What would you give up for Revis?

[packers020802]

GB has two major FA signings over the yrs.
#92
and signing Woodson..... Which wasn't even considered a big deal when it happened because everyone thought Chuck was washed up.
I dont see TT making a move on Revis.
I don't see him making a move on SJax either..... although I really think he could really flurish in MM's offensive scheme.
TT will sign jobbers and a few FA's nobody has ever heard of and try and find more cap room to re-sign 12 and 52 to career deals that will keep them in GB for the rest of their careers.

 

[El Guapo]

Joe Johnson was a MUCH bigger signing than Woodson at the time of the transaction. Woodson's signing, as you indicated, was backpage news. Even getting Santana Dotson was bigger news at the time than Woodson's signing. It's easy to forget the big money that we paid to guys like Joe Johnson because he never produced.

 

[TJV]

I remember Woodson’s signing differently. I thought it was a significant gamble at the time but I also thought it was a big signing. Woodson signed a seven year deal worth about $52M. He received a $10.5M bonus and collected $18M of that deal during the first three years of the contract. Pickett’s deal in the same off season was 4 years at $14M. Joe Johnson’s 2001 deal was 6 years for $33M, he received a $6.5M bonus. No doubt Johnson’s deal was a big signing but so was Woodson’s five years later.

 

[13 Times Champs]

TT will sign jobbers and a few FA's nobody has ever heard of .....

And that won't be enough in my opinion. Lots of holes on this Packer team and I don't think all can be addressed through the draft alone, especially given our low draft position.

 

[paulska]

Joe Johnson was a MUCH bigger signing than Woodson at the time of the transaction. Woodson's signing, as you indicated, was backpage news. Even getting Santana Dotson was bigger news at the time than Woodson's signing. It's easy to forget the big money that we paid to guys like Joe Johnson because he never produced.

Disagree. Woodson's deal, dollar wise, was in line with some of the biggest FA deals signed that offseason by players that multiple teams bid for. Remember that Lavar Arrington got a similar length deal worth several million more by using GB as leverage to extract more money from the NYG, and that contract was the standard for big deals that offseason.

We had one adversary for Woodson, Tampa, and they were a distant second on Woodson's list because they wanted him for a position he didn't want to play. Our signing was for HUGE money early after two consecutive seasons of declining performance to a player that we were the only interested party for at the position we signed him to play. Woodson wasn't Reggie White by any stretch- any dominance he'd shown was two seasons past in the mirror. Reggie was the consensus top DE in all of football at the time of his signing in GB.

You're right that Joe Johnson's signing was big news, but it wasn't as big a contract, and he had better performance in the final years he played with the Saints to warrant the money than Woodson did with the Raiders before signing here. We also had KGB playing high level football opposite him. We didn't have anyone dominating or elite at CB before signing Woodson (Al Harris was good, but nowhere near all-pro).

And Santana Dotson? You're really reaching here. He wasn't an all-pro at any point, or even remotely in the discussion as the top player at his position at any time in his career. Woodson was one of the elite talents, for a time, at CB during his Raiders career, but was universally perceived to have lost that status, thus the dearth of high level interest in him as a FA...

 

[PackMan13x]

The Jets want a 1st this year and at least a 2nd next year. Plus he will command top dollar, no thanks. But then again, I guess it would depend who the picks would end up being. I'd definitely trade Sherrod and this years 2nd for him.

 

[ivo610]

I'd do a 1st and a 2nd for him. I'd want to see him run and cut first. Maybe a 2nd this year and a 1st next year dependent on if he plays the whole season or not

 

[HardRightEdge]

Additional salary cap space does not come with the player.

Therefore, I would give Tramon Williams in exchange for Revis and a draft pick. The draft pick covers the guy we'd have to cut to clear cap space.

In other words, he'd be unaffordable this year.

 

[packers020802]

And that won't be enough in my opinion. Lots of holes on this Packer team and I don't think all can be addressed through the draft alone, especially given our low draft position

and with teams like the 49ers and falcons willing to add in FA and improve already championship quality teams I feel like TT needs to keep pace and make a move! ( A BIG MOVE ) I understand not wanting to overpay but there are a lot of quality FA's out there that could really help this team...

 

[ivo610]

and with teams like the 49ers and falcons willing to add in FA and improve already championship quality teams I feel like TT needs to keep pace and make a move! ( A BIG MOVE ) I understand not wanting to overpay but there are a lot of quality FA's out there that could really help this team...

To be fair, Packer fans have been saying the same thing since TT took over every single year. Those teams come and go it seems.

Still, I think Revis is the type of talent you make a trade for.

