[RochesterJet]

Originally Posted by JetsVilma28

Please. Go suck on your thumb, cry baby.

I told you before the reason why we are having trouble resigning Revis is because of your fellow cry baby Holmes. If there was anyway to flush that turd I would have done it immediately after he threw the football to the San Fransisco 49ers D. Holmes contract should have been given to Revis.

Moving on, lets have a great draft weekend

BB (Big Baby)...

[Big Blocker]

Originally Posted by Biggs

What you can't do is build a roster with enough overall talent to actually win a SB when a huge portion of your money is tied up in a CB and you have holes all over your roster that need to be filled.

Since I agree with the rest of your post, and as I have said before I am hardly predicting that Idzy cannot build a contender from this point, I have only quoted what I disagree with.

The angle in the discussion with JB is that he is not merely saying paying Revis kind of money on any player other than Qb is going to prevent you from being a contender. he is saying that paying that kind of money to your #1 Cb is going to do so. Since you have included in the quoted sentence the distinction contained in the term "is tied up in a CB", you are essentially agreeing with him.

I do not agree with that. As I have been saying for months now, what prevents the Jets from succeeding now is the money tied up in too many other players who are highly paid and who underperform. Cap space taken up by them can and likely will be cleared enough next year to have had enough room for Revis and enough other players to make a difference.

And to have a contender.

I suppose I also, on second thought, do not entirely agree with your point about acquiring talent, if by that you mean such an acquisition program can overcome bad draft picks. Not too many of the latter, imo. More to the point I do remain persuaded by the bird in the hand notion. Revis was on the team. Aside from the acl injury and return, which I am not as concerned about as some, Revis is a known quantity. Who the Jets get in return for the picks they have obtained is not a known quantity. Worse than that it is highly unlikely the player or players they get will be on his level.

Now I understand the Jets have several holes to fill, and may well approach the draft by trading down for multiple picks. I have no problem with that strategy, but again, odds are that one or more of the people they pick in this draft will underperform.

And overall it is not likely that the compensation they have gotten for Revis will become players of equivalent value.

[Big Blocker]

Originally Posted by RochesterJet

BB (Big Baby)...

So, you want to engage in namecalling as well? I would not have thought that was your style, Roch.

I also did want to get back to you, about your saying I should move on on this subject.

This board is primarily a discussion board, where different points of view are exchanged and debated. It is not supposed to be about forging a homer consensus that all must agree with. It is not a pep rally. It is not required that we all don rose colored glasses and wave our pom poms and cheer.

I think the Jets made a bad decision not even trying to retain Revis. That does not mean I think they certainly would have been able to reach an acceptable deal with him, or that their failure to do so means or requires that they will be damaged for the foreseeable future. Even if they do in fact succeed, it will remain an issue for me that they did not try.

Which I blame on Woody. And I am hardly the only one who questions his role as owner and occasional officious intermeddler.

And I do not see the need to be quiet about it merely so that you are not disturbed by arguments you disagree with.

Having said that, neither is it my intention to go on and on about it for any great length of time, and in fact I am playing golf tomorrow and will not, I hope, be thinking much about Revis, Woody, or anything related to them.

That about cover it.

[RochesterJet]

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

So, you want to engage in namecalling as well? I would not have thought that was your style, Roch.

I also did want to get back to you, about your saying I should move on on this subject.

This board is primarily a discussion board, where different points of view are exchanged and debated. It is not supposed to be about forging a homer consensus that all must agree with. It is not a pep rally. It is not required that we all don rose colored glasses and wave our pom poms and cheer.

I think the Jets made a bad decision not even trying to retain Revis. That does not mean I think they certainly would have been able to reach an acceptable deal with him, or that their failure to do so means or requires that they will be damaged for the foreseeable future. Even if they do in fact succeed, it will remain an issue for me that they did not try.

Which I blame on Woody. And I am hardly the only one who questions his role as owner and occasional officious intermeddler.

And I do not see the need to be quiet about it merely so that you are not disturbed by arguments you disagree with.

Having said that, neither is it my intention to go on and on about it for any great length of time, and in fact I am playing golf tomorrow and will not, I hope, be thinking much about Revis, Woody, or anything related to them.

That about cover it.

Well I apologize for the BB comment. You are for sure entitled you you're opinion, as much as I don’t agree with it. Woody is a guy who is accustomed to getting what he wants, it's just who he is based on his experiences in life. While I usually question his decisions (Tebow was purely his call, the media circus he created to be relevant was too) this is one that I am fully on board with.

