My Blueprint for the Defense

Tagging McCourty gives Revis even more leverage. Revis camp knows there is pressure to get the deal done by March 10th. Revis's camp wants him to hit the market ASAP. By keeping him under contract, the Pats lower the demand for him. We're not privy to the negotiations. But, for media outlets to act like the Pats don't have any leverage. Aren't being objective.

patsfaninpa said:

Tagging McCourty gives Revis even more leverage. Revis camp knows there is pressure to get the deal done by March 10th. Revis's camp wants him to hit the market ASAP. By keeping him under contract, the Pats lower the demand for him. We're not privy to the negotiations. But, for media outlets to act like the Pats don't have any leverage. Aren't being objective.

Click to expand...

I don't understand this. Please clarify. Either the Pats keep Revis on his option and then try and negotiate a long term deal, in which case there isn't any "demand" for him in 2015, or they let him test FA, in which case tagging McCourty wouldn't have that much of an impact. Am I missing something?

Tagging McCourty at 9.6m means it will be harder for the Pats to get under the cap. Really hard to do without a Revis restructure. By tagging a kicker at 5m less. It's easier to get under the cap without re-doing Revis. Revis's agents want him to be a free agent on March 10th. Not April 1st.

mayoclinic said:

I don't understand this. Please clarify. Either the Pats keep Revis on his option and then try and negotiate a long term deal, in which case there isn't any "demand" for him in 2015, or they let him test FA, in which case tagging McCourty wouldn't have that much of an impact. Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

What he is saying is, on march 10 at 4:00 pm ET. All teams have to be under the cap (I've read this from multiple places, but I'm not 100% sure) If we had tagged McCourty, there is almost 0 chance that we made that deadline, thus causing us to let Revis hit the open market in the begging of FA, when all the main teams are dying to spend the money they have.

it doesn't really make much sense because its not like the team is going to pay him the 10 million roster bonus, only to cut him april 1st

HawaiianPatsfan said:

What he is saying is, on march 10 at 4:00 pm ET. All teams have to be under the cap (I've read this from multiple places, but I'm not 100% sure) If we had tagged McCourty, there is almost 0 chance that we made that deadline, thus causing us to let Revis hit the open market in the begging of FA, when all the main teams are dying to spend the money they have.

it doesn't really make much sense because its not like the team is going to pay him the 10 million roster bonus, only to cut him april 1st

Click to expand...

That was my point. If the Pats exercise Revis option then they've paid him a big option bonus, so they aren't going to cut him. And if he's due to get $20M for 2015, Revis would have less incentive to accept a deal that pays him less than that this year.

mayoclinic said:

That was my point. If the Pats exercise Revis option then they've paid him a big option bonus, so they aren't going to cut him. And if he's due to get $20M for 2015, Revis would have less incentive to accept a deal that pays him less than that this year.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I have the same thought process on the subject. I guess this time next week, we will find out what happens. Man I hope they can figure it out!

If we somehow don't bring Revis back, do you think we have to pick a CB with out first pick, and bring in a FA guard like Mike Iupati?

HawaiianPatsfan said:

If we somehow don't bring Revis back, do you think we have to pick a CB with out first pick, and bring in a FA guard like Mike Iupati?

Click to expand...

Look at cornerbacks drafted early in the last two years and then tell me which was worth their pick. And then do the same for guards. Similar to DMac I don't think that our draft this year will be hugely impacted by the Revis decision. Either way it would be nice if we get a DB a bit later in the draft.

HawaiianPatsfan said:

If we somehow don't bring Revis back, do you think we have to pick a CB with out first pick, and bring in a FA guard like Mike Iupati?

Click to expand...

luuked said:

Look at cornerbacks drafted early in the last two years and then tell me which was worth their pick. And then do the same for guards. Similar to DMac I don't think that our draft this year will be hugely impacted by the Revis decision. Either way it would be nice if we get a DB a bit later in the draft.

Click to expand...

I don't think you "have" to pick any particular position at 32. If there's a player at that position that BB likes then he's worth considering, regardless of whether Revis stays or goes. Marcus Peters, Byron Jones and Jalen Collins are all intriguing. But you don't have to pick one.

I think that if the Pats lose Revis then they won't be able to duplicate the way the 2014 defense worked. That defense worked because Revis could match up with anyone and lock down a large part of the field, and because the Pats had so much personnel flexibility at CB to mix and match agai

I'm keeping Revis even if at 20m. With the 5m carryover. I want him for more than one more year. It would be wise for Revis to work a long-term extionsion with a lot of guaranteed money before he ever plays again. I want it to be with the Pats.

patsfaninpa said:

I'm keeping Revis even if at 20m. With the 5m carryover. I want him for more than one more year. It would be wise for Revis to work a long-term extionsion with a lot of guaranteed money before he ever plays again. I want it to be with the Pats.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I almost think that picking up the option is worse than cutting him in terms of long term prospects.