 

[adambr2]

We are not trading for Revis. I don't know why it is even a subject of discussion. With contracts upcoming this year for Rodgers and Matthews, and Revis obviously requiring a new contract as well, huge amounts of salary would have to be deferred to later years to have a chance of affording all 3.

We are not mortgaging our future AND giving up early round picks to bring in Revis. It's a "we're one player away" mentality and it's too dangerous of an attitude in the NFL, there are simply too many variables.

You'll give yourself a short window of a better opportunity, and then you're just asking for a lengthy rebuilding process in 3-4 years when Revis and Matthews' cap numbers get enormous and they're no longer as effective, and you can no longer afford to surround Rodgers with any talent.

 

[adambr2]

To be fair, Packer fans have been saying the same thing since TT took over every single year. Those teams come and go it seems.

Still, I think Revis is the type of talent you make a trade for.

So is Adrian Peterson. Doesn't mean that trading a couple high draft picks and giving him a huge multi year contract would be a smart thing for us to do if we could.

 

[GeeDogWarrior]

It'd be great to be a team without "holes" - it'd be great to have all pros at every position on the roster - it'd be great to have a Corner that never allows a single reception - an offensive tackle that never allows a sack - an All Pro QB/HB/WR/DE that don't beg to be the highest paid guy at their position ...

Everything is great in la-la land.... reality thou, is there's a salary cap - parity - and that the last several superbowl winning teams all had "holes" and "jobbers" ... Steelers won 2 in spite of their oline and corners. We won one in spite of our running game/health - Ravens won 1 with a bunch of washed up old timers - Saints had a crappy defense - etc. ... We keep our core intact - continue developing our young guys - stay the course - let some dumb team like the jaguars go after revis ...we'll keep contending and getting in position to get hot late in the year.

 

[ivo610]

So is Adrian Peterson. Doesn't mean that trading a couple high draft picks and giving him a huge multi year contract would be a smart thing for us to do if we could.

No Peterson isnt.

You dont focus your team around a RB. You dont make the highest player on the team a RB. We wouldnt have the line, offense, or blocking to make use of him. At his age and carries you wouldnt waste the picks on trading for him.

Apples to Oranges.

 

[adambr2]

It'd be great to be a team without "holes" - it'd be great to have all pros at every position on the roster - it'd be great to have a Corner that never allows a single reception - an offensive tackle that never allows a sack - an All Pro QB/HB/WR/DE that don't beg to be the highest paid guy at their position ...

Everything is great in la-la land.... reality thou, is there's a salary cap - parity - and that the last several superbowl winning teams all had "holes" and "jobbers" ... Steelers won 2 in spite of their oline and corners. We won one in spite of our running game/health - Ravens won 1 with a bunch of washed up old timers - Saints had a crappy defense - etc. ... We keep our core intact - continue developing our young guys - stay the course - let some dumb team like the jaguars go after revis ...we'll keep contending and getting in position to get hot late in the year.

Exactly...two years ago, the Eagles were thinking, "Wow, we were already so close. Now we added a shutdown corner, another top end corner, a couple high end defensive linemen. We have everything we need now." Talking heads were wondering if they could be beaten.

Didn't work, and now they're having to gut the team and regroup already. Show me the last Super Bowl winner that won it by landing the hottest name on the FA or trade market.

Stay the course and don't lose patience with the system. We were not the best team last year, but just like every other year, we were in it. That's all you can ask for. This is a league with 31 other teams trying to get to the same place you are -- it's not going to happen more often than not, no matter what you do.

 

[adambr2]

No Peterson isnt.

You dont focus your team around a RB. You dont make the highest player on the team a RB. We wouldnt have the line, offense, or blocking to make use of him. At his age and carries you wouldnt waste the picks on trading for him.

Apples to Oranges.

First of all, Peterson is going to be effective no matter what kind of offensive line you put him behind. He's a special talent. He's certainly not a product of a perennial elite offensive line.

Secondly, you also don't waste picks or money trading to improve a position of relative strength. Of all the issues on our team, CB is not one of them.

 

[adambr2]

I look at it this way. If Revis was a free agent, would I want to invest $12M-$15M a year in him? Well, I sure wouldn't. So I'm supposed to get excited about the prospect of not only doing exactly that, but also giving up a 1st round pick + more for the pleasure of doing so?

 

[ivo610]

First of all, Peterson is going to be effective no matter what kind of offensive line you put him behind. He's a special talent. He's certainly not a product of a perennial elite offensive line.

Secondly, you also don't waste picks or money trading to improve a position of relative strength. Of all the issues on our team, CB is not one of them.

Hmm if you dont think he benefits from a great blocking offense you are kidding yourself. Matt Birk? possible HOFer. Steve Hutchinson? HOFer. McKinnie was above avg. Both TEs in APs early years were good blockers.

