You are missing my point. It's not just Revis and Sherman....it's Wilson, Thomas, Okung, etc. They are all on rookie deals now.

Can we afford them both? Yes - but at the expense of losing other key pieces. And again, the secondary is not the problem on this defense. If Revis puts on 130 pounds and can penetrate the A and B gaps, then I'll be more excited.

This isn't fantasy football. We have a lot of key players to re-sign in the near future and adding an Albatross financial commitment like Revis, any way you want to justify it, doesn't make sense.

It's not worth it to break up the core of what we have for a luxury want. Just my opinion.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

what the hell does that have to do with it........not mutually exclusive....get both and add another fantastic draft! duh!

Havnt read the whole thread so dont know if this has been brought up, but having Revis and Sherman would help the pass rush in two ways. First, and most obvious, QB's would have a harder time finding open receivers forcing them to hold onto the ball a lot longer. Secondly, rather then upgrading personnel it would allow us to scheme more pressure. With Revis and Sherman shutting down their man it woudl allow for many more exotic blitz formations and play calls.

Plus, there's no reason we can't bring in Revis AND d'line help. Especially if Flynn would be part of the trade freeing up more cap space.

If i'm Seahawks management I'd be all in for this move. Not worried about salary cap implications. There are always ways around the salary cap, plus Pete and John have shown they can restock the roster with quality cheap players if we do lose a few due to money issues.


Honestly, I cant believe anybody would argue against this. It baffles me.

_________________

Hell, might as well try to trade for Larry Fitzgerald and Adrian Peterson while we are at it!

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

I not buy it. Sounds like agent speak to me

What point have I missed? You claimed we'd have two cornerbacks earning ridiculous money. Whether my proposition is likely or not is open to debate, but I formulated an idea that shows even if you pay Revis the best contract ever given to a cornerback and pay Richard Sherman a deal that matches Champ Bailey and Nnamdi's current deals, you're still paying both players on average $3-4m less than the Seahawks are due to pay Zach Miller in 2013.

That level of investment doesn't stop you re-signing those other players. Tom Brady's cap hit in 2013 and 2014 will be $22m alone. New England still have Wilfork, Welker on the franchise tag plus a cluster of others. They've been able to keep the players they want. The proposal I suggested would mean the Seahawks are paying $14m for two players in 2013 and 2014 and $17.5m in 2015/16 if Sherman signs a substantial $10m a year contract. So I don't think this trade automatically denies you the opportunity to re-sign Okung and Thomas who in fairness cannot expect major pay hikes given their deals were already pretty good as part of the old CBA. I've only suggested a plan until 2016 - and Seattle aren't even allowed to negotiate with Wilson until later in his deal which will keep that cheap for at least two more years.

I'm not saying I'm all in on this... but trading for Revis doesn't mean you have to break up anything. And the interior pass rusher that me and you both covet can still potentially be found at a dirt cheap price in the draft, as long as Carroll and Schneider continue to work their magic.

there not available sherlock

the one and only goal is to win the superbowl.
rather than debating whether or not we should trade for revis it is much more effective to debate what we can get for matt flynn that will provide the greatest probability to win the superbowl.

if you have an idea better than revis speak up....
otherwise save your breath.

There's a lot of assumption in your numbers and what you "think" Revis would accept. Hard to say. I think you are way under-selling what Revis would cost. If he wants $60 million guaranteed (as pointed out in this thread) - which would be commensurate with his elite talent - there's no way his cap hit is going to be anything less than $10 million a season. Revis, Sherman, Thomas, Okung, Chancellor, Wilson, Tate, probably Wagner, potentially even Irvin if he develops. That's a LOT of pennies to take from the bank.

Nothing "automatically" denies re-signing players, but it's a consideration. I'm sure the front office will do what's best.

It doesn't really matter what New England is doing - totally different team and construct. They don't have a stack of young up and coming stars on their roster either. And FYI, New England will most likely let Welker go to free agency because he is too expensive now.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

No sh*t. I guess sarcasm isn't your thing?

Wake up.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

He was being sarcastic, Sherlock.

I say, if there's cap room, go for the Revis acquisition. Adding more competition for the DB's can do no harm.

_________________

Thought it was pretty obvious...

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

im awake friend....
go to sleep....

Ok, then you picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

Whatever dude. Bigger fish to fry.

I admitted in both my previous posts that I was throwing the numbers out there and that they were open to debate. It wasn't an assumption because I was merely using examples to explain my point. However, I also made both contracts deliberately large for the examples. The highest salary paid to a cornerback is $11m (Champ Bailey, Nnamdi). By putting forward $14m per year for 2013-14 I not only beat that, but also got closer to the $16m he's reportedly 'looking for'. It stands to reason that there's probably a point where both parties can meet and even then $14m is closer to $16m than $11m. By giving him $7m in 2015/16 he's averaging over $10m per year. I think a four year contract would be fair to start with, so I don't think my numbers -- even as an example -- were ridiculous.

He will struggle to get $60m. And by that I mean nobody will pay that. Mario Williams got $50m guaranteed, was a free agent and wasn't coming off ACL surgery.

The reason I highlighted New England was to show they are paying one man -- Tom Brady -- an incredible amount of money. And yet they are still able to retain their key players. They have one guy set to earn $22m in each of the next two years. They are not losing every other player who is hitting the market in NE. And if they do lose Welker, it's because Bill Belichick has decided it's time to move on. They've been bitching at each other for ages. I actually think he'll end up staying there though.

Signing Revis does not stop the Seahawks re-signing their players. Another great example here is the Zach Miller contract. He is earning $11m in 2013, which as I pointed out previously would be $3-4m more than the average cost of Sherman and Revis. Miller is due to earn considerably less than that in 2014/15 and he's an UFA in 2016. So any extra cost you take on paying Revis and Sherman is off-set by Miller's contract coming off the books. Sidney Rice's $10m a year deal ends at the same time. So you're talking about a good $20m coming off the cap by the time Wilson's new contract is negotiated.

Bringing in a superstar player doesn't prevent you from doing anything. The issue we should be debating here really isn't whether we can afford Revis -- because we almost certainly can. It's whether we want to invest a possible first round pick and taken on a player coming off an ACL. Those are concerns, the big positive is before the injury he was among the best 2-3 defensive players in the entire NFL. He could be #1. So it's an interesting little debate for those reasons. But we can almost certainly afford to do it if we really wanted to.

i would only trade for him if flynn was part of the deal and would give up nothing more the 3rd round pick and another (non-starter) player for him. I don't anticipate that is the best the jets can get but it's the most id give.

Flynn, 3rd rd pick + Jeremy Lane -->> Revis
or
forget it

Agreed - and I pointed that out earlier in the thread, both the draft pick and his injury concern me.

What will be interesting is to see how desperate the Jets get to move him.

_________________
@SeahawkGreg

YEAH, WE HAVE A DUDE NAMED CHRISTINE...DEAL WITH IT!

He's due a seven-figure payment shortly after the new league year opens on March 12th. That could put pressure on the Jets to make a deal. Basically New York has almost no leverage in these talks. They get nothing for him next year and cannot franchise tag him. They're banking on Revis' star quality getting the job done... but they're fighting against teams looking for value and a player demanding crazy money because he wants to put teams off a trade. He know he's 12 months away from being a free agent. He doesn't want to jut negotiate with one team. So he could force a market between teams and then the price comes down even further in terms of compensation. I think the only loser out of all this will be the Jets.

This guy is still considered by most to be the best corner in the league, we would have the best 2 corners in the league with this trade, I hope we make this