Every player in the league is available for trade if the offer is good enough. It doesn't hurt to listen and would be quite foolish not to.Just for the sake of conversation let's say we were to trade him for 2 firsts before the deadline. Our missing 3rd would become a missing fourth. We would have the 2 firsts we got in the trade and 16M to play with. Let's say that 16M turned into Mack anf Hardy. We them use our additional cap space to sign Peanut Tillman, the tackle from the Raiders (Vedhere or something like that), and Josh McCown. Do you not feel that we would be an improved team overall?The long and the short of it is we would be (hypothetically of course) trading Revis and a fourth for 2 firsts, a third, Mack, and Hardy with still having enough cap room to cushion the loss at CB somewhat. I would have to put serious thought into that offer.
I don't think he is going anywhere. He needs to restructure though. And he should be all for that.
Hell no don't restructure. He's not crippling us financially, he's happy with it, he's in his prime, and IF anything ever happened thats 16 million in cap relief with one cut.Leave his contract the way it is and let him ball.
He may be the one looking for the restructure. Guaranteed $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
He's making 1 million dollars a game. Why restructure?
Zero guaranteed dollars. Its not how much you make, its how much is guaranteed. Its a rough game.
If he starts the season playing for Tampa that's pretty much 16 mill guaranteed. Nobody is adding 16 million to their cap with a trade deadline deal and if they are.. We got them over the barrel if they want him that bad.No need to restructure.
Agree on that. I am not even thinking about a trade scenario. If they restructure him to say, 11-12 mil a year, with some of it guaranteed, its a win/win for both sides.
Every player in the league is available for trade if the offer is good enough. It doesn't hurt to listen and would be quite foolish not to.Just for the sake of conversation let's say we were to trade him for 2 firsts before the deadline. Our missing 3rd would become a missing fourth. We would have the 2 firsts we got in the trade and 16M to play with. Let's say that 16M turned into Mack anf Hardy. We them use our additional cap space to sign Peanut Tillman, the tackle from the Raiders (Vedhere or something like that), and Josh McCown. Do you not feel that we would be an improved team overall?The long and the short of it is we would be (hypothetically of course) trading Revis and a fourth for 2 firsts, a third, Mack, and Hardy with still having enough cap room to cushion the loss at CB somewhat. I would have to put serious thought into that offer.
That is great and all, but who is going to give up 2 first, and assume his 16mil a season contract?
No one specifc- I was directing that at those that basicly say that they wouldn't be open to trading Revis at all. I think it would be foolish to make a decision before hearing the whole story is all I'm saying.
I knew this would be brought back up. I talked about it as soon as lovie was hired.On one hand, he has this very good m2m corner that will presumably be playing zone, on the other, he can get a kings ransom for him and get a qb of his choosing, but lack talent at the cb position.Food for thought anyway. Probably won't amount to anything, but the possibility still exists.If it were for manziel or bridgewater and a low round pick (somewhere around what we obtained him for), I'd be down. Especially if lovie believes he doesn't need him (I actually trust the guy about defensive schemes and fits).
One team that comes to mind is the Rams. They're reportedly parting ways with Finnegan. Imagine the 2 overall and their second rounder. Then they can address their WR spot at 13, which could be any WR other than Watkins. Us? Let's say it's Clowney at 2. You can take Dennard or LT at 7. In the second go CB or oline plus the best WR. Or imagine Clowney and Donald, address CB in free agency and then go oline and tight end (Sefarian-Jenkins) in the second! It makes sense for both teams.
Every player in the league is available for trade if the offer is good enough. It doesn't hurt to listen and would be quite foolish not to.
not sure why this is so hard to understand.
Agree on that. I am not even thinking about a trade scenario. If they restructure him to say, 11-12 mil a year, with some of it guaranteed, its a win/win for both sides.
you keep saying this, but how much guaranteed would you have to give? possibly i dont undertand his current salary. he gets 16 mil guaranteed every year, right?
Agree on that. I am not even thinking about a trade scenario. If they restructure him to say, 11-12 mil a year, with some of it guaranteed, its a win/win for both sides.
you keep saying this, but how much guaranteed would you have to give? possibly i dont undertand his current salary. he gets 16 mil guaranteed every year, right?
He does but he has no guarantee he will get the $16m per season? There is no bonus or up front money so as soon as we think he costs too much...*blammo*..he's cut and is out $16m X years left on the deal. If he converts a bunch into signing bonus then he gets that big fat upfront cash plus salary because that upfront hit makes him less not more cuttable like his current deal does.,
Nothing to see here. Revis will be a buc and be used properly next year. That is all.