Current starters he benefits from? Felton is a beastly FB. Kalil is a great LT. Sulivan is one of the best run blockers in the league. Give credit where credit is due.

Position of strength? Really? Marques Colston 9 receptions 153 yrds. Reggie Wayne 13 receptions 212 yrds. Andre Johnson 8 receptions 75 yrds. Cecil Shorts 8 receptions 116 yards. Calvin Johnson 5 receptions 143 yrds. Calvin Johnson 10 receptions 118 yrds. Michael Crabtree 9 receptions 119 yrds.

Last season we got killed by #1 WRs. We play in a division with 3 great ones, including 2 who were All Pros last season. The one of those 3 that was left off the all pro list? Yeah he was a candidate for MVP until he got hurt.

A shut down corner would do wonders for this team.

 

[ivo610]

I look at it this way. If Revis was a free agent, would I want to invest $12M-$15M a year in him? Well, I sure wouldn't. So I'm supposed to get excited about the prospect of not only doing exactly that, but also giving up a 1st round pick + more for the pleasure of doing so?

Id rather invest $12 - $15 mil in Revis than $19 mil on Finley, Tramon, and Hawk.

 

[Bensalama21]

A left nut. Not mine, mind you. But somebody's.

I will donate mine

 

[bozz_2006]

SOLD!

 

[13 Times Champs]

As I read the posts I don't see anyone say we need to make a splash ala the Eagles or like the Skins do time and again. But getting a talented free agent that could at least fill one of our holes is something we need to do this year in my opinion. The Packers do not need to fill the team with all pros but we have too many average players on this team and we need more players at the A and B levels. Our secondary coverage will improve with the guys we have once we get better play from the front 7.

We should concentrate on a free agent that could help our pass rush like a Kruger rather than trading away our picks for Revis.

 

[adambr2]

Hmm if you dont think he benefits from a great blocking offense you are kidding yourself. Matt Birk? possible HOFer. Steve Hutchinson? HOFer. McKinnie was above avg. Both TEs in APs early years were good blockers.

Current starters he benefits from? Felton is a beastly FB. Kalil is a great LT. Sulivan is one of the best run blockers in the league. Give credit where credit is due.

Position of strength? Really? Marques Colston 9 receptions 153 yrds. Reggie Wayne 13 receptions 212 yrds. Andre Johnson 8 receptions 75 yrds. Cecil Shorts 8 receptions 116 yards. Calvin Johnson 5 receptions 143 yrds. Calvin Johnson 10 receptions 118 yrds. Michael Crabtree 9 receptions 119 yrds.

Last season we got killed by #1 WRs. We play in a division with 3 great ones, including 2 who were All Pros last season. The one of those 3 that was left off the all pro list? Yeah he was a candidate for MVP until he got hurt.

A shut down corner would do wonders for this team.

#1 - You are vastly overrating some (not all) names on your list to support your argument. I never said Peterson hasn't run behind some good O-lines, but to be giving them the credit for his success is ridiculous. Peterson is a special back and would be one of the top RB's in the game no matter where he was. This is like saying Rodger's owes all the credit for his success to his receivers.

#2 - They were 11th in passing D last year. They also had FOUR corners in the top 25 of passes defended, no other team had more than 2. Yes, it is a relative strength, regardless of your cherry picked stats. Almost any team has a list of WR's that they gave up 100+ yards to, that's why they are #1 WR's. Also, just like 2011, we normally played from ahead -- so passing statistics against us are often inflated.

#3 - I don't buy the "we have 3 really great WR's in our division, we NEED Revis" argument. This could be said about almost any division. The East has Bryant, Cruz, Austin, and Nicks. The South has White, Julio Jones, Colston, and Vincent Jackson. The West has Fitzgerald and Crabtree.

Yes, it's the NFL, there are a lot of good WR's.

#4- A shutdown corner would be very helpful to any team. So would another elite pass rusher. Or an elite running back. There are a lot of good players out there that could make us better.

#5 - I would bet a lot that this is not even being seriously considered by the Packers FO. This is not happening, no matter how badly you might want it to. It would require a complete policy shift by Ted Thompson -- and no, Woodson isn't a comparable argument. It's just not going to happen.

 

[packers020802]

[Still, I think Revis is the type of talent you make a trade for./QUOTE]

Is Revis better than any DB you would get in the 1st round this year..... Yes

So why not.

I know TT won't..... but one can dream...... maybe try a second rnd pick!? nyj will prob. realease him anyway if they cant find a trade partner right?

 

[adambr2]

Because he's also going to cost way, way, way more than any DB you would get in the 1st round this year.

And no, the Jets won't release him if they can't find a trade partner. They are a poorly run organization, but they haven't gone off the deep end that badly yet.