If you give him a season at 20m - which essentially takes the franchise tag out of play for next year - there is no leverage to extend him before next years offseason. And you are back at square one. Except, that one year cost you a lot of flexibility with cap space and you most probably had to get rid of various key depth pieces along the way to even get under the cap.

If you cut him there at least is the outside chance that once he takes a look at whats available he still comes back with a number and you get something done. However small that chance is.

Revis can't be tagged. He's risking injury by not doing an extension. Also, we'd get a 3rd rounder if he walks after 2015 season. We don't get anything if we release him now.

patsfaninpa said:

Revis can't be tagged. He's risking injury by not doing an extension. Also, we'd get a 3rd rounder if he walks after 2015 season. We don't get anything if we release him now.

Click to expand...

That he can't be tagged is part of my point why not to pick up the 20m option.

If we don't pick up the option we get 20m in cap space and don't have to fiddle around with contracts or outright release players to get under the cap. If we can keep him for multiple years then it is worth all the fiddling around with contracts and maybe shedding 1-2 players. But I fail to see how any of that is worthwhile just to keep him around one more year. The 3 round pick is nice but way too costly.

patsfaninpa said:

Revis can't be tagged. He's risking injury by not doing an extension. Also, we'd get a 3rd rounder if he walks after 2015 season. We don't get anything if we release him now.

Click to expand...

Revis could be tagged in 2016 if the Pats keep his option for 2015, which is what Luuked was referring to. But the cost would be 120% of his 2015 cap hit, so it would be prohibitive.

luuked said:

That he can't be tagged is part of my point why not to pick up the 20m option.

If we don't pick up the option we get 20m in cap space and don't have to fiddle around with contracts or outright release players to get under the cap. If we can keep him for multiple years then it is worth all the fiddling around with contracts and maybe shedding 1-2 players. But I fail to see how any of that is worthwhile just to keep him around one more year. The 3 round pick is nice but way too costly.

Click to expand...

I think that if Revis wants to test the market - and won't sign a long term extension with the Pats before doing so - that you let him test the market, and decide what he really wants. Maybe you lose him. If someone wants to pay more than $16M/year AAV for a 30 year old CB, more power to them. The world will go on. But I think there's a good chance that he'll re-sign with the Pats.

mayoclinic said:

I don't think you "have" to pick any particular position at 32. If there's a player at that position that BB likes then he's worth considering, regardless of whether Revis stays or goes. Marcus Peters, Byron Jones and Jalen Collins are all intriguing. But you don't have to pick one.

I think that if the Pats lose Revis then they won't be able to duplicate the way the 2014 defense worked. That defense worked because Revis could match up with anyone and lock down a large part of the field, and because the Pats had so much personnel flexibility at CB to mix and match agai

Click to expand...

I agree that without Revis, the Pats cannot play defense the way they did in 2014. I just don't think they necessarily have to.

Mayo, you and I have disagreed about the level of play of the defense last year. You have said that they were as good as any team in football and I don't think they were. I saw a team that allowed too many points to too many mediocre offensive teams to rank among the very elite. To me, while they were the best Pats defense in a decade, they were still susceptible to the run and had difficulty pressuring the qb. While I saw these as pretty clear deficiencies, they did make plays when it mattered most. Against the Ravens and the Seahawks they were exposed, but ultimately made the big plays necessary to win (even if both big plays occurred in their endzone!). To me, that was the big difference between the team last year and the teams that lost in 2007 and 2011.

I think the reason they were able to make those plays was the maturation of their younger players and, most importantly, the addition of playmakers. Previously, our best defensive players (guys like Mayo) were excellent but not playmakers. Last years team, with Collins and Hightower and Browner and Revis, the Pats had players who could make big plays, and even when they themselves weren't making big plays, they were players who needed to be "accounted for" by the opposition, players BB could scheme around and thereby make everyone else better (BB has been doing this on offense for years, first due to Brady but also with Dillon, Moss, Gronk, Hernandez, et. al.). If we lose Revis and subtract such a difference maker, then we better add one somewhere else. Maybe Easley will be such a player, but without Revis we need to add somebody who can allow BB to use his mad scientist touch to make this defense capable of making big stops at important times. This is why I have pushed so hard for Suh if Revis is unsigned. I think BB could then turn this defense into a front seven oriented defense that would be Superbowl calibre. They wouldn't be able to play defense the way they played defense last year, but the might end up just as good.

mosi's man said:

I agree that without Revis, the Pats cannot play defense the way they did in 2014. I just don't think they necessarily have to.

