Look of course it turned out bad. No one is disputing that. And I never liked the $16 million but it was part of the deal to get him to accept no guaranteed money. And believe me that was a crucial selling point. Without a new deal that Revis would accept, there would have been no trade at all. Was the Nicks signing a bad deal? If he never plays again I'm sure some will say yes, but a bad toe and MRSA isn't anything that Dominik could have seen coming. Same thing with Revis. He didn't sign the guy with the intention of getting fired after the season. I have no horse in the race with Dominik. He and I had no personal relationship, other than GM and reporter. Heck I can't even get him to text me back lately. I am not defending him or the trade I am just saying there were plenty of factors besides the obvious. I mean if Revis leads the NFL in INTs next year, is Defensive Player of the Year and wins a Super Bowl, will it not be a mistake to have released him?To me a terrible trade would have been $30 million guaranteed spread over five years and he never becomes a quality starter again and then gets released with millions of dead money.Of course hindsight is 20/20. I'm sure my wife wishes had a crystal ball before she married me.
1) Lots of deals now in the NFL involve "guaranteed" money that only kicks in when the player is on the roster.2) Given that Revis had very little to no leverage, if he wouldn't take a lesser deal the trade never should have happened. You can argue "hindsight", but all hindisght is revealing is that this was a terrible deal. It was a terrible deal because the contract was so exhorbitant that 0 teams would trade for the best corner in football. Look at it this way - if Revis was worth a 1 and a 3 & $16 mill unguaranteed/yr coming off an ACL tear, how much more is he worth healthy? Zero because of the contract. That proves how badly Dominik got hoodwinked. The fact that there were no provisions that Dominik negotiated for a trade or re-couping of draft picks highlights his incompetence. You can't call it anything else (and I wouldn't have called Dominik incompetent before this). 'Would $30 million guaranteed over 5 years been terrible? Yes. But you're negotiating with a team that doesn't have the cap space to re-sign him, he's in the last year of his deal, and he's coming off an ACL tear and it's too early to determine precisely how healthy he'll be. If you can't get favorable terms because they're stubborn then don't make the deal. And I'll ask again, what would have happened next year if the Bucs kept Revis? 3) What happened with Nicks is apples and oranges. Similar to if Revis re-injured his knee. The issue is that Revis was 100% healthy... and had to be released.
Had to be released??? Really? Not true. The new regime chose to release him. Was he worth $12 million? So, Tampa Bay was paying him $16 million, but they could have still made a number of moves to keep him. And you are also saying all of the free agents signed with the Revis money are all going to work out, right? There is zero guarantee any of the Revis money was well spent yet. Hopefully it was, especially if Revis becomes the dominant player he once was.And to say Dominik should have a trade friendly contract in the deal doesn't make a lot of sense. Was he supposed to know he was getting fired? Because if he hadn't, Revis would still be here right? I don't think you are seeing it from Dom's perspective clearly. What GM sets up deal worrying about his replacement's ability to trade the player. Personally the selection of Freeman to me is a lot more damning of his tenure than Revis. I am not outside protesting the firing of Dominik by any stretch. As Lovie says, we are a 4-12 football team.
He had to be released because his cap number was unsustainable. I am basing this on: spotrac's 2015 cap numbers and the fact that his contract was untradable. Both suggest to me that no team could afford to keep that cap number for more than a year - including the Bucs. Could the Bucs have kept him this year? Yes. But what about next year or the year after? Very unlikely - especially given how poor the team has drafted (ie. how many holes have to be plugged outside of the draft). I don't think most of the free agents will work out - history clearly demonstrates that's very unlikely. We may very well look back on it and decide keeping Revis would have been better than having Johnson and Verner.But that's part of the problem. Do you give out contracts assuming you'll draft poorly or get fired? Of course not. But you do need to give yourself flexibility, if a signing was a mistake or you need cap space to fill other holes. That is, it's not about a contract being "trade-friendly" but giving the team as many options as possible. Dominik structured the contract in such a way that, if the team needed flexibility, there were only one of two options: keep Revis at his current price or release him. That's it. The Bucs didn't have even have any leverage to encourage a restructure (Dominik's comment about a unilateral restructure were a joke). What if Revis partially recovered but wasn't the same player? You're again in that same position: keep at current contract or release. Sure, Revis would be here for another year if Dominik were here. I see things from his perspective quite well. I understand he's in win-now mode, he's assuming Revis will be here for a number of years, and that draft picks in the 1st round have ~30% hite rate (and take time to develop). But the team is still severely constrained. Let me put it this way - how often are large contracts renegotiated? Especially post-rookie contracts to free agents? I'd guess the number pretty closely approaches 100%. As has been said ad nauseum during this free agent period - these aren't 5 or 6 year deals, they're 2 year deals with team options for the rest. Dominik's supposed strength in negotiating contracts in such a way as to give a team flexibility was abused by Revis' agent to Revis' great benefit. Sure, the team wasn't on the hook for guaranteed money, but... well you know. And the worst part is that at no point was it clear that Revis would be the same guy. So you got proverbially bent-over-a-barrel for an injury risk who wasn't even a free agent. Dominik bid against himself, just like he did with Michael Clayton and Quincy Black.There were a number of options to make it more palatable: (a) keep 2013 1st rounder, make 2014 1st rounder conditional on him being on the team, (b) put in guaranteed money, but make it guaranteed when he's on the roster, (c) front load guarantee HEAVILY into 1st year. Those are just 3 non-creative options. Options B & C would obviously involve a much lower cap hit. And obviously Revis and/or the Jets would have likely not agreed to some of these provisions. If not - don't trade! If you don't make the trade to patch up that terrible secondary (btw the stat about it being one of the worst secondaries in the NFL is way overblown because (a) it only calculates passing yards and (b) ignores that 3 of the 4 worst passing defences happened in the last 2 years)? Sign DRC/Sean Smith/Keenan Lewis/Munnerlyn/etc. all for deals that were $5.5 mill/year or LESS. Last year's free agent period saw shockingly low contracts for lots of players in large part because of the flat cap.Anyways, if Dominik were here he would be confronting the same situation Lovie & Licht were. Anemic pass rush, vastly overpaid offensive line, uncertainty at QB, etc (ie. a 4-12 team). He would have $16 less million to do it but the best corner in the game. So even if Dominik were here he would have (based on Bucs cap numbers as of Mar. 10) ~$19 million to play with. Thus he'd be confronting the same decision L&L did - and he would have the same options: do nothing or release.
PewterReport.com prides itself on being the most complete, comprehensive news source covering the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and delivering inside scoop on the team found nowhere else.