For the reasons we have exhausted in this thread, I believe for once, the jets did the right thing. No matter how good Revis was, Woody was sick of catering to his demands every 3-4 years (remember Revis’s "band-aid" deal was front loaded by design). The Jets paid him premium dollars and Revis played well during that time frame but got hurt at a bad time for him.

But yet again, it was reported that Revis was looking for another payday EXACTLY like the one he received from TB (so I think that report was substantiated). This deal would have crippled the Jets, It truly would have in the next 3-4 years. We did the best we could given the circumstance and I just don’t understand how some people cant's see this. You are entitled to your opinion but still haven’t come to the table with a compelling argument to sway mine.

*Have fun golfing tomorrow and I hope you are hung-over with joy from what we did tonight with our two picks!

[JetBlue]

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

talk about changing arguments! You do it from one post to the next!

how have I changed my argument? since the discussion changed to the value of the position it is the same argument I have made. you are apparently having trouble following the discussion so I will repost both for you:

Originally Posted by JetBlue

let's concede the '83 Raiders to you. but that is still simply one team in the history of all Super Bowls winners, and a team in a different era than today. that makes it an exception, not the rule. and since I have already conceded that the argument wasn't that it was impossible, just that it didn't happen, that exception still doesn't negate the overall point -- that is it such a rare occurance, and happened so long ago, that it is hard to claim its relevance to today's game with much different rules and salary restrictions, and those rules and restrictions make it the less practical course of building a team in today's game.

Originally Posted by JetBlue

secondly, we are talking about whether great Super Bowl defenses were driven primarily by the CB play, and that CB play made up for the D Line and Linebackers play, or made them better.

you see, the reason why QB is so valuable, because with an elite QB he can make up for deficiencies in the offense. Great D lines can make up for deficiencies in the secondary by forcing the QB to throw the ball quicker. Super Bowls have been won by teams with just average to good secondaries but outstanding LB's and D Lines, or great offenses to compensate for the defense. Super Bowls have been won by teams with average O lines but great QB's. nobody is saying that great CB's can't win Super Bowls, that isn't the argument. the argument is that teams have never won because they had a great CB, and their CB play complimented the defense that was dominant in other areas.

just provide one Super Bowl example of a team that had a average D Line and Linebackers but the defense was great due to the backfield. you can't, because it doesn't exist, and that is why CB has less value than other defensive positions. not that it doesn't have any value or provide a defensive advantage. but if you had to choose between a great pass rush and run stopping or a great secondary, history shows you are better off with the former. I have never seen a Super Bowl team win simply because their secondary created coverage sacks or incessant incompletions.

the argument is that great CB's have never been the difference makers for Super Bowl teams. the "it is still possible" excuse is just that, an excuse to defend your position, but it is a defense that forces you to ignore the fact that there is a reason it has not happened yet.

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

And I do dispute your assertion. YOU are the one who asserted that a team cannot win the SB with a Cb "spearheading" the team. Now you are talking about deficiencies elsewhere.

of course we are talking about deficiencies elsewhere -- all teams, even Super Bowl teams, have deficiencies somewhere, but Super Bowl teams have superior players at the positions that have shown historically to mask those deficiencies. and history has shown that CB is not one of those positions.

[Don]

So a good read from Cimini of all people about how ridiculous it would have been to keep Revis. Maybe this will bring an end to this idiotic discussion once and for all (although I know better).

"We interrupt your draft-day anticipation to bring you this random thought:

If the Jets had acquiesced to Darrelle Revis and signed him to the same contract he received from the Bucs (six years, $96 million) -- he said he would've accepted the same deal -- they would've used almost all of their remaining salary-cap room.

Right now, the Jets have $7.25 million in cap room, according to the NFLPA figures. Revis is counting $13 million. If they had given him a $10 million raise in 2013 compensation, which is what the Bucs did, his cap number would've ballooned to $19 million. In that case, they'd have approximately $1.25 million in cap space, meaning they'd have to cut players and/or restructure contracts to sign their draft picks.

The Jets' rookie pool, based on their current eight picks, will be approximately $7.3 million. That's based on last year's slotting, so you have to figure there will be an ever-so-slight bump.

