FireChan Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 2-3 years That's at most right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I felt for Revis on that play -- the ref truly screwed him over. I'm curious to know what the league tells refs about getting out of the way on plays like that. It can't be easy in such an enclosed space. Does anyone know anything about that? Are they supposed to look to get out of the way, or is it all on the player to be aware of his presence? Or is it a mix? I believe there's great tradition in The League to use the refs for a pick play. They should try to get out of the way - and that one did - albeit not very quickly. They're not going to throw the flag on themselves. PS - the excessive "celebration" carried a 15 yd penalty, but classless antics like that should get a stiffer penalty IMHO. Maybe make them sit out a series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Revis is going to command too much money so I don't understand why people feel he's a viable option. McPhee is a risky pick, are we going to get the guy who got 6.5 sacks as a rookie and 7.0 sacks in his contract year or 1.5 or 2.0 sacks in his middle years? I want Hughes back and if we lose him I think he's hard to replace but one name in UFA that interest me would be Derrick Morgan yet the draft is another option. I'd hope a guy like Eli Harold fall to us but he might be out of our reach which means we might take Hau'Oil Kikaha instead. Just out of curiosity what do you forsee Hughes' contract looking like? What about Revis? I think that Hughes is looking at a Tamba Hali type of deal 5 years $57.5M. The Revis deal is probably 4 years $58M (a little different than I initially threw out). The point being is that It is just a couple million different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland Rocks? Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Wow. The rich could get richer on D. He's a game-changer. Edited February 2, 2015 by Cleveland Rocks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I believe there's great tradition in The League to use the refs for a pick play. They should try to get out of the way - and that one did - albeit not very quickly. They're not going to throw the flag on themselves. PS - the excessive "celebration" carried a 15 yd penalty, but classless antics like that should get a stiffer penalty IMHO. Maybe make them sit out a series. agree about everything you say here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Just out of curiosity what do you forsee Hughes' contract looking like? What about Revis? I think that Hughes is looking at a Tamba Hali type of deal 5 years $57.5M. The Revis deal is probably 4 years $58M (a little different than I initially threw out). The point being is that It is just a couple million different. My preference would be spending the bulk of the money for the retention of Hughes and then adding an offensive lineman to the mix. The attention that Mario Williams garnered certainly aided Hughes's sack numbers. But the flip side of that alignment was that having Hughes on the line also assisted Mario's production. Our roster last year was very unbalanced. Our defense was stellar while our offense was very limited, especially on the line. My inclination would be to use more of the cap space to bulk up our OL and possibly add a TE who is a receiving threat. Without a doubt Rex is biased toward the defense. Without getting into his dire qbing situation in NY the lack of playmakers on offense hurt him for the past few years. Adding talent to an established upper tier defense at the expense of substantially upgrading the offense (mostly the line) would be a strategicmistake from building a more balanced roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC883 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I wonder if mr. Khaki pants (aka, the analytics department) might view revis as having a better net effect on the defense than re-signing Hughes. I bet you a guy like revis has a quantifiable increase on coverage sacks. This could be. Then draft a guy to replace Hughes. Or they view the return of Kiko as nullifying Hughes departure, so Revis adds coverage sacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 My preference would be spending the bulk of the money for the retention of Hughes and then adding an offensive lineman to the mix. The attention that Mario Williams garnered certainly aided Hughes's sack numbers. But the flip side of that alignment was that having Hughes on the line also assisted Mario's production. Our roster last year was very unbalanced. Our defense was stellar while our offense was very limited, especially on the line. My inclination would be to use more of the cap space to bulk up our OL and possibly add a TE who is a receiving threat. Without a doubt Rex is biased toward the defense. Without getting into his dire qbing situation in NY the lack of playmakers on offense hurt him for the past few years. Adding talent to an established upper tier defense at the expense of substantially upgrading the offense (mostly the line) would be a strategicmistake from building a more balanced roster. Fair enough, the defense certainly will be the dominant unit again. I was just directing it at the people that think by going after Revis they will neglect the offense. That's not the case at all. It would be at the expense of Hughes not the OL. They will be addressing the OL in FA regardless of whether or not they resign Hughes, sign Revis or neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC883 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Fair enough, the defense certainly will be the dominant unit again. I was just directing it at the people that think by going after Revis they will neglect the offense. That's not the case at all. It would be at the expense of Hughes not the OL. They will be addressing the OL in FA regardless of whether or not they resign Hughes, sign Revis or neither. Totally agree. Given that, I'd take Revis over Hughes, simply because Hughes is likely easier to replace than the talent Revis brings. Edited February 2, 2015 by RyanC883 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 That's at most right? Impossible to say, I was just guesstimating. However guys like Rod Woodson, Aeneas Williams and Darryl Green played at a very high level into their mid to late 30's. That's not to say that Revis could as well, but it has happened. I suppose it's a matter of genetic physiology and