Revis signed with the Jets

[PPIchamp]

ESPN radio is reporting Revis has signed witht NYJ, contract details haven't been released yet. He'll sign Monday and be one the field week 1.

[BS Miscreant]

Also on ticker on NFL network

[PPIchamp]

Jason Smith is talking about it right now on ESPN radio, of course he estatic, lol.

I shouldn't have used the past tense that he has signed, he agreed to terms and will sign tomorrow, they are reporting.

And he's reporting it's the richest defensive contract ever, not just the richest DB deal ever.

Edited September 6, 2010 by PPIchamp

[piratesownninjas]

Is a week of practice going to be enough to keep Anquan Boldin on Revis island?

[Dcat]

http://twitter.com/TheJetsStream

 

Per NY Daily News Jets beat reporter Manish Mehta:

 

deal for Darrelle Revis is 7 years... it can be voided to 4 years, $46 million, per source. #nfl #nyj

 

probably not correct if it is "the richest Defensive player deal ever". 4 yrs @ $46 mill only comes to 11.5 per.

[delusions of grandeur]

http://twitter.com/TheJetsStream

 

Per NY Daily News Jets beat reporter Manish Mehta:

 

 

 

probably not correct if it is "the richest Defensive player deal ever". 4 yrs @ $46 mill only comes to 11.5 per.

 

Yes, but that means that's the low end of the deal. Would have to assume he's getting bank for the seven years if he performs like he has.

[APinMN]

Is a week of practice going to be enough to keep Anquan Boldin on Revis island?

 

Was really hoping he would miss next week, I have Boldin in one league and Flacco in another....now may start MSW and Eli Manning....

[electricrelish]

Various sources are reporting that Darrelle Revis & the Jets have agreed to terms. Revis is looking at seven-year deal that could be voided after four years for $46 million, with $32 million guaranteed.

 

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/09/06/reports...ew-deal/?synd=1

 

Here's what Darrelle Revis tweeted. http://twitter.com/Revis24/status/23117137928

 

Drats. I was hoping my WR tandem of Randy Moss and Brandon Marshall wouldn't have to visit Ellis Island this season.

Edited September 6, 2010 by electricrelish

[Dcat]

Various sources are reporting that Darrelle Revis & the Jets have agreed to terms. Revis is looking at seven-year deal that could be voided after four years for $46 million, with $32 million guaranteed.

 

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/09/06/reports...ew-deal/?synd=1

 

Here's what Darrelle Revis tweeted. http://twitter.com/Revis24/status/23117137928

 

Drats. I was hoping my WR tandem of Randy Moss and Brandon Marshall wouldn't have to visit Ellis Island this season.

 

 

Hardly "the richest deal in NFL history" for a defensive player. As any Jets fan will tell you, Rich Cimini, formerly of the Daily News and now of ESPN, is a total d-bag and is wrong almost all of the time. His nickname for the past decade has been Ciminidiot.

 

Flat out: Revis caved on this deal. He has unrelentlessly demanded Al Davis to Aso money - $16 million per season - (Aso was a free agent BTW) and he and his agents wouldn't budge for the last 35 days. He winds up getting $11.5 million per season, with $32 million guaranteed over 4 yrs. Under the terms of his current contract, he was guaranteed $20 - $21 million over the next 3 years. This means that for an extra one year, Revis gets $11 - 12 more million in guaranteed money. Remember the Jets had a $120 million 10 year offer on the table over 3 weeks ago that Revis scoffed at. These next 4 years will be the most productive of his career and the Jets get him for less than their earlier offer.

 

Of course, this means Revis will likely hold out a third time 3 years from now.

 

Also we don't know the terms of who can void the contract after the 4th year (it's purportedly a 7 year deal that is voidable after the 4th year). We also don't know the terms of the 5th, 6th and 7th years if the party who has the power to void the deal elects not to do so.

