https://twitter.com/JasonLaCanfora/status/575415879665606658Corsi said:
link to tweet
So, that's more AAV than Peterson, but less guaranteed money.
https://twitter.com/JasonLaCanfora/status/575415879665606658Corsi said:
Marciano490 said:
So, that's more AAV than Peterson, but less guaranteed money.
Id do the deal reportedly on the table, but acknowledge its risky and get the sense I'll be less upset than most here if it doesnt get done. Also not going to panic on day 1 of free agency about the secondary.ZMart100 said:This board wouldn't have traded Mankins or Seymour, those deals worked out. Paying a 30 year old CB with a history of knee injuries is risky, even if he is an all time great. I would have set 3/36 in real money as the threshold.
Ferm Sheller said:Dumb question, I'm sorry, but has any NFL player ever had a fully guaranteed contract of 3+ years?
Stitch01 said:Id do the deal on the table, but acknowledge its risky and get the sense I'll be less upset than most here if it doesnt get done. Also not going to panic on day 1 of free agency about the secondary.
Or he could be Darrell Green. We just do not know. Pats aren't willing to take the risk it seems.theapportioner said:I mean, it's a risk. Ty Law, Asante Samuel, and Nnamdi Asomugha's last Pro Bowl selections were around age 30. Samuel and Asomugha are 34 and 33 respectively, and are both out of the league. It's quite possible that Revis drops off quite a bit in the next 1-2 seasons.
He played on it all year, the risk of re-tearing it is actually quite lowdcmissle said:They are worried about the knee. That's a risk you have to carry in this circumstance
I'm on record as willing to go 5/80 with 48 guaranteed.RedOctober3829 said:I'd go 4/64 with 48 million guaranteed.
I'm a bit surprised the contract length being rumored is 3 years. You'd think he'd be looking for a longer term on his last "big" contract.RedOctober3829 said:I'd go 4/64 with 48 million guaranteed.
That's harsh, considering the age and experience difference. And Peterson brings a lot more to the table in ST, and his YAINT skills are much better.rodderick said:
And Peterson isn't in Revis' stratosphere as a corner. If the Pats can do mid 30's in guaranteed money, just give him what he wants.
PaulinMyrBch said:I'm a bit surprised the contract length being rumored is 3 years. You'd think he'd be looking for a longer term on his last "big" contract.
What if the opt-out benefits the team?theapportioner said:Can players have opt-out clauses in contracts, like in MLB? I don't recall ever hearing of any, but if so, I'd give him what he wants for guaranteed money, but give him a player opt-out clause after year 2, with the third year "guaranteed money" no longer guaranteed if he opts out.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:If Woody decides that he wants to beat the Patriots at this game, he has the cap room to do it. Can't win a bidding war with them, and don't want to. The goal at this point might be to drive their price up as high as possible.
Also, a 3 year deal doesn't give as much flexibility with the cap as a longer deal would -- not as many years to spread out the signing bonus. Probably looking at what? 12/18/18, maybe 12/16/20 in terms of cap hits over the three years?
Chuck Z said:What if the opt-out benefits the team?
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:If Woody decides that he wants to beat the Patriots at this game, he has the cap room to do it. Can't win a bidding war with them, and don't want to. The goal at this point might be to drive their price up as high as possible.
Also, a 3 year deal doesn't give as much flexibility with the cap as a longer deal would -- not as many years to spread out the signing bonus. Probably looking at what? 12/18/18, maybe 12/16/20 in terms of cap hits over the three years?
Chuck Z said:What if the opt-out benefits the team?
Since when did the Jets care about making sense?Marciano490 said:Does Revis at this price even make sense for the Jets? I know they have a ton of money, but aren't there better ways to deploy it given how many pieces they need to compete?
What you could do is something similar to what the Pats did with this Revis deal - make it a four- (or five-, I guess) year deal so you can spread the guaranteed money out, but make year four have a crazy high roster bonus that isn't realistically going to be picked up.DennyDoyle'sBoil said:If Woody decides that he wants to beat the Patriots at this game, he has the cap room to do it. Can't win a bidding war with them, and don't want to. The goal at this point might be to drive their price up as high as possible.
Also, a 3 year deal doesn't give as much flexibility with the cap as a longer deal would -- not as many years to spread out the signing bonus. Probably looking at what? 12/18/18, maybe 12/16/20 in terms of cap hits over the three years?
I would assume any 3 year deal would be structured as a 4 year deal. In order to cut Revis after 3 years, you'd have to keep the signing bonus below ~17.5m on a 5 year deal. That would be 3.5/year for 2 years, 7 million in dead money. In a 4 year deal you could get away with a signing bonus between 20 and 28 million (5-7 million in dead money) which would help improve the cap hit in 2015.Super Nomario said:What you could do is something similar to what the Pats did with this Revis deal - make it a four- (or five-, I guess) year deal so you can spread the guaranteed money out, but make year four have a crazy high roster bonus that isn't realistically going to be picked up.
Yeah, and there is not a lot left in the pass rush department either. This is where, for example, Orakpo on a "reasonable" deal to reestablish his value does not cut it. He is not that good and has had 3 torn pecs in the last 4 years.rodderick said:
I'm not going to panic either, but if they lose Revis they'll have to invest elsewhere if they don't want the defense to be significantly worse. There's not much out there in terms of secondary help if he's gone.
Done as in going to the Jets I assumeDevizier said:Honestly, I think this was done once the Harvin/Spiller/Sheard news started leaking out earlier today.
That was "reported" like 3 hours ago.Spelunker said:May be old, but the ESPN crawl was just that the Patriots expect that he'll likely sign with the Jets (but they plan on continuing to negotiate).
Spelunker said:May be old, but the ESPN crawl was just that the Patriots expect that he'll likely sign with the Jets (but they plan on continuing to negotiate).
That strategy can backfire./WelkerPeaceSignMoose said:
Schefter had that right at 4:00 PM.
I'm probably guilty of relentless homerism here, but I'm starting to feel the same way wutang is, and that the Revis camp is just trying to squeeze as much out of the Pats as possible.
The Pats knew Welker was pretty much done and had little market.snowmanny said:That strategy can backfire./Welker
jsinger121 said:The Pats knew Welker was pretty much done and had little market.
theapportioner said:
Maybe, but he probably still would have given the Patriots more than Amendola has the past two years.