Mayo, you and I have disagreed about the level of play of the defense last year. You have said that they were as good as any team in football and I don't think they were. I saw a team that allowed too many points to too many mediocre offensive teams to rank among the very elite. To me, while they were the best Pats defense in a decade, they were still susceptible to the run and had difficulty pressuring the qb. While I saw these as pretty clear deficiencies, they did make plays when it mattered most. Against the Ravens and the Seahawks they were exposed, but ultimately made the big plays necessary to win (even if both big plays occurred in their endzone!). To me, that was the big difference between the team last year and the teams that lost in 2007 and 2011.

I think the reason they were able to make those plays was the maturation of their younger players and, most importantly, the addition of playmakers. Previously, our best defensive players (guys like Mayo) were excellent but not playmakers. Last years team, with Collins and Hightower and Browner and Revis, the Pats had players who could make big plays, and even when they themselves weren't making big plays, they were players who needed to be "accounted for" by the opposition, players BB could scheme around and thereby make everyone else better (BB has been doing this on offense for years, first due to Brady but also with Dillon, Moss, Gronk, Hernandez, et. al.). If we lose Revis and subtract such a difference maker, then we better add one somewhere else. Maybe Easley will be such a player, but without Revis we need to add somebody who can allow BB to use his mad scientist touch to make this defense capable of making big stops at important times. This is why I have pushed so hard for Suh if Revis is unsigned. I think BB could then turn this defense into a front seven oriented defense that would be Superbowl calibre. They wouldn't be able to play defense the way they played defense last year, but the might end up just as good.

Click to expand...

I think that you need to look at "as good as any defense in the NFL" in context. The Pats' D certainly gave up more yards than I would like (BB defenses will generally do that), wasn't statistically a top 5 defense, and certainly had some awful moments giving up some big drives, especially the Miami and Seattle drives before halftime. But (1) they made the stops when they had 2, (2) they were pretty much shutdown in the 2nd half for the last 10 games of the season, despite missing their best pass rusher for a large part of the season, and (3) they faced a LOT of very good QBs. Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck twice, and others.

There weren't many really good defenses last year, and in some cases the stats were misleading. The Pats shredded Detroit's top ranked defense, and they pretty much had their way with Seattle's. The Seahawks played a lot of teams with very bad QBs during the season. Aaron Rodgers and Brady both moved the ball very effectively on them.

I think there is plenty of room for improvement, but the Pats' D was competitive with any in the NFL last year. The strength of the D was (1) the secondary and (2) Collins and Hightower. Seattle and Arizona were the only secondaries that came close. The rest was pretty average. Detroit, Buffalo, the Jets and the Ravens all had much better front lines and run defenses.

With Wilfork cut and Revis likely following him, that would free up $28M in cap space. A Mayo restructure would take it to about $32M. It won't all go on defense, and some of it will be required to get under the cap, but you can get a lot of really good players for that kind of money.

I agree with a focus on the front 7, but I don't see Suh being an option, personally. Never have. Good player, but too much of an unknown quantity as to how he would fit for the amount of money it would take, and against BB's philosophy. Revis is different because he's a known fit, personally and professionally. I would be shocked if the Pats made a run at Suh.

DL is a huge need now that we didn't pick up Wilfork's option. Do we trade up in the 1st for a big man up front? We have precedent for such moves before, such as the year we moved up to select Ty Warren. Is there a Richard Seymour or Wilfork type out there in the mid/late 1st of this year's draft?

mayoclinic said:

With Wilfork cut and Revis likely following him, that would free up $28M in cap space. A Mayo restructure would take it to about $32M.

Click to expand...

Those moves do not free up 28-32m in cap space. They lower our cap number by that amount. We don't have that much to spend. Cutting Revis puts us at 15.5m under the cap. We better be on the phone with McCourty if that happens.

Again Mayo, we can agree to disagree. Every team had injuries on defense and in fact the Pats had fewer than many (Seattle, Arizona, Baltimore, San Fran come immediately to mind). By the way, if I recall correctly I think the Seattle defense gave up about 200 yards total to the Packer offence. It was the five turnovers that made the game close. Additionally, I realize that historically the Pats give up lots of yards; it was giving up too many points that was the issue. To be fair, I think the Pats improved greatly from prior years but were not among the elite, especially when you take into account how the offense "protected" them with ball possession. Just my opinion.

Regarding Suh, I think he'd fit in just fine. In fact, I think he'd thrive just about anywhere. The bigger issue is could we get him. Without question he'd have to take less to come here. Having said that, he made 65 million on his rookie deal and played for a team that routinely sucked. Would he take less to come to a proven winner? I'll be interested to find out. I think his decision regarding where to play will speak volumes as to who he really is as a football player. But if we lose Revis and get him for roughly the same cost, I for one would be thrilled.

patsfaninpa said:

Those moves do not free up 28-32m in cap space. They lower our cap number by that amount. We don't have that much to spend. Cutting Revis puts us at 15.5m under the cap. We better be on the phone with McCourty if that happens.

Click to expand...

That's what "some of it will be required to get under the cap" was meant to convey. My bad if I wasn't clear.