 

No matter how you slice it, Revis' agents look like fools and Tannenbaum is the clear victor here while Tanny does the smart thing by making it look like a win-win for all parties. Tannenbaum again shows himself to be one of the best at working the economics of deals. Great job by him and the Jets.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Dcat

[delfamdelfam]

He still hasn't signed just agreed so I still have my doubts, but damn, I have Flaaco week 1 and no backup QB, have to do some manuevering.

[ajh2]

What was the guaranteed monies under the10yr - $120 million deal? If it was less than the $32 miilion then both parties won. I think the guaranteed monies were less which was the real issue. Well, several ESPN radio guys and several here speculated that this is how this would go down.

 

Moss, Boldin, etc. al - Welcome to Revis Island.... please check your egos at the door, it is a Dead Man's Island, who could ask for more?

[Bronco Billy]

Okay, I will admit to not quite understanding paying so much money for a CB. Granted, they can absolutely negate one stud WR if they are as talented as Revis, but offenses are so much more diverse and can move the ball using the running game and/or throwing the ball to other receivers that the impact isn't nearly as great as it used to be when NFL teams lined up only one WR and one FL out wide, and the TE was the OT with the best hands.

 

For my money, I'd much rather have a $2M CB and a $12M DE. Consistent heavy pressure can make even mediocre CBs look great, and you negate the run game at the LoS over at least a third of the field.

[Rovers]

Okay, I will admit to not quite understanding paying so much money for a CB. Granted, they can absolutely negate one stud WR if they are as talented as Revis, but offenses are so much more diverse and can move the ball using the running game and/or throwing the ball to other receivers that the impact isn't nearly as great as it used to be when NFL teams lined up only one WR and one FL out wide, and the TE was the OT with the best hands.

 

For my money, I'd much rather have a $2M CB and a $12M DE. Consistent heavy pressure can make even mediocre CBs look great, and you negate the run game at the LoS over at least a third of the field.

 

Revis' value to the Jets is in large part scheme related. He plays man coverage, which allows the defense to attack, blitz, the safeties don't give Revis any deep help. Ryan's system doesn't reaslly need that dominant DE pass rusher. He will disguise and blitz from anywhere. CB's, safeties, LB's, sometimes a DE will start with a hand down and drop into coverage. It's all about scheme. Revis is the cornerstoe of that scheme. The safeties can also load the box in run support.

 

In contrast, The Giants go with the DE's to create pressure, as is apparently your preferred philosophy. Both systems can work very well.

 

As for the contract, both sides gave. Much more gauranteed money, a 4 year deal, which puts Revis as a UFA at the age of 28. Another big contract.

[bpwallace49]

Revis island my azz.

 

Revis aint in football shape, which tends to result in pulled muscles for players that miss all of camp. One week is not enough time to get in "football shape".

 

If he doesnt pull a hammy by week three, then i will be scared with him as a matchup player starting then. \

 

But I have no doubts in week one that Boldin will do just fine.

[Bronco Billy]

Revis' value to the Jets is in large part scheme related. He plays man coverage, which allows the defense to attack, blitz, the safeties don't give Revis any deep help. Ryan's system doesn't reaslly need that dominant DE pass rusher. He will disguise and blitz from anywhere. CB's, safeties, LB's, sometimes a DE will start with a hand down and drop into coverage. It's all about scheme. Revis is the cornerstoe of that scheme. The safeties can also load the box in run support.

 

In contrast, The Giants go with the DE's to create pressure, as is apparently your preferred philosophy. Both systems can work very well.

 

I understand the philosophy. You play a lock down corner to one side and slant your coverage the other way. Theoretically it allows at least 2 guys on the second level to cheat. I'm saying that utilizing a base D with primary level constant hard pressure off the edge is more effective and allows a team to respond more equally to all potential scenarios. That makes the stud DE more valuable than the stud CB.

