pick because they have to clear so much cap room just to sign their guy. This puts them in the percarious position of having to restructure deals and/or let guys go just so they can make room salary wise for some snot nose kid that has yet to prove he can play at the NFL level.
How many busts have their been?
Ryan Leaf any one.
Point is that kids don’t deserve a damn thing as far as the money goes and it’s going to kill the NFL unless something is done about it.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated