Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Revis
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dmac505


Joined: 07 Aug 2008
Posts: 956
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
dmac505 wrote:
would people do dmc and our 3rd for revis?


I think it is plausible, if the jets think they have no chance at resigning him long term, then why not get something out of him

IIRC they wanted to draft DMC that year, and they have a poor Run game.


Both are coming off injuries, with 1 year left on their deals.


McFadden would help our team's outcome significantly more than Revis and he'd cost less. Keep Revis away.


Yea I wouldn't do the trade either, but with DA being a former DB coach you have to think hed love to get his hands on a guy like Revis.

Its a weird idea because RB is becoming the expendable position on offence while DB is the same on D. However these two guys when on their game our top tier players at their position.

RM being a defensive minded person (this may be wrong but he played D so i assume so) may be on the build a championship D, before the O.

If we take Moore, Star, or Jones ect.. and Add Revis our D becomes vastly improved. Not to mention it started to gel late in the season.

All theoritical of course.. but i do think it is an interesting idea.

I admit its doubtful seeing as it seems we are changing our offensive scheme to go back to what DMC does well
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3922
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmac505 wrote:
would people do dmc and our 3rd for revis?


I think it is plausible, if the jets think they have no chance at resigning him long term, then why not get something out of him

IIRC they wanted to draft DMC that year, and they have a poor Run game.


Both are coming off injuries, with 1 year left on their deals.


Lol maybe a 5th and DMC.

Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmac505


Joined: 07 Aug 2008
Posts: 956
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chali21 wrote:
dmac505 wrote:
would people do dmc and our 3rd for revis?


I think it is plausible, if the jets think they have no chance at resigning him long term, then why not get something out of him

IIRC they wanted to draft DMC that year, and they have a poor Run game.


Both are coming off injuries, with 1 year left on their deals.


Lol maybe a 5th and DMC.

Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


haha i originally was going to ask... would you do DMC for Revis straight up... but i assumed people would just reply... "this isnt madden"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 37312
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chali21 wrote:
Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


Chris Culliver, Carlos Rogers for SF. NE doesn't put a premium on CBs and never really has.

In such a passing league, I think its silly to say a top 3 RB is more valuable than a top 2 CB. And McFaddn is my favorite current Raider.
_________________

#FreeAgent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 11204
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think they give a hard look. Revis is guy that can play for many more years and eventually move to S as he gets older.

And didnt Clinkscales find him in the draft?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 11204
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
Chali21 wrote:
Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


Chris Culliver, Carlos Rogers for SF. NE doesn't put a premium on CBs and never really has.

In such a passing league, I think its silly to say a top 3 RB is more valuable than a top 2 CB. And McFaddn is my favorite current Raider.

Would have been Talib and McCourty I believe. Talib may be hurt though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3922
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
Chali21 wrote:
Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


Chris Culliver, Carlos Rogers for SF. NE doesn't put a premium on CBs and never really has.

In such a passing league, I think its silly to say a top 3 RB is more valuable than a top 2 CB. And McFaddn is my favorite current Raider.


While that's true I wouldn't want us to depart with one of our best players of a first for a player that is only going to be here a year. Like some one else said I rather roll with a youngster for ten years who may be solid than Revis for maybe a year.

Now if we where a corner away from the SB sure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1456
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd give a 3rd rounder for him (as we're probably going to draft a CB anyway in the 2nd/3rd round), then we pick up Nnamdi after he's cut by Philly.........Job Done Laughing
_________________
"The fire that burns brightest in the Raiders organization is the will to win."
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 37312
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TiberiusRising wrote:
Would have been Talib and McCourty I believe. Talib may be hurt though.
McCourty moved to S. But Talib is one

Chali21 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Chali21 wrote:
Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


Chris Culliver, Carlos Rogers for SF. NE doesn't put a premium on CBs and never really has.

In such a passing league, I think its silly to say a top 3 RB is more valuable than a top 2 CB. And McFaddn is my favorite current Raider.


While that's true I wouldn't want us to depart with one of our best players of a first for a player that is only going to be here a year. Like some one else said I rather roll with a youngster for ten years who may be solid than Revis for maybe a year.

Now if we where a corner away from the SB sure.

We don't know what the future holds though

TiberiusRising wrote:
I think they give a hard look. Revis is guy that can play for many more years and eventually move to S as he gets older.

This is what I'm getting at. He could be a difference maker for a long time at different spots. If we lock him up, he could be like Charles Woodson has been for GB only better because he's younger. I think Allen and Tarver could really unlock a lot of potential we haven't seen out of him in NY. Not because Rex Ryan sucks or anything, but because they haven't needed to use him in as many different ways. They've had the talent we lack up until he got injured.
_________________

#FreeAgent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3922
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
Would have been Talib and McCourty I believe. Talib may be hurt though.
McCourty moved to S. But Talib is one

Chali21 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Chali21 wrote:
Lets be honest in the PBS scheme he's much better and a top 3 RB which is a much more premium position than a DB.

Quick someone tell me the starting corners in the SB!


Chris Culliver, Carlos Rogers for SF. NE doesn't put a premium on CBs and never really has.

In such a passing league, I think its silly to say a top 3 RB is more valuable than a top 2 CB. And McFaddn is my favorite current Raider.


While that's true I wouldn't want us to depart with one of our best players of a first for a player that is only going to be here a year. Like some one else said I rather roll with a youngster for ten years who may be solid than Revis for maybe a year.

Now if we where a corner away from the SB sure.

We don't know what the future holds though

TiberiusRising wrote:
I think they give a hard look. Revis is guy that can play for many more years and eventually move to S as he gets older.

This is what I'm getting at. He could be a difference maker for a long time at different spots. If we lock him up, he could be like Charles Woodson has been for GB only better because he's younger. I think Allen and Tarver could really unlock a lot of potential we haven't seen out of him in NY. Not because Rex Ryan sucks or anything, but because they haven't needed to use him in as many different ways. They've had the talent we lack up until he got injured.


That's true. I just hope we don't give up the farm on this guy like we have on guys in the past. This team does lack playmakers on defense and he could be the guy we need.

If we trade our 3rd or 4th for him I love the trade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5832
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this really a Woodson situation?
I see Revis as a guy who benefits greatly from NOT playing in Oakland. Always have. Meaning, this dude is ultra physical with WRs. There's no way he wouldn't lead the league in flags playing for the Raiders.

Plus the idea of giving up draft picks makes me ill. We are just getting ready to have our first full draft in years, not even this year but next year. I'd hate to get back on that cycle of pain. Sorry, but no to Revis. He's definitely a guy the old regime would have went for. It's been like what, 4 or 5 years running where we burned picks on high priced vets? Have we gotten even one iota better doing it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1456
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NickButera wrote:
If we look at him, Reggie will be looking to get him on the cheap. Personally I'm not worried one ounce that we'll give up too much. Which is a tad strange. I'm not used to feeling this secure in our teams ability to be rational. Laughing

Edit: Dang it BigD! You beat me to it. Well played.


I have the same, strange feeling............ kind of refreshing Smile
_________________
"The fire that burns brightest in the Raiders organization is the will to win."
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 37312
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
Is this really a Woodson situation?
I see Revis as a guy who benefits greatly from NOT playing in Oakland. Always have. Meaning, this dude is ultra physical with WRs. There's no way he wouldn't lead the league in flags playing for the Raiders.

Plus the idea of giving up draft picks makes me ill. We are just getting ready to have our first full draft in years, not even this year but next year. I'd hate to get back on that cycle of pain. Sorry, but no to Revis. He's definitely a guy the old regime would have went for. It's been like what, 4 or 5 years running where we burned picks on high priced vets? Have we gotten even one iota better doing it?


I'm just saying he could pay a lot of dividends for us. I do think that if we got him, it would be in a rational way as NickB alluded to
_________________

#FreeAgent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5832
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Is this really a Woodson situation?
I see Revis as a guy who benefits greatly from NOT playing in Oakland. Always have. Meaning, this dude is ultra physical with WRs. There's no way he wouldn't lead the league in flags playing for the Raiders.

Plus the idea of giving up draft picks makes me ill. We are just getting ready to have our first full draft in years, not even this year but next year. I'd hate to get back on that cycle of pain. Sorry, but no to Revis. He's definitely a guy the old regime would have went for. It's been like what, 4 or 5 years running where we burned picks on high priced vets? Have we gotten even one iota better doing it?


I'm just saying he could pay a lot of dividends for us. I do think that if we got him, it would be in a rational way as NickB alluded to


He could, in theory.
And a rational trade for him is fine.

But... I just... I just think it's a really important thing to have a full draft for once. Or even one of those drafts where we have 10 or 13 picks. We just never seem to be in that position.
Revis might be the one guy who it's worth doing this for, as opposed to Seymour, Palmer, Wimbley, Curry, etc. None of whom are game changers one bit.

But I am just of the opinion that at this point, I really hope McKenzie doesn't trade any picks for any vets. In any circumstance. I think it's important to get off the addictive cycle of mortgaging the drafting of new, young, and cheap personnel. My thinking is that it is basically a debt position to be in, rather than a capital position. To put it in financial terms if that makes any sense. Noone in debt is in better shape than someone with liquid assets, and even though that's a money metaphor, I think it holds true with football in this case..
If anything I think we should be adding picks anywhere and everywhere we can. Not giving more away.


Last edited by holyghost on Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 37312
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Is this really a Woodson situation?
I see Revis as a guy who benefits greatly from NOT playing in Oakland. Always have. Meaning, this dude is ultra physical with WRs. There's no way he wouldn't lead the league in flags playing for the Raiders.

Plus the idea of giving up draft picks makes me ill. We are just getting ready to have our first full draft in years, not even this year but next year. I'd hate to get back on that cycle of pain. Sorry, but no to Revis. He's definitely a guy the old regime would have went for. It's been like what, 4 or 5 years running where we burned picks on high priced vets? Have we gotten even one iota better doing it?


I'm just saying he could pay a lot of dividends for us. I do think that if we got him, it would be in a rational way as NickB alluded to


He could, in theory.
And a rational trade for him is fine.

But... I just... I just think it's a really important thing to have a full draft for once. Or even one of those drafts where we have 10 or 13 picks. We just never seem to be in that position.
Revis might be the one guy who it's worth doing this for, as opposed to Seymour, Palmer, Wimbley, Curry, etc. None of whom are game changers one bit.

But I am just of the opinion that at this point, I really hope McKenzie doesn't trade any picks for any vets. In any circumstance. I think it's important to get off the addictive cycle of mortgaging the drafting of new, young, and cheap personnel.
If anything I think we should be adding picks anywhere and everywhere we can. Not giving more away.


I respect and understand that, but this is one case where I would look the other way on that front. IF it's a fair deal. That's all.
_________________

#FreeAgent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group