 

The stud DE can make the mediocre CB more effective. The same isn't true except in a very limited sense in reverse. A CB can only hold coverage for so long, no matter how good he is. A DE shortening pocket time, and hence modifying an entire passing offense while reducing coverage time - not to mention having to be accounted for by multiple intereference from the OG outward on his side on running plays - makes more impact. The O changes it blocking scheme to constantly double team the DE and it allows one-on-one attack for all other DLs, or alternatively it reduces viable receivers in the pattern.

[Rovers]

I understand the philosophy. You play a lock down corner to one side and slant your coverage the other way. Theoretically it allows at least 2 guys on the second level to cheat. I'm saying that utilizing a base D with primary level constant hard pressure off the edge is more effective and allows a team to respond more equally to all potential scenarios. That makes the stud DE more valuable than the stud CB.

 

The stud DE can make the mediocre CB more effective. The same isn't true except in a very limited sense in reverse. A CB can only hold coverage for so long, no matter how good he is. A DE shortening pocket time, and hence modifying an entire passing offense while reducing coverage time - not to mention having to be accounted for by multiple intereference from the OG outward on his side on running plays - makes more impact. The O changes it blocking scheme to constantly double team the DE and it allows one-on-one attack for all other DLs, or alternatively it reduces viable receivers in the pattern.

 

I understand the benefits of the DE heavy 4-3 pass rush defense, but to say one sytem is intristically better than the other is subjective IMO.

 

The shutdown CB approach can make a mediocre DL more effective as well, the old coverage sack. 6 of one, half dozen of the other. If you want to hang your hat on the DE heavy system, fine, but the fact that the Jets had the #1 ranked D last year is pretty much proof that both systems work. Both can also fail. The Jets' D takes a hugh hit without Revis, but the Giants D took a hugh hit with injuries to their DE's last year too.

 

As for people who think Revis won't be ready... Ryan says he expects Revis to stay on the field for every snap, unless the Jets are really losing the ToP battle. Keller said "He is Revis." when asked if he's ready to play in a game. I am trying to find a way to sit Boldin, myself. We shall see, but for anyone to say slam dunk, Revis is in no way ready is purely steaming cow pile in a field stuff. Not saying you can't be right, but to say it's 100% is silly.

[Bronco Billy]

I understand the benefits of the DE heavy 4-3 pass rush defense, but to say one sytem is intristically better than the other is subjective IMO.

 

The shutdown CB approach can make a mediocre DL more effective as well, the old coverage sack. 6 of one, half dozen of the other. If you want to hang your hat on the DE heavy system, fine, but the fact that the Jets had the #1 ranked D last year is pretty much proof that both systems work. Both can also fail. The Jets' D takes a hugh hit without Revis, but the Giants D took a hugh hit with injuries to their DE's last year too.

 

Two things for the record: 1) I'm enjoying the discussion immensely, and 2) It is not my intention to dminish the Jets' D or Revis' ability in any way.

 

It is my contention that all other things being equal, the stud DE impacts the game more than the stud CB.

 

The CB affects the way the his D plays, the DE affects the way the opposing O operates. The CB by the definition of the position is placed further from the ball than any other D player (dependent upon how deeply the FS lines up) and has a primary responsibility for negating the impact of one player. That changes the way the D can operate, but the opposing O can attack in other areas that avoid the stud CB.

 

The stud DE affects the running game on one side of the line directly as well as affecting the timing of the entire pass offense. The average pocket clock drops from 4 to 4.5 seconds to 3 to 3.5 seconds. That affects the entire timing of the pass game, forces shortened routes, and puts the QB under extreme duress. To take the opposing DE out of the game requires 2 O players whereas the CB effectively eliminates 1 O player.

 

Thus it is my conclusion that the stud DE has greater value overall to the D and consequently ought to be paid more when a team finds that kind of guy. I agree with you, this doesn't mean a D built around a stud CB like Revis isn't a very nasty and effective D. It just means that a D built around a stud DE can be more well balanced and wreaks more havoc when all other factors are equal. I'd hold as my "proof" some of the best Ds in the history of the NFL have been built around D lines that collapse pockets and pushed the LoS backwards during play - the '85/'86 Bears and the '00/'01 Ravens. Those 2 Ds gave opposing QBs no time to function efficiently. They collapsed the pass pocket before the timing could develop, which put the entire O under tremendous pressure. In pushing the LoS they also simultaneously wrecked the run game. The Bears' and Ravens' CBs didn't have to be special - they just needed to play hard corners and stay close for a short burst.

 

That doesn't take away from anything Ryan has built in NY. I love the way the Jets play D, and I don't have to be a Jets' fan to appreciate and enjoy the way they go about their business.

[Rovers]

Two things for the record: 1) I'm enjoying the discussion immensely, and 2) It is not my intention to dminish the Jets' D or Revis' ability in any way.

 

It is my contention that all other things being equal, the stud DE impacts the game more than the stud CB.

 

The CB affects the way the his D plays, the DE affects the way the opposing O operates. The CB by the definition of the position is placed further from the ball than any other D player (dependent upon how deeply the FS lines up) and has a primary responsibility for negating the impact of one player. That changes the way the D can operate, but the opposing O can attack in other areas that avoid the stud CB.

 

The stud DE affects the running game on one side of the line directly as well as affecting the timing of the entire pass offense. The average pocket clock drops from 4 to 4.5 seconds to 3 to 3.5 seconds. That affects the entire timing of the pass game, forces shortened routes, and puts the QB under extreme duress. To take the opposing DE out of the game requires 2 O players whereas the CB effectively eliminates 1 O player.

 

Thus it is my conclusion that the stud DE has greater value overall to the D and consequently ought to be paid more when a team finds that kind of guy. I agree with you, this doesn't mean a D built around a stud CB like Revis isn't a very nasty and effective D. It just means that a D built around a stud DE can be more well balanced and wreaks more havoc when all other factors are equal. I'd hold as my "proof" some of the best Ds in the history of the NFL have been built around D lines that collapse pockets and pushed the LoS backwards during play - the '85/'86 Bears and the '00/'01 Ravens. Those 2 Ds gave opposing QBs no time to function efficiently. They collapsed the pass pocket before the timing could develop, which put the entire O under tremendous pressure. In pushing the LoS they also simultaneously wrecked the run game. The Bears' and Ravens' CBs didn't have to be special - they just needed to play hard corners and stay close for a short burst.

 

That doesn't take away from anything Ryan has built in NY. I love the way the Jets play D, and I don't have to be a Jets' fan to appreciate and enjoy the way they go about their business.

 

I am also enjoying the discussion.

 

The stud DE is something that can be used by Ryan's CB man to man coverage scheme as well, usually in the form of a a 3-4 OLB hybrid, like a Suggs. Because a shut down corner can take one of the opposing offenses best weapon out of the game (on paper) the defense has that extra safety who no longer has to support that CB in deep coverage. From that 3-4, the 4th and even fifth pass rusher can come from anywhere, except from the man cover CB. The other CB, either safety, any of the LB's, and even sometimes have a DE in a 4-3 look stand up and go into pass coverage while an ILB might rush the inside gap, while moving a safey up to contain on the outside. It's all about different looks and disguising, designed to have a defender a free and claer path to either the ball carrier or RB.

 

The difference IMO between these two D systems is that the DE heavy 4-3 is easier to game plan against in terms of O line blocking assignments, but relies more on the pure abilty of that stud DE to beat his blocker and perhaps a TE or RB on his way to the QB. In rush D, if the D line holds, every gap is covered, while in the disguise 3-4 with safety support, sometimes a gap can be blown open.

 

One is a more conservative overpowering defense, less inclined to surrender a big play, the other is more of a higher risk turnover creating oriented one that can give up more big plays than the traditional 4-3, but is equally more likely to make big plays on defense, again, on paper.