If you're wondering why Revis still counts $13 million on the cap, here you go:

In 2011, he received an $18 million option bonus, which got pro-rated over the remaining six years of the contract. (The last three years were bogus years, tied to a voidable that would've triggered if he didn't stage a holdout.) So the Jets get hit with this year's pro-rated amount ($3 million), plus an acceleration of the remaining pro-rated years ($9 million). The Jets also get a $1 million charge for the roster bonus that was triggered last month.

He's off their cap in 2014."

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

[boston_jet]

Originally Posted by Don

So a good read from Cimini of all people about how ridiculous it would have been to keep Revis. Maybe this will bring an end to this idiotic discussion once and for all (although I know better).

"We interrupt your draft-day anticipation to bring you this random thought:

If the Jets had acquiesced to Darrelle Revis and signed him to the same contract he received from the Bucs (six years, $96 million) -- he said he would've accepted the same deal -- they would've used almost all of their remaining salary-cap room.

Right now, the Jets have $7.25 million in cap room, according to the NFLPA figures. Revis is counting $13 million. If they had given him a $10 million raise in 2013 compensation, which is what the Bucs did, his cap number would've ballooned to $19 million. In that case, they'd have approximately $1.25 million in cap space, meaning they'd have to cut players and/or restructure contracts to sign their draft picks.

The Jets' rookie pool, based on their current eight picks, will be approximately $7.3 million. That's based on last year's slotting, so you have to figure there will be an ever-so-slight bump.

If you're wondering why Revis still counts $13 million on the cap, here you go:

In 2011, he received an $18 million option bonus, which got pro-rated over the remaining six years of the contract. (The last three years were bogus years, tied to a voidable that would've triggered if he didn't stage a holdout.) So the Jets get hit with this year's pro-rated amount ($3 million), plus an acceleration of the remaining pro-rated years ($9 million). The Jets also get a $1 million charge for the roster bonus that was triggered last month.

He's off their cap in 2014."

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

As much as it pains me to see him go, this is exactly why he couldn't (and shouldn't) have stayed. He was hindering our ability to fill out other spots of our roster. Depth clearly became a major issue with this team last year. Hopefully through tonight's draft, and smart acquisitions with the freed up cap space next year, we can quickly become a contender again in 1-2 years.

Fully agree with Idzik's move.

[Biggs]

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

I suppose I also, on second thought, do not entirely agree with your point about acquiring talent, if by that you mean such an acquisition program can overcome bad draft picks. Not too many of the latter, imo. More to the point I do remain persuaded by the bird in the hand notion. Revis was on the team. Aside from the acl injury and return, which I am not as concerned about as some, Revis is a known quantity. Who the Jets get in return for the picks they have obtained is not a known quantity. Worse than that it is highly unlikely the player or players they get will be on his level.

Based on the new rules bad drafts are way less risky than they had been previously. Now does that reduced risk mean you can have multiple bad drafts and still fix your squad? That's an interesting question. Probably not but drafting a bust like Gholston would have been much easier to overcome if we could have replaced him with a FA and cut him with little loss of cap space, something the new rookie rules effectively does.

As far as a bird in the hand I absolutely agree and if we had Revis under contract and he wasn't coming off major knee surgery we would agree we had a bird in the hand. Of course that bird in the hand would also have much more real trade value.

Where you and I part is Revis unsigned and coming off injury is the bird in the hand part. I view him as an asset that may go up or down in value that a bet had to be made on. Hardly the bird in the hand but very possibly better than we will get in value back? To Be Determined.

[Big Blocker]

Originally Posted by RochesterJet

Well I apologize for the BB comment. You are for sure entitled you you're opinion, as much as I don’t agree with it. Woody is a guy who is accustomed to getting what he wants, it's just who he is based on his experiences in life. While I usually question his decisions (Tebow was purely his call, the media circus he created to be relevant was too) this is one that I am fully on board with.

For the reasons we have exhausted in this thread, I believe for once, the jets did the right thing. No matter how good Revis was, Woody was sick of catering to his demands every 3-4 years (remember Revis’s "band-aid" deal was front loaded by design). The Jets paid him premium dollars and Revis played well during that time frame but got hurt at a bad time for him.

But yet again, it was reported that Revis was looking for another payday EXACTLY like the one he received from TB (so I think that report was substantiated). This deal would have crippled the Jets, It truly would have in the next 3-4 years. We did the best we could given the circumstance and I just don’t understand how some people cant's see this. You are entitled to your opinion but still haven’t come to the table with a compelling argument to sway mine.

*Have fun golfing tomorrow and I hope you are hung-over with joy from what we did tonight with our two picks!