Agree on that. I am not even thinking about a trade scenario. If they restructure him to say, 11-12 mil a year, with some of it guaranteed, its a win/win for both sides.
you keep saying this, but how much guaranteed would you have to give? possibly i dont undertand his current salary. he gets 16 mil guaranteed every year, right?
He does but he has no guarantee he will get the $16m per season? There is no bonus or up front money so as soon as we think he costs too much...*blammo*..he's cut and is out $16m X years left on the deal. If he converts a bunch into signing bonus then he gets that big fat upfront cash plus salary because that upfront hit makes him less not more cuttable like his current deal does.,
I dont understand you guys who say he needs to restructure...why? Why would the team want to do that? Why would he want to take less money? He took an entirely non-guaranteed contract coming off an ACL injury and now that he is back to healthy he is going to magically lower the amount he gets paid?
Another thing I don't get is why people care so much about the $16 million cap figure? The Bucs, even with Revis' contract, have at least $20 million in cap space and his contract is not stopping the Bucs from signing anyone. I swear some of you people think its your own personal money being paid to these players instead of the Glazers.
Agree on that. I am not even thinking about a trade scenario. If they restructure him to say, 11-12 mil a year, with some of it guaranteed, its a win/win for both sides.
you keep saying this, but how much guaranteed would you have to give? possibly i dont undertand his current salary. he gets 16 mil guaranteed every year, right?
He does but he has no guarantee he will get the $16m per season? There is no bonus or up front money so as soon as we think he costs too much...*blammo*..he's cut and is out $16m X years left on the deal. If he converts a bunch into signing bonus then he gets that big fat upfront cash plus salary because that upfront hit makes him less not more cuttable like his current deal does.,
I dont understand you guys who say he needs to restructure...why? Why would the team want to do that? Why would he want to take less money? He took an entirely non-guaranteed contract coming off an ACL injury and now that he is back to healthy he is going to magically lower the amount he gets paid?
He will not get less. They will take say $16m X 5 years ($80m) or whatever he has left. Convert it into a signing bonus of $42m and then add a couple of fake years onto the deal to make the annual hit less. He gets actual, real cash in hand which his current deal doesn't give, and then also draw a salary. This is sort bof like why as a lottery winner you take the cash now which is less than the "actual" amount that is paid out over 50 years.
Another thing I don't get is why people care so much about the $16 million cap figure? The Bucs, even with Revis' contract, have at least $20 million in cap space and his contract is not stopping the Bucs from signing anyone. I swear some of you people think its your own personal money being paid to these players instead of the Glazers.
Here is the problem, does it stop anything THIS year...likely no. When we need to start redoing some guyus like GMC or David...maybe. Maybe you say you trade him then when you need the space but of course that lowers your leverage.He is, like any player, an asset. You look at what trading him gets you - potential players in the forms of picks and cap room. If the value of that > the value of his play then easy deal. Toss in that really other than a tiny handful of spots (QB, Pass rusher, tackle) no one individual player matters all that much you might be better off turning him over. Plus, coverages can be schemed and gamed. Plernty of teams get by without an "elite" CB. You want good but there i no proof you need/gain from elite. Even SEA for all the talk about their great CB's have Sherman, who is nowhere near as good as Revis BTW, and guys who are helped by a pass rush and a scheme that protects them.
Another thing I don't get is why people care so much about the $16 million cap figure? The Bucs, even with Revis' contract, have at least $20 million in cap space and his contract is not stopping the Bucs from signing anyone. I swear some of you people think its your own personal money being paid to these players instead of the Glazers.
Here is the problem, does it stop anything THIS year...likely no. When we need to start redoing some guyus like GMC or David...maybe. Maybe you say you trade him then when you need the space but of course that lowers your leverage.He is, like any player, an asset. You look at what trading him gets you - potential players in the forms of picks and cap room. If the value of that > the value of his play then easy deal. Toss in that really other than a tiny handful of spots (QB, Pass rusher, tackle) no one individual player matters all that much you might be better off turning him over. Plus, coverages can be schemed and gamed. Plernty of teams get by without an "elite" CB. You want good but there i no proof you need/gain from elite. Even SEA for all the talk about their great CB's have Sherman, who is nowhere near as good as Revis BTW, and guys who are helped by a pass rush and a scheme that protects them.
Im not against trading him if someone wants to come in and offer us the world. To me, very few players are "untouchable". I dont know why you would want him to restructure to something with guaranteed money. The only thing that would do is potentially hurt the team on the back end with dead money. We should want to make smart moves in the FO and that would not be one unless its right before trading him for a boat load of picks.
