Darrelle Revis is making headlines in the New York Jets minicamp because he is being very vocal about his displeasure over his landmark contract he received in 2007 after being picked 14th overall. The basics of his contract are that it is a 6 year $30 million dollar contract. There is guaranteed money in it and it is a sliding scale by year and he has the option to void the last two years of his contract, etc., however the point is he would receive $30 million over a 6 year period!
Revis is arguably the best cornerback in the league. He wasn’t at the time he signed his contract, however now that he is he wants to be paid like the best cornerback in the league. Recently Oakland Raider cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha became the NFL’s highest paid cornerback. Many NFL experts feel Revis is the better cornerback of the two. This is the crux of Revis’ contract complaint.
The New York Jets are picked by many experts to make a run at the 2010 Super Bowl, however this contract dispute is becoming a distraction to the team already. Revis displayed a very childish protest at the minicamp by faking an injury and sitting out several plays. He later then told the media he did this on purpose as his form of protest. This is very poor leadership from someone that feels he is the best cornerback in the league. If the tables were turned and Revis was a bust instead of becoming the best corner in the NFL, would the New York Jets come to him and ask him for a new contract for him to make less money? I don’t think they would have. I think Revis needs to live up to his original commitment and if he still is the best cornerback in the league after this contract he will be paid like it. What type of precedence will this set if players are able to break their contracts during the middle of them when they are playing well? What is the point of signing a contract if you can break it at any time?