Thanks, Rochester. I appreciate it.

[Big Blocker]

Originally Posted by JetBlue

how have I changed my argument? since the discussion changed to the value of the position it is the same argument I have made. you are apparently having trouble following the discussion so I will repost both for you:





.

First you said you conceded that Raider team was an exception, then you said you conceded nothing.

Look, if you think you have proven anything, you are simply wrong, and i am done arguing with you on THAT part of it. You can't just say "history has shown" anything other than that the teams that have won it have done so. There's nothing about that history that PROVES that you can't win an SB with a top shelf CB on the squad. The assertion in itself is ludicrous, so the burden is on you to prove it, and you have not.

If you just repeat yourself I will not respond.

[Big Blocker]

Originally Posted by Biggs

Based on the new rules bad drafts are way less risky than they had been previously. Now does that reduced risk mean you can have multiple bad drafts and still fix your squad? That's an interesting question. Probably not but drafting a bust like Gholston would have been much easier to overcome if we could have replaced him with a FA and cut him with little loss of cap space, something the new rookie rules effectively does.

As far as a bird in the hand I absolutely agree and if we had Revis under contract and he wasn't coming off major knee surgery we would agree we had a bird in the hand. Of course that bird in the hand would also have much more real trade value.

Where you and I part is Revis unsigned and coming off injury is the bird in the hand part. I view him as an asset that may go up or down in value that a bet had to be made on. Hardly the bird in the hand but very possibly better than we will get in value back? To Be Determined.

I agree that we don't konw what will happen with Revis going forward. But he has been checked out, at this point by doctors from two teams, and nothing has surfaced suggesting he is a significant risk of not returning to form.

My main beef is I think the Jets should have tried to negotiate an extension with him, and it was Woody's call they did not. What happens in the future, no one knows at this point.

[JetBlue]

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

First you said you conceded that Raider team was an exception, then you said you conceded nothing.

no, I said I conceded for the sake of argument. that isn't saying I conceded nothing, it is saying that even if I give you the Raiders, the Raiders do not dispute the actual argument, because at best they are simply an exception.

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

Look, if you think you have proven anything, you are simply wrong, and i am done arguing with you on THAT part of it. You can't just say "history has shown" anything other than that the teams that have won it have done so.

that is false. if there are common denominators to those historical events, you can draw a conclusion, which even if just anecdotal is still stronger than an argument that has no historical precedence to support it.

Originally Posted by Big Blocker

There's nothing about that history that PROVES that you can't win an SB with a top shelf CB on the squad. The assertion in itself is ludicrous, so the burden is on you to prove it, and you have not.

that is a ludicrous assertion and one that has never been made.

[LAJet]

Originally Posted by Don

So a good read from Cimini of all people about how ridiculous it would have been to keep Revis. Maybe this will bring an end to this idiotic discussion once and for all (although I know better).

"We interrupt your draft-day anticipation to bring you this random thought:

If the Jets had acquiesced to Darrelle Revis and signed him to the same contract he received from the Bucs (six years, $96 million) -- he said he would've accepted the same deal -- they would've used almost all of their remaining salary-cap room.

Right now, the Jets have $7.25 million in cap room, according to the NFLPA figures. Revis is counting $13 million. If they had given him a $10 million raise in 2013 compensation, which is what the Bucs did, his cap number would've ballooned to $19 million. In that case, they'd have approximately $1.25 million in cap space, meaning they'd have to cut players and/or restructure contracts to sign their draft picks.

The Jets' rookie pool, based on their current eight picks, will be approximately $7.3 million. That's based on last year's slotting, so you have to figure there will be an ever-so-slight bump.

If you're wondering why Revis still counts $13 million on the cap, here you go:

In 2011, he received an $18 million option bonus, which got pro-rated over the remaining six years of the contract. (The last three years were bogus years, tied to a voidable that would've triggered if he didn't stage a holdout.) So the Jets get hit with this year's pro-rated amount ($3 million), plus an acceleration of the remaining pro-rated years ($9 million). The Jets also get a $1 million charge for the roster bonus that was triggered last month.

He's off their cap in 2014."

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

Thank you Don for this write up. Revis and Tanny got us in the cap hell we were in.
I'm glad its over, and hope we never get in a situation were one player can literally hold the team hostage.
Simply not worth it. Good luck with that TB. How long will it be in 2014 before Revis wants his contract guaranteed?