And where does the cap space come from to pay the superior players up front who are best at creating that havoc? If the Jets have a 6th of the cap tied up in their CB's every year where do they get the space to pay the guys who will be good in the first line of defense? That's the disconnect. Revis would be worth his weight in gold in an uncapped system because he is great and he's not fighting other more important positions for limited cap resources. As it is he is a drag on the team. If Rex Ryan wants to keep Darrelle Revis long term he better go back to the blitzing with inferior players up front that compensates for not having great players up front who can get penetration and sacks without blitzing.
Well they just spent their last 2 first rounders on 5 techniques who are capable of disengaging blocks & getting to the QB. Are the Jets in cap hell? Not to mention...rex doesn't need all stars to have an effective pass rush. See 2009.
Geez am I the only one who sees the flaws in Brad's analysis? It leaps out at you. He lumps both wideout positions into one category - WR. Yet he divides CB into left and right. This has several distorting effects. It divides the number of pro bowl appearances for CB's while adding them together for WR's. It also ignores that many CB's switch from left to right sides, even if they primarily line up on one or the other. Most importantly CB is a position where you will usually have one who is better than the other, and that person in a man D will either, as Revis plays it, play the best receiver on the opponent man to man, or more commonly will play the opponent's second best receiver as the best is double covered. Alternatively and for many teams over the last twenty years the CB's played mostly in a base zone D, which limited the value and benefit of a CB who can and does primarily play man D. In short Brad's analysis fails to isolate the variable of the value of a CB who plays man D against the opponent's best receiver. But even that huge criticism aside, there is no justification for lumping WR's together and distinguishing between the left and right CB's. Brad's analysis does not prove what he claims it does.
the superior players up front have arrived from the draft the past two seasons... Wilk, Ellis, Coples, Davis at small cap costs
Superior????? Ellis cant even mange to get himself activated for a game, Wilk's jusry is still out obviously and the other two don't even know how to get to the practice field yet
Are you kidding me? -Ellis was activated for a good 7games, & was only deactivated for times when the Jets only dressed 5 DL. Did you expect him to come in & immediately replace Pouha?? He showed immense potential & additional year in the weight room/practice field will do him wonders. -The jury is still out on Wilkerson. Really???? I'm not saying he's a no brainer future superstar but the guy started from DAY 1, got better with every game & ended up with 13 tackles for a loss last season. That's a crazy stat. for a rookie playing the 5 technique. Wilkerson is just a baby..just wait till he learns better technique and packs on an additional 5-10 lbs in muscle Let's not call them the sack exchange just yet...and further development is needed..but c'mon..give credit where credit is due. This group this LOADED moving forward
hopefully we get to watch all four of them meet at Brady this season and end his career LORD HEAR OUR PRAYER
Nice strawman argument. You stated that you wanted Mevi$ made a Jet for life so he can go to Canton as a Jet: The purpose of constructing of a team is not to collect HOF players, it is to win a championship. Overpaying Mevi$ will not help the Jets get to the Super Bowl. It will only serve to tie up financial resources in one position that does not have the force multiplier impact to bring a team a Super Bowl in the salary cap era. Mevi$ is a great player, but wasting over $12 million on a player that takes away one WR is not worth it except for the few times a year that he matches up against an elite WR. The other 10-12 times it is the salary cap equivalant of using a sledgehammer to kill a fly. I understand the idea that Mevi$ allows the Jets to do some different things on the field but those schematic advantages do not translate into a Super Bowl. As well as he played in 2009 and 2010, the Jets could only get as far as AFCCG. Although Sanchez played well in the playoffs and performed pretty well in the regular season given the circumstances, an elite QB in those years would have given the Jets a better shot at a SB victory. Switch out Mevi$ for Dan Marino or Jim Kelly for Sanchez or for Bruce Smith on the 2010 team and I think you have a Super Bowl in 2009 or 2010. As for Doug Williams and Mark Rypien, that was a different era of football from a salary cap and offensive standpoint. Rypien had a career year in 1991 and Williams had one of the greatest SB performances coupled with Timmy Smith's one game wonder. The Redskins were able to compile serious talent at multiple key positions without worry from a salcap standpoint, played in an era where running the ball set-up the pass, and benefited from tremendous play along a superior offensive line. They also had a HOF coach in his prime coaching a formidable defense. The impact on today's NFL of a shutdown CB is simply not on par with that of an elite QB or pass-rushing DE. To argue otherwise is simply ignorant of the game. The Jets would be better served in their pursuit of a SB to move on without Mevi$ in 2013. This would free up the financial resources to upgrade more important positions and bring multiple early round DPs with locked in lower labor costs for 4-5 years instead of engaging in a fruitless holdout with one player at a position that cannot deliver a SB.
I split the CB's because pro-football-reference splits the CB's into RCB and LCB. I didn't split the WR's because pro-football-reference only lists WR and WR, not SE and FL. The argument can be put to rest though by the fact that normally only the #1 WR on a team makes the Pro Bowl and certainly All-Pro status. There is one exception to this, which is the 2006 Colts where both the #1 and #2 WR's made the Pro Bowl. There are no cases where both CB's made the Pro Bowl. So we can reliably call this 9 #1 WR's making the Pro Bowl alongside 6 #1 CB's. That is a good look at their respective values on a team. Again the problem with having a great CB is that a lot of the time he is overkill against weaker #1 WR's. With a great #1 WR you don't have that problem because when he is matched up against a weaker #1 CB he just goes to town on them and gives his team extra value, either in the form of an extra defender on him or more production. When Darrelle Revis is locked up on an inferior #1 WR the cap value that is spent on him is wasted because any good CB would be likely to shut down that WR.
FTR, I agree that we shouldn't spend so much on the CB position. I don't know how good of an argument number of pro-bowl appearances per position is though. The pro-bowl is a joke. I also think you should group all the CB's together if you're going to do a per-position analysis like that. If you narrowed it down to all-pro appearances it might be more a more reasonable argument IMO.
Meanwhile a great passrusher/LB or safety can effect the game no matter what type of skill level he is facing and his cap value never decreases due to the opponents skill level. I even find it funny how people are so adamant on paying Revis what he wants (which could be around 15 mil for multiple years) yet when the fact of paying any kind of RB is just laughed at and said “you can find them anywhere”... A RB, along with many other positions, can affect the game every single play, wether its through a key catch, picking up a blitz, getting a 1st down, breaking off a long run, ect... Yet a CB can only affect ONE player on the field, and could even bring out other player’s flaws (i.e. QBs throwing away from Revis and attacking the middle of the field). Revis is a great player... He could eventually be the greatest to ever play his position. But his position isnt worth the investment he will be asking for if he holds out or once his contract is up.
