MDH Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Not really. We have money, no QB. So spend it. Plus Gilmore only 1 year left. Spend it on OL and fix the running game and provide pass protection for whomever is the QB next year. The D is already stacked, there's no need to keep stacking it when the O is horrible.
YoloinOhio Posted February 1, 2015 Author Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) You have to get to the playoffs before you get to the super bowl You are not going to do that with a crap offense no matter HOW good the defense is i don't believe it's an either/or situation Spend it on OL and fix the running game and provide pass protection for whomever is the QB next year. The D is already stacked, there's no need to keep stacking it when the O is horrible. they can spend on the OL and draft a RB, they are already changing schemes. They can do this, and make a good D better. If you have an opportunity to add a game changer, you should do it unless you have no cap space after attacking "need" positions. I don't believe that would be the case here, as long as Revis was given a short term deal. No matter how good the Bills d looked at times last year, they couldn't stop SD, NE, Miami, Oakland when they needed to. They would benefit greatly from adding Revis. Edited February 1, 2015 by YoloinOhio
KD in CA Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Revis over Hughes Yup. Whatever QB hits/sacks you lose by downgrading Hughes you more than make up for with Revis' coverage. Gilmore on the #2 WR and make McKelvin a nickle back -- 3 positions upgraded.
Omar Little Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 i don't believe it's an either/or situation they can spend on the OL and draft a RB, they are already changing schemes. They can do this and make a good D better. Thank you for getting it.
MDH Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 i don't believe it's an either/or situation they can spend on the OL and draft a RB, they are already changing schemes. They can do this and make a good D better. No doubt they can make a good D better but there's no need to sign the top defensive FA on the market. That will absolutely take money away from other areas of the team. Depth is needed on D, not a top end CB. Sure, Revis would make the D better but at what cost to the O? Despite what posters want to believe they cannot sign guys who can come in and fill every need this team has in addition to Revis. The team needs 3 quality OL (not just two guards.)
John from Riverside Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Who said the offense had to be crap. Revis does not preclude a good offense. I'm not saying they should sign Revis. But it wouldn't be a bad thing either. I'm sure they have a plan. We should let things play out. OK......so lets say they sign revis (which I imagine will keep us from signing Hughes - What do we do at DE? - Our OL situation is abismal......we need at least 2 OG's, a TE, a RB, and the ever elusive QB Then we have to think about how Glenn and Darius are signed beyond this year. Revis will cost a MINT....and we are spending it on the side of the ball that was ranked 4th last year
Franchiseneedsme Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 We won't be able to find a good qb this off-season. So spend the money on impact players. I started a thread talking about getting Revis and J Huston last night. Lets spend on two all pro players to make this D the best in the league. I would gladly spend 25m for Brady or manning, hell even Roethlisberger. But it isn't going to happen.. Spend on top players now. And I don't trust spending big on offence. Do u really think spending 30m on J Thomas, a top guard, and a top RB Would be worth more that J Huston and Revis?
Tintonfallsbillsfan Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) If you can get Revis you do it. Mckelvin can be cut or maybe traded for a 5th and that saves 4 million right there. If you cut Mckelvin, rivers and Urbik you can pay for most of revis's salary. I more I think about hughes the less I am inclined to pay him 10 million per year. Looking over the current free agent list you might be able to get close production from , the graham, morgan, or the kid from Cleveland for half the price. Either way You give Rex one great and one very good corner with the current front seven ,you are not going to need to score very much to win a lot of games. They can sign Revis and still bring in a solid guard and a good Pass rusher. Edited February 1, 2015 by Tintonfallsbillsfan
Omar Little Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) OK......so lets say they sign revis (which I imagine will keep us from signing Hughes - What do we do at DE? - Our OL situation is abismal......we need at least 2 OG's, a TE, a RB, and the ever elusive QB Then we have to think about how Glenn and Darius are signed beyond this year. Revis will cost a MINT....and we are spending it on the side of the ball that was ranked 4th last year What you do at DE is plug someone in next to the three Pro Bowlers. Will that person(s) be as effective as Hughes? No, because Hughes is really good. Would DE suddenly become something to worry about with Hughes gone and Revis aboard? No, because the rest of the DL is an absolute monster. RBs are a dime a dozen and QB's not getting fixed this offseason, no matter how much money you want to throw throw at it. They've gotta augment the entire team around a less-than-ideal QB situation. That includes the defense. Signing Revis would not preclude the Bills from improving the OL/TE positions. Edited February 1, 2015 by Omar Little
YoloinOhio Posted February 1, 2015 Author Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) OK......so lets say they sign revis (which I imagine will keep us from signing Hughes - What do we do at DE? - Our OL situation is abismal......we need at least 2 OG's, a TE, a RB, and the ever elusive QB Then we have to think about how Glenn and Darius are signed beyond this year. Revis will cost a MINT....and we are spending it on the side of the ball that was ranked 4th last year i doubt they will sign more than one G in FA. Unless they trade for Bradford, I don't see a big contract for any of the QBs. I wish there was one worth spending on but those QBs do not hit FA. They can sign another DE who cost less than Hughes (plenty good ones in FA) or play Wynn or Randell in that spot. I'm not at all worried about Rex replacing Hughes in that scheme. They don't need a DE per se, just an Edge defender. It's kind of like Byrd - he was a great talent but Schwartz's scheme didn't emphasize a single high safety so we adapted without him in the secondary. Rex doesn't rely on front 4 pressure so I think the same thing applies. They have enough cap space to sign a TE as well. The Bills have a lot of options. Edited February 1, 2015 by YoloinOhio
Kirby Jackson Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) True. But with Robey he may be #5. You could probably get a #4 pick for him. He's way better than 80-90% of fourth round picks. A starting cb who can make plays and return kicks for a #4? Someone would do that. Maybe even a low 3 on a team that thinks they can compete.What about trying to flip him for a player that could help? Maybe a mid-tier TE? Dwayne Allen maybe? Edited February 1, 2015 by Kirby Jackson
Rockinon Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) You're not fixing QB this offseason. It's either Manuel or some other flawed option. No use allocating a ton of cap space to that position, considering the lackluster options. The Bills have the cap room to sign Revis and improve in other areas (OL, TE). If they can add one of the best defenders in the game for a semi-palatable contract - which remains to be seen - they should do it, regardless of position. Revis in, McKelvin out transforms a good secondary into an all-world one. A defensive line without Hughes and with the Williams bros and Dareus would more than hold its own. I love Hughes, but it's true. Combining those three with an LB corps whose best player will return, a secondary with Revis, Gilmore, Graham and Williams and a defensive genius (Ryan) at the helm would be magical. Hughes alone accounts for 20% of Buffalo's sacks over the last 2 seasons. That is a position that cannot be ignored. Revis may marginally improve the secondary but not the way you are thinking. Then the notion of kicking McKelvin to the curb to make room for Revis is ludicrous too. McKelvin has been improving his game plus he is a great special teams player....plus he is younger. How much longer can Revis play? And at what cost? If you want to see magical, fix the offense. There seems to be a preconceived notion that that Rex is inflexible. That the secondary must be man coverage for his defensive philosophy to work. Revis is a horrible idea. Just imagine how awesome our defense would be if they weren't on the field for 3/4 of the game week in and week out. For some teams, Revis makes perfect sense. For Buffalo, a competent offense puts the Bills in a position to dominate. The defense today is all ready championship caliber. You are not going to get much better than this. Also, just think of the other defensive backs on the team who have been improving their game by working together....communicating together. You bring in Revis and tell all of your guys to play man coverage, you are asking them change from a system that is all ready working very well for them. Revis is agreat player....granted. But people are pretty quick to jump on the bandwagon without considering the whole picture. I know Rex is anxious to put his own stamp on this team, but I just think we have young talent that is more than capable on the D side to dominate. Revis is a household name but for years teams have tried going that route. Washington comes to mind. They liked to stock up on big name FAs. Didn't work out for them. We can pick up some great FAs this year. Young ones that actually improve areas that are not all ready considered a strength. Our passing defense is ranked 3rd in the entire NFL. And that is while the offense is ranked 21st in time of possession. Keep the offense on the field longer and this defense will lead the league. Revis doesn't do that for us. Buffalo is 6th in interceptions. Revis had 2 interceptions this season. McKelvin had 4. Revis played very well for a long time. Earned a couple of big pay days. Big enough to draw national attention. He is good, but he is not the best corner in the league anymore. Now don't go getting the impression that I think Mckelvin is better. I did not say that. But you are actually suggesting that paying big money for a name is the right move. I happen to think it would be a huge mistake. The Buffalo defense is all ready very dominant against the pass and Revis will not make it better. The guys we have are young and have continued to improve. Why in the world would you want to break that up? Edited February 1, 2015 by Rockinon
Kirby Jackson Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) I guess that I will take my 1st crack at my ideal offseason: -restructure Mario -Sign Bradford (if he becomes available) 4 years, $32M with each $8M being fully guaranteed the 1st day of the league year -Sign Clint Boling 5 years $20M ($10M guaranteed) - Sign Revis 5 years $70M ($35M guaranteed) - trade McKelvin for Dwayne Allen - draft Todd Gurley -draft Jeff Heurman - draft a DE, OL, QB & WR -Resign Spiller 3 years $9M Edited February 1, 2015 by Kirby Jackson
YoloinOhio Posted February 1, 2015 Author Posted February 1, 2015 What about trying to flip him for a player that could help? Maybe a mid-tier TE? Dwayne Allen maybe?Grigson would throw in a draft pick too because he's Grigson.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 What about trying to flip him for a player that could help? Maybe a mid-tier TE? Dwayne Allen maybe? Allen would be great. Those trades don't happen much but it's possible. I imagine McKelvin is probably considered a little better around the league than we give him credit for. He's in his prime. He's not overly priced. You don't want to build your defense around him obviously, but as a starting number 2 or 3 corner he is pretty valuable. Especially with kick return ability. You know as well as anyone the league values speed and natural talent and skills and playmaking ability a little more than average fans do.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Allen would be great. Those trades don't happen much but it's possible. I imagine McKelvin is probably considered a little better around the league than we give him credit for. He's in his prime. He's not overly priced. You don't want to build your defense around him obviously, but as a starting number 2 or 3 corner he is pretty valuable. Especially with kick return ability. You know as well as anyone the league values speed and natural talent and skills and playmaking ability a little more than average fans do.That's definitely true. I'm not sure Indy is looking to do another player for player swap with us but they have Fleener. There defense needs to improve and Luck can make anyone look good. They need to invest in defense just like we do in offense. Maybe they see this as a chance to get a starting caliber corner?
firemedic Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 A healthy Revis/Gilmore guarantees the Bills four wins next year: the AFC South opponents. There are no QB/WR combos in that entire division that could move the ball an inch against a secondary that looks like that.Indy certainly has the QB...........
