Link: Clayton on Jets Money Woes
John Clayton goes Inside the Huddle with the New York Jets.
New York Jets #24 CB Darrelle Revis,#52 LB David Harris and #74 C Nick Mangold
The Jets will be challenged to re-sign corner-back Darrelle Revis, linebacker David Harris, center Nick Mangold and tight end Dustin Keller in part because of their success in acquiring high-price talent. D’Brickashaw Ferguson’s recent $10 million a year extension gives them 10 starters making more than $4 million a year, and long-term tabs for Revis, Harris, Mangold and Keller could come close to $200 million in commitments.
Yowza. That’s a lot of green, even for the Jets.
34 Responses to Link: Clayton on Jets Money Woes
-
Randy says:
Keller Needs an extension too????
WTF I thought once we resigned D’Brick that we had 3 left, and now someone else jumps in that needs to be signed?Where will the madness stop?
-
JayM says:
How do the Colts, Saints, Cowboys do it? Unless the Jets have ALL the talent. This will all settle out once the CBA is in place and MrT can figure out how to pay these guys. So far the Jets have not lost one young player that they wanted to keep to free agency.
-
DHarvey says:
Relax. In Tanny We Trust. Please pass the popcorn.
-
Jeff says:
This doesn’t bother me because I just ignore everything that John Clayton says.
-
Mark Sanchez says:
Keller isn’t a FA until 2013, so he shouldn’t even be mentioned.
-
BurbankJetsFan says:
Isn’t Clayton a closet Jets hater? I swear I get that vibe.
-
@BurbankJetsFan
Yeah me too.
-
Jmike says:
Keller will be in the same situation as Dbrick and Revis after this year in relation to his rookie contract. Currently he is the 17th ranked TE and will probably move up in the rankings. Salary for the 17th ranked TE is roughly 3mil per year. Keller has been playing for 1.5 so he has out performed his rookie contract.
Jets seem to be looking to reward performing rookies but hold veterans to the terms of their contract. Jets seem to have their sights on a core of young players they would like to keep longer term. Is Keller one?? If so, he probably gets renegotiated.
That being said, new CBA may put everything up in the air.
-
billvv says:
Or the lack of a CBA may mean no season in 2011! Maybe that’s what’s holding up the line….
-
JEFFDOLFINI says:
I promise you that Keller will not be extended until he has one year left on his deal. Clayton has no idea what he is talking about.
-
ron2473000 says:
has anyone checked out the new webiste yet?
-
Bent says: Ron – we have a thread on it. Scroll down on the front page. Doesn’t seem that popular.
-
Bent,
Thanks…I havent been keeping up like I used to be anymore!!!
-
daddybe1 says:
Thank you jeffdolfini I was thinkin the same exact thing I have no clue where keller came?
-
Bent says:
If Keller meets all incentives, he’ll earn an average of $2.5m over the next three years, which isn’t bad for a young TE. I don’t expect him to get (or expect) a new deal before the 2011 season begins and when he does, he won’t get a big raise unless he really blows up this year. If he does, that probably means one of the receivers is expendable and therefore affording him presumably won’t be a big issue.
-
juunit says:
$200m? Geez, what are the Jets… the Yankees?
-
James in TN says:
clayton is dumb
-
Bent says:
It sounds like a lot, but at that level they aren’t overpaying for any of them and will be doing it within the constraints of the cap. I also think “$200m in commitments” is inaccurately worded, because that represents the total value, including incentives and non-guaranteed money.
But, hey, if they get a championship like the Yankees did, I’ll take it!
-
Michael says:
this is to Bent, can we sign mangold,harris,revis,crom, and edwards all this year? do we have enough money
-
Harlan Lachman says:
Good point Bent. Seems to me total payout of a contract is meaningless unless the entire contract is guaranteed for both injury and performance.
Annual salary and cap hit, assuming as most do that there will continue to be a cap, are what matter.
Clayton is mixing his criteria to obfuscate (nickel word for the day) the issues.
Harlan
-
Yeah that’s true, and at least it isn’t $200m in one year like the Yankees.
-
Bent says:
Michael – they don’t need to sign them all this year (don’t forget Holmes too), but if they want to retain all of them by next year they certainly have the flexibility to do so.
I don’t expect Cromartie to get a deal this year and Harris and Mangold will probably have to wait because the current rules make offering them a big deal during an uncapped year almost impossible.
Edwards is an interesting case because if they re-sign him it won’t need to comply with the 30% rule so they can perhaps front or backload it (or both) to use the uncapped year to their advantage and stagger the payments to fit in with other extensions. However, I don’t think he or Santonio will get a deal until they’ve proved themselves next season. Midseason could be a possibility for Edwards, but I’m inclined to think his deal will wait until after the season too.
-
Bent says:
Juunit – unless Revis gets the deal he is after!
-
Bent makes a great point about how Clayton is using a misleading number by using total contract totals, which are very rare for the player to actually earn.
-
Bent says:
Ultimately, it was just a throw away comment that he barely committed to because it was couched in qualifiers “COULD come CLOSE TO $200m”. It’s like he tried to sensationalize it and then bottled it and made a late edit.
But, yes, the Jets have some spending to do. Fortunately, it’s all on proven commodities rather than having a ton of money to spend and a bunch of available players with “issues” or that don’t fit your needs.
-
If Revis got the deal he was after the Jets would need a government bailout.
-
jvsvn says:
Forget what Clayton said but there are real money issues that need to be managed. Tanny has proven to be pretty on top of this stuff so it isn’t a real concern. It’s he same issue that all good teams face. It’s progress. It’s been a long time since we’ve had a group of young players worthy of such consideration. Stop worrying and enjoy it.
-
interested jet says:
Bent:
Ultimately, it was just a throw away comment that he barely committed to because it was couched in qualifiers “COULD come CLOSE TO $200m”. It’s like he tried to sensationalize it and then bottled it and made a late edit.”
Lord Jesus (Not you Jesus Revis) Bent, How far back are you going to reach?
Aren’t most NFL contracts Monopoly money anyway?
-
TOON2388 says:
Bent – does the 30% Rule render the $200MM # a pipe dream? Seems as Clayton is giving an opinion, with not all the facts. Or am I wrong?
-
Bent says:
Toon – if any of these deals happen after the new CBA is in place, the 30% rule won’t apply.
In any case, they could still have deals that big with big signing bonuses, incentives and backloading. Since the Jets don’t want big signing bonuses and the players don’t want backloading (and nobody seems to favor incentives), that’s why some of the deals will probably have to wait.
-
Bent says:
Hank – I don’t understand your comment, I was just critiquing the lack of substance behind what Clayton wrote.
Yes, a lot of NFL contracts include what you term “monopoly money”. I think we’ve established that with what I wrote higher up.
-
neauone says:
They don’t have to pay Revis for 3 more years if they want. Keller is years away as well. The Jets will pay Revis but don’t have to do it so soon. Let him play out his contract and even franchise him for a 4th year. How old will he be then 29-30. I think they should let him play it out. The contracts will work themselves out. Lots of vets will be gone and new blood will take their place. Mangold is due before Revis and he is the best hands down. His contract is up after this year.
-
Bent says:
Minor correction: one of the conditions with the buyback is that the Jets cannot franchise Revis for a 4th year.
It should be sorted well ahead of that though. If the Jets “promised” him a new contract before this season then they’ll stick to that. However, if he keeps turning down reasonable offers, what more can they do? I don’t think refusing to push your offer to an unreasonable amount constitutes “going back on your word”.
Keller has three years left on his deal, he is not even an issue at this point, we will be shedding contracts like Bart Scott by then.