Report: Darrelle Revis Will Report to Camp

[Jetsfan80]

using that math the Jets should cut Revis and then go undefeated, forever.

Rex Ryan has coached top 5 defenses with or without Darrelle Revis. Last year, we went 8-8 with him.

[pointman]

Not really. You could get two number one picks and a good player for him. If not more. I'm not saying trade him of course, but a great org like the Steelers know how NOT to be held hostage by players.We should look to emulate that. If he's being a prick, get rid of him and take the best of the many offers that would come in for him.

Who? You mean the guy that is the brown spot on our banana? Please. The Steelers got lucky with that one.

[wavegirl22]

I love Revis. I am OK with anything he wants.

I could not have said it any better.

[T0mShane]

I could not have said it any better.

Hi. I'm Tom.

[T0mShane]

yeah it's such a burden having the league's best defender on the team

if only the Jets had 53 mediocre players, they could pay them all the veteran's minimum and never have cap problems.

Obviously, having Revis on the team is not a burden. Giving Revis jackhammer super-leverage going into next season is a burden. As Jason pointed out, they can't even elect to trade him without costing themselves a cap hit.

[wavegirl22]

Obviously, having Revis on the team is not a burden. Giving Revis jackhammer super-leverage going into next season is a burden. As Jason pointed out, they can't even elect to trade him without costing themselves a cap hit.

And how would you feel seeing Revis suit up for another team? I sure wouldnt.

[wavegirl22]

Hi. I'm Tom.

Hi Tom, I's Shari

[GREENBEAN]

Who? You mean the guy that is the brown spot on our banana? Please. The Steelers got lucky with that one.

Not only him. The Steelers traditionally allow their big name players on to leave when they want big contracts or they are getting a little older and they never miss a beat. We on the other hand, tend to give people their last big pay day a an NFL player.

[slats]

Not only him. The Steelers traditionally allow their big name players on to leave when they want big contracts or they are getting a little older and they never miss a beat. We on the other hand, tend to give people their last big pay day a an NFL player.

IMHO, that's a much better way than the Jets' way, but the problem is in shifting gears from the way Tannenbaum has been doing business. Since Mikey T was named GM, the Jets have drafted 41 players and the Steelers have drafted 59 (further, the Steelers took 30 players in rounds 3-5 while the Jets took just 14). The Steelers can afford to let players go because they always have someone in the chute to replace them. Under Tanny, the Jets have run decidedly lean. Switching over to the Steelers way can only come during a rebuilding period. They need to hold onto their existing draft picks and accumulate additional ones, not have 3 and 4 player drafts, if they ever hope to get out of the cycle of overpaying old guys. *coughcedricbensoncough*

[GREENBEAN]

IMHO, that's a much better way than the Jets' way, but the problem is in shifting gears from the way Tannenbaum has been doing business. Since Mikey T was named GM, the Jets have drafted 41 players and the Steelers have drafted 59 (further, the Steelers took 30 players in rounds 3-5 while the Jets took just 14). The Steelers can afford to let players go because they always have someone in the chute to replace them. Under Tanny, the Jets have run decidedly lean. Switching over to the Steelers way can only come during a rebuilding period. They need to hold onto their existing draft picks and accumulate additional ones, not have 3 and 4 player drafts, if they ever hope to get out of the cycle of overpaying old guys. *coughcedricbensoncough*

Oh I'm with ya. I would not want to see them switch gears mid stream and am one of the holdouts from an ideology that allows guys to have more than a 3-4 trial period before you cut ties with them. I am not a fan of the quick to judge "HE SUCKS! GET RID OF HIM!! " mentality that has overtaken pro sports.

A good example of that is Rex. He has obvious football smarts and obvious charisma. He's also an incredible motivator. Everyone knows these things about him. He's been a more consistent success here than most coaches we've ever had, yet one 8-8 season and the jeers from the fans come about why he should be fired. Me? I would love to see them keep rex for the next 10 years with all the ups and downs that would come with it. I feel similarly about Sanchez. (shhhhhhhhhhh)

As far as the Steelers org vs the Jets org, there really is no comparison. None. They are the finest run team in the NFL and have been for a very long time.

But here we are. Tanny has had success here and although it has not brought home a championship, I can say that the Jets have been more fun to watch since his arrival than in the past. (steinberg, Bradway etc) I want a ring ( i know I wont get one in the mail if the Jets win it all by the way) but if we're not going to get it, Tanny at least makes it interesting.

pssst. He'd get two #1 picks and then some for Revis by the way

[bitonti]

Rex Ryan has coached top 5 defenses with or without Darrelle Revis. Last year, we went 8-8 with him.

... and had a top 5 defense

you are right Rex has coached good defenses without Revis, they had Ed Reed and Ray Lewis on them. Coaches need star players to win. Revis is the Jets' star player. Replacing him with 2 first round picks would be a debacle.

[THE ILK]

Hi Tom, I's Shari

Hi Shari, I'm JiF

[Bleedin Green]

... and had a top 5 defense

you are right Rex has coached good defenses without Revis, they had Ed Reed and Ray Lewis on them. Coaches need star players to win. Revis is the Jets' star player. Replacing him with 2 first round picks would be a debacle.

