- Rich Cimini, ESPN Staff Writer
- 0 Shares
Rex Ryan and GM John Idzik will face an angry mob Monday -- well, kinda.
They will hold a 1 p.m. conference call with season-ticket holders, answering football questions. The Jets do this once or twice a year, a PR move that lets the fan base hear the state of team directly from the decision makers. Presumably, the calls will be screened, so it probably won't get too down and dirty, but Jets fans aren't bashful and they believe Ryan has some 'splaining to do.
But something will be missing: Woody Johnson.
The fans deserve to hear from the owner, who is dangling the Jets' best player -- Darrelle Revis -- in trade talks. No matter how the Jets spin it, Johnson is the man behind the Revis situation. He started telling people around him as far back as January, including some of the GM candidates, he was deeply concerned about the team's ability to sign Revis to a long-term deal and that it should explore the possibility of a trade.
The fans pay outrageous prices for PSLs, and now they have a team that has gone south faster than the Florida snowbirds. Soon they'll be asked to renew their season tickets, knowing there's a chance their one true star player could be sent packing.
What say you, Mr. Johnson?
Johnson hasn't addressed the media since the day he introduced Idzik at a news conference in January, the day after the Revis rumors broke. That day, Johnson mostly talked in circles, neither confirming nor denying the trade speculation.
I went back and checked Johnson's comments from September, 2010, when the Jets signed Revis to a four-year, $46 million contract following a long holdout. The owner was asked if he envisioned Revis finishing his career as a Jet; even then, he wasn't overflowing with optimism.
"We'd like him to be a Jet, but I guess it takes two to tango," Johnson said. "I'm happy we have him for four years, which is about the average length of a NFL player's life in the NFL. That's a long time to be together. That will be a total of seven years with Revis. What could be better?"
Why not another seven? That's the question he should be answering now.