 

The DE oriented 4-3 can also be had at times if the DE takes an outside rush on say a draw play when her gets fooled. Conversly, he can sometimes fail to outside contain. The OLB's have to contain and the MLB has to be pretty freakin good. He has to be a tackle machine as tackles get funneled up the middle. I'd point to Vilma's early career with the Jets when they ran a 4-3 with Abraham at DE.

 

I would argue that Buddy Rayn's 46 defense used elements of both approaches, predicated on the talents of the players he had to work with. I don't think that Chicago D was a straight forward DE heavy 4-3 at all. It was more of a hybrid, but based more on Doug Plank's abilities at safety. The Giants are a better example of the DE stud system. Great DE's several of them, with run of the mill CB's and safeties. One thing the DE heavy system also needs is a stud MLB IMO. All pro type, while the 3-4 disguise doesn't have to have an Urlacher or Dent to make it work.

 

Does a read stud DE have the abilty to change a game? Yes. They jump off the screen when they make big plays. The cover corner's abilty to change a game is far more subtle. He frees up other defenders to make plays, giving the defense an extra defender to use in just about any way they choose. The idea is that the offense won't be able to see what position the defense will attack from.

 

In last year's AFC title game, Manning was never fooled. He saw through the disguises particularly in the second half. Saturday is also extremely good at calling blocking assignments and not being fooled by multiple fronts. Against a team like INDY, NO's more traditional D seems to work better. In Ryan's 3-4, if the pass rush doesn't get there, he needs not just a Revis, he needs 3 guys that can cover. Once Strickland got hurt in that game, it was all over. That is why Ryan carries 6 CB's on the roster. It's a DB heavy oreinted defense.

 

I am curious to see how it works for the Jets this year. Pool is an upgrade over Rhodes at safety in this scheme, and Cromartie and the rookie CB Wilson have looked good so far. Both of them can man cover pretty well.

[Rovers]

Along these lines... Mario Williams. He is a very good DE. The Texans took him #1, but he had little supporting cast. The other pieces needed weren't there. A dominant DE still has to have other players around him. CB's like Champ Bailey in his prime, or Revis now aren't affected as much as a DE is as far as the talent level on the rest of the defense. An offense can double team a DE, while a shut down corner is on the proverbial island. He takes the best WR out of the game. The surrounding cast isn't as important.

 

Now, I don't claim to be any sort of authority on any of this, just saying that is my impression that dominant DE defenses need more than just those DE's to be good. The interior linemen have to be good enough to stay in their lanes, the LB corp also has to have some talented playmakers and fit the overall scheme. A shut down corner can just go out and play in any scheme. The key word is scheme.

 

Defense is more team oriented and has to play together. Schemes and a supporting cast are needed for DE's to be game changers, or at least dominant. Shut down corners really aren't as much affected by the supporting cast. They can take the best WR out of the game, all by themselves.

 

I'll bring up Woodson. Not the best cover corner, but in GB's scheme, where he isn't just a CB, he's a blitzer, might be anywhere on the field be it run support, pass blitz, dropping into zone, man to man, he is versatile, but the scheme in GB dictates that. He is not a shut down corner, but has plenty of talent elsewhere on the defesne, so he benefits from that. They use him as a playmaker, but not an island, the scheme puts him in that playmaker role. I think this is somewhat similar to the dominant DE. The scheme is what lets DE's shine so brightly. The scheme is what puts Woodson in a position to make as many big plays as he does.

 

Shut down corners like Aso, Revis, Bailey... aren't very good FF IDP players. It isn't so much how many big plays they make, it's what they do that allows other players on teir respective defense to make plays, rack up FF IDP points. How many sacks do any of the 3 I just mentioned get? They tend to be low in tackles as well.

[JUMbotron]

Not to hijack but it just seemed so convenient that the HBO series ended with this drama-dripping Revis arrival at practice. "1-2-3 Jets !!!"

 

It just seemed so... planned. I was mumbling to myself, "You gotta be kidding me."

[Rovers]

Conspiracy theory much?