YoloinOhio Posted February 1, 2015 Author Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) Allen would be great. Those trades don't happen much but it's possible. I imagine McKelvin is probably considered a little better around the league than we give him credit for. He's in his prime. He's not overly priced. You don't want to build your defense around him obviously, but as a starting number 2 or 3 corner he is pretty valuable. Especially with kick return ability. You know as well as anyone the league values speed and natural talent and skills and playmaking ability a little more than average fans do.also, CBs are somewhat overvalued (like QBs and OT) because they are so tough to hit on in the draft. If a team needs CBs (and many do) they will pay in FA or trade for one because they have film on him in the NFL and know what he can and can't do. It's also helpful that he has played in SO many different schemes (lol) because teams can scout him much better that way. Edited February 1, 2015 by YoloinOhio
Omar Little Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) Hughes alone accounts for 20% of Buffalo's sacks over the last 2 seasons. That is a position that cannot be ignored. Revis may marginally improve the secondary but not the way you are thinking. Then the notion of kicking McKelvin to the curb to make room for Revis is ludicrous too. McKelvin has been improving his game plus he is a great special teams player....plus he is younger. How much longer can Revis play? And at what cost? If you want to see magical, fix the offense. There seems to be a preconceived notion that that Rex is inflexible. That the secondary must be man coverage for his defensive philosophy to work. Revis is a horrible idea. Just imagine how awesome our defense would be if they weren't on the field for 3/4 of the game week in and week out. For some teams, Revis makes perfect sense. For Buffalo, a competent offense puts the Bills in a position to dominate. The defense today is all ready championship caliber. You are not going to get much better than this. Also, just think of the other defensive backs on the team who have been improving their game by working together....communicating together. You bring in Revis and tell all of your guys to play man coverage, you are asking them change from a system that is all ready working very well for them. Revis is agreat player....granted. But people are pretty quick to jump on the bandwagon without considering the whole picture. I know Rex is anxious to put his own stamp on this team, but I just think we have young talent that is more than capable on the D side to dominate. Revis is a household name but for years teams have tried going that route. Washington comes to mind. They liked to stock up on big name FAs. Didn't work out for them. We can pick up some great FAs this year. Young ones that actually improve areas that are not all ready considered a strength. Our passing defense is ranked 3rd in the entire NFL. And that is while the offense is ranked 21st in time of possession. Keep the offense on the field longer and this defense will lead the league. Revis doesn't do that for us. Buffalo is 6th in interceptions. Revis had 2 interceptions this season. McKelvin had 4. Revis played very well for a long time. Earned a couple of big pay days. Big enough to draw national attention. He is good, but he is not the best corner in the league anymore. Now don't go getting the impression that I think Mckelvin is better. I did not say that. But you are actually suggesting that paying big money for a name is the right move. I happen to think it would be a huge mistake. The Buffalo defense is all ready very dominant against the pass and Revis will not make it better. The guys we have are young and have continued to improve. Why in the world would you want to break that up? -How many sacks do you think Hughes' replacement(s) would have? Zero? Rex Ryan's the same coach who dragged six sacks out of Aaron Maybin's corpse. I'm pretty sure he could plug someone in to do an OK job next to three Pro Bowl linemen. -Revis is a massive improvement over McKelvin, and he's the same age as McKelvin. You're talking about elite vs. decent. It's not even close. Using INT totals to compare players is totally disingenuous and devoid of context. Richard Sherman had four INTs. Do you think he and McKelvin are equal? I'll cite the facts/stats I did earlier: PFF had Revis as the fourth-best CB in the league this season and opposing QBs' rating when throwing at him was 67. That's equal to Blake Bortles' rookie rating. He turns opposing QBs into rookie Blake Bortles. -For the umpteenth time, the offense can be improved with Revis here. It's not one or the other. You're pro-Hughes but anti-Revis? Newsflash: Hughes is also going to cost a lot. Edited February 1, 2015 by Omar Little
Dorkington Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) I'd like it, sure. But in the real world where we have a salary cap, and bigger needs on the offensive side of the ball, I think it's unnecessary. If it happens, I won't complain though. I'd just rather see the money go towards offensive line, and hopefully picking up a decent vet QB, somehow. Edit: I'm admittedly ignorant on just how much cap room we have, especially if we re-sign Hughes, and extend Dareus. Edited February 1, 2015 by Dorkington
Recommended Posts