how well he keeps himself in shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Fair enough, the defense certainly will be the dominant unit again. I was just directing it at the people that think by going after Revis they will neglect the offense. That's not the case at all. It would be at the expense of Hughes not the OL. They will be addressing the OL in FA regardless of whether or not they resign Hughes, sign Revis or neither. Instead of adding a rich contract to acquire Revis use the allottment of money for Hughes and a quality TE. In addition, although there isn't an upper tier qb on the market having some cap leeway could help get the best veteran qb on the market. The difference to improving next year from this year is not going to be the defense, it is already well established. Also, next year a healthy Alonzo will be on the roster. The real difference-maker for this team is going to be a competent qb who will be taking the snaps. The reality is that we are not going to be the only team desperately searching for a respectable qb. Having a little extra money to offer can be the difference in getting rather than losing a qb prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Instead of adding a rich contract to acquire Revis use the allottment of money for Hughes and a quality TE. In addition, although there isn't an upper tier qb on the market having some cap leeway could help get the best veteran qb on the market. The difference to improving next year from this year is not going to be the defense, it is already well established. Also, next year a healthy Alonzo will be on the roster. The real difference-maker for this team is going to be a competent qb who will be taking the snaps. The reality is that we are not going to be the only team desperately searching for a respectable qb. Having a little extra money to offer can be the difference in getting rather than losing a qb prospect. Assuming they will command roughly the same sticker price, Revis will have a much larger impact in Rex's defense. If the cost of Revis = Hughes + another OG or TE, then you go with the latter. But I doubt Hughes will be that much cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Something to consider here.....just thinking about it this morning. Signing Revis also weakens the pats........ Beating the patriots next year is mission number 1.....we gotta put that team in our rear view mirror Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Something to consider here.....just thinking about it this morning. Signing Revis also weakens the pats........ Beating the patriots next year is mission number 1.....we gotta put that team in our rear view mirror I was thinking that this morning too. He's probably staying on the Pats or going to the jets if we don't sign him. That's not insignificant at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Assuming they will command roughly the same sticker price, Revis will have a much larger impact in Rex's defense. If the cost of Revis = Hughes + another OG or TE, then you go with the latter. But I doubt Hughes will be that much cheaper. From what I have read about Revis is that he wants to be the highest paid CB. Even if there isn't a great differential between their contracts the difference can still be enough to defray the cost of getting a quality guard or impactful TE. As I said in my response to Kirby our roster is very imbalanced. The offense, especially the OL, needs to be significantly upgraded. You can get a quality guard at a reasonable price. I'll take Hughes and a starting OG or possibly TE than use the money for just Revis. Don't get me wrong Revis is a great player who influences the game. But my preference leans toward having a dominant line over a dominant secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Impossible to say, I was just guesstimating. However guys like Rod Woodson, Aeneas Williams and Darryl Green played at a very high level into their mid to late 30's. That's not to say that Revis could as well, but it has happened. I suppose it's a matter of genetic physiology and how well he keeps himself in shape. Right. I guess it's a risk/reward thing. Gotta weigh how long he'll play at a high level. I'd hate to be paying him a ton if he hits the wall and isn't great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 One thing to remember - Revis isn't getting any younger. He'll be 30 on opening day. I worry about paying a lot of money for his "decline years." That said, Champ Bailey had some good seasons in years 30 and after ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 2, 2015 Author Share Posted February 2, 2015 One thing to remember - Revis isn't getting any younger. He'll be 30 on opening day. I worry about paying a lot of money for his "decline years." That said, Champ Bailey had some good seasons in years 30 and after ...if he's only going to sign a long term contract I don't do it. If he would do a 2 yr deal with a big SB, I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBills Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Hughes over Revis. LOL. Only in Buffalo. One thing to remember - Revis isn't getting any younger. He'll be 30 on opening day. I worry about paying a lot of money for his "decline years." That said, Champ Bailey had some good seasons in years 30 and after ... Revis will absolutely have a 2nd career as a FS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah John Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I think it's 60-40. 60% of the benefit of signing Revis is the harm it does to NE, and 40% of the benefit is making the Bills already-great defense somewhat better. The cheapest and most cost effective outcome is if some NFC team signs him. Maybe Pegula can slip one of his fellow billionaires a few bucks to make that happen. The Pats defense was Revis, Jaime Collins (who's turning into a great player), Vincent Wilfork (who's slowing down), wily old Ninkovich, and a bunch of other guys. (It's OK if I don't know them, but you'd think Russell Wilson would have learned about them. Oh well.) The point is that Belichek and Patricia built a very good defense around just a few good players. Take one or two away, and their house of cards tumbles. It's a close call, but considering most of the benefit to the deal would be in hurting NE, and the lost opportunity to sign other players, I'd say no, if an NFC team were to sign him, and yes if he would return to NE otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts