its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
Here is the part some of you are missing. Revis will not take less than 16M a year average. We have the right to restructure his contract, but not lower it overall. Restructure simply means moving the cap hit to other years. If we take some away from this year we have to add it to others.To put it very simple. His cap hit right now is 16M for 2014, 16M in 2015, 16M in 2016 etc.A restructure would only move the numbers around so it would look something like 4M in 2014, 22M in 2015, 22M in 2016. Regardless of where we move the numbers to the total will be the same. Restructuring it will also make atleast some of his contract guaranteed. As of right now we can cut him at any point with no cap backlash. If we restructure his deal we lose that clause.
The restructure only makes sense to me if the Bucs are going to deal him to a team that doesn't have a ton of room.
Uh...No. No, he's not. La Canfora just made that up, :)
its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
I was initially thinking about him being dealt and the notion that his current deal would prevent that
its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
I was initially thinking about him being dealt and the notion that his current deal would prevent that
That I agree with. He's not getting traded with the current contract and restructuring will be an issue. My opinion is that he's a Buc for the next season or he's cut prior to March 13th.
its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
It's none of that according to this story. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330718/article/offseason-forecast-tampa-bay-buccaneers Though Lovie's quotes say more man less zone so there's conflicting info. http://thepewterplank.com/2014/02/26/lovie-smith-buccaneers-will-win-and-lose-with-revis-defense-man-coverage/
its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
It's none of that according to this story. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330718/article/offseason-forecast-tampa-bay-buccaneers Though Lovie's quotes say more man less zone so there's conflicting info. http://thepewterplank.com/2014/02/26/lovie-smith-buccaneers-will-win-and-lose-with-revis-defense-man-coverage/
None of that in what way? It's exactly what I said. I think the "scheme" issue is completely overblown but the first comment in the nfl.com article focuses on the value of the contract. That's the issue.
its the same take home cash plus more time though? that's the trade off, cap relief for more time.not a contract/cap guy so I could certainly be wrong
It's not a cap issue. It's a value issue. The team can absorb the cap hit. The question is can they absorb paying the player this much over current market value.
It's none of that according to this story. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330718/article/offseason-forecast-tampa-bay-buccaneers Though Lovie's quotes say more man less zone so there's conflicting info. http://thepewterplank.com/2014/02/26/lovie-smith-buccaneers-will-win-and-lose-with-revis-defense-man-coverage/
None of that in what way? It's exactly what I said. I think the "scheme" issue is completely overblown but the first comment in the nfl.com article focuses on the value of the contract. That's the issue.
"Tampa Bay expected to play more zone than man, Revis simply isn't an optimal fit."
Here is the part some of you are missing. Revis will not take less than 16M a year average. We have the right to restructure his contract, but not lower it overall. Restructure simply means moving the cap hit to other years. If we take some away from this year we have to add it to others.To put it very simple. His cap hit right now is 16M for 2014, 16M in 2015, 16M in 2016 etc.A restructure would only move the numbers around so it would look something like 4M in 2014, 22M in 2015, 22M in 2016. Regardless of where we move the numbers to the total will be the same. Restructuring it will also make atleast some of his contract guaranteed. As of right now we can cut him at any point with no cap backlash. If we restructure his deal we lose that clause.
That wouldn't be a restructure, it would be a new deal....As it is right now, the Bucs can walk away from the deal...Revis can hit the market and go to the highest bidder....probably for a lot less than $16 mill...
come on guys, we about done here?
This has at least a few more weeks...
come on guys, we about done here?
Plenty of meat left on the bone.
Someone may even cry... http://espn.go.com/blog/tampa-bay-buccaneers/post/_/id/3532/nfl-nation-buzz-tampa-bay-buccaneers-18
The Bucs front office seriously needs to consider restructuring Revis, mainly with the purpose of getting him at a fan-friendly cap number.