Anything actually quantifiable to support this? You constantly make these subjective statements as if they were facts (going even as far as calling it "not debatable", which is laughable), but give little, if anything, to actually support them. Instead, you dismiss everything that counters your opinions as meaningless, simply because you say so. Nobody is arguing against the idea that Revis is a great player that the Jets are better off with than without, but that's nowhere close to saying the Jets cannot possibly survive without him, which is a statement you seem to have no basis for making. You've continually ignored the points that hurt your case, like that even though Revis only missed a limited number of games in 2010 (in which the Jets did just fine without him), he was also ridiculously out of shape and playing poorly at the start of 2010 and yet the Jets defense still played extremely well despite him being more of a hindrance than a help. You need to realize that when you're the one making the extreme case, the onus is on you to make the case to support it, and I hate to break it to you, but your say so isn't enough to do the trick.

Don't get me wrong, it's obviously more than your right to have whatever opinions you want on the topic and argue with people about it (I mean come on, what else are these boards for, right?), but if you have no interest in supporting your stances, or addressing the counter-points, than don't go around telling everyone else they're wrong (because you say so), and starting up debates with people in which you have no interest in actually holding up your end of the bargain.

[Matt39]

Revis' ability to take away half the field by himself allows Rex to pretty much do whatever he wants with his front 6 or 7 on passing downs...without him the D looks a lot different.

[bitonti]

Anything actually quantifiable to support this? You constantly make these subjective statements as if they were facts (going even as far as calling it "not debatable", which is laughable), but give little, if anything, to actually support them. Instead, you dismiss everything that counters your opinions as meaningless, simply because you say so.

you have the same amount of evidence as I do to predict what a Revis-less Jets would look like or how they would perform. I say the Jets would suck without Revis you say they'd be awesome. Neither of us has proof.

[Bleedin Green]

you have the same amount of evidence as I do to predict what a Revis-less Jets would look like or how they would perform. I say the Jets would suck without Revis you say they'd be awesome. Neither of us has proof.

I never said they would be awesome, I simply said there's absolutely no reason to believe they would be awful, as you have suggested.

And again, I have far more evidence than you, which would be half of a season of 2010 that saw Revis either hurt or playing like crap to tell me the Jets entire defense wouldn't fall apart without one cornerback who's now 3 years removed from the season that many are still evaluating him based off of (and yes, he's certainly still great, but has come nowhere close to duplicating that year).

[Bleedin Green]

Revis' ability to take away half the field by himself allows Rex to pretty much do whatever he wants with his front 6 or 7 on passing downs...without him the D looks a lot different.

While I think the "take away half the field by himself" line is one of the more overused instances of hyperbole when it comes to the Jets, this at least a point I can understand making. However, there's a pretty substantial difference between saying the D would look different and saying it would suddenly suck because of one player. It's fair to assume that Rex, like most good coaches, would build his defense around his players he had, and not suddenly just start having Kyle Wilson chasing after every team's #1 WR one on one and not change a single other thing. Particularly since we've seen a number of changes over his 3 years here already, and it's certainly different than the defense he ran in Baltimore.

[bitonti]

I never said they would be awesome, I simply said there's absolutely no reason to believe they would be awful, as you have suggested.

And again, I have far more evidence than you, which would be half of a season of 2010 that saw Revis either hurt or playing like crap to tell me the Jets entire defense wouldn't fall apart without one cornerback who's now 3 years removed from the season that many are still evaluating him based off of (and yes, he's certainly still great, but has come nowhere close to duplicating that year).

If we are using past results to project future performance (always a risky choice) you have the 2 and a half games they were without Revis I have the rest of the time he was playing. that's 2 afc champ appearances yadda yadda yadda. When he shut down Andre. When he shut down Megatron (!). Every major WR he's shut down it's a long and distinguished list.

End of the day I don't know how you can say revis was great in 2009 and living off rep since then. That's a mighty big matzoh ball. Even if it is just rep, it's still preventing every QB except Ryan Fitzpatrick from throwing to their #1 targets.

Ask me, he's been great every time he stepped on the field. He's not replaceable. Not with draft picks and not with a trade. The Jets without Revis would be far far worse than they are today.

You want to put the onus on me, i want to put the onus on you for denegrating the best Jet we've seen since Joe Willy. Making it seem like he's only average, living off rep or doesn't deserve the immense money he's going to receive. In most of our cases, Revis is best Jet we've ever seen. I get it you don't like his hold out tactics. But so what that's what stars do. No one ever told Michael Jordan to be happy to be the 2nd, 3rd or 4th highest paid player on the team.

[dbatesman]

If we are using past results to project future performance (always a risky choice)

Seems to me the alternative is a lot riskier.

[Bleedin Green]

If we are using past results to project future performance (always a risky choice) you have the 2 and a half games they were without Revis

You are once again blatantly ignoring the fact that Revis spent half of 2010 out of shape & even after returning from injury, playing hurt, and due to that, his play was mediocre at best. I've brought it up repeatedly to see how many times you would ignore it, and even after I called you out on ignoring it, you did so again anyway because, as always, you absolutely refuse to acknowledge anything that hurts your case. So we've already established one thing you're wrong about, because I have more than that and your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't change that.

I have the rest of the time he was playing.

Which tells us what exactly about how the Jets would have fared without him? Oh, that's right, absolutely nothing.

that's 2 afc champ appearances yadda yadda yadda. When he shut down Andre. When he shut down Megatron (!). Every major WR he's shut down it's a long and distinguished list.

Again, I've never disputed he's a great player, but none of this says anything about the Jets alleged inability to survive without him.

End of the day I don't know how you can say revis was great in 2009 and living off rep since then. That's a mighty big matzoh ball.

Nice try, but I didn't say that. I went out of my way to make the point that he is still a great player, but has not come close to duplicating that season which he still wants to be paid based on and some people still hold him up based on. His first half of 2010, even when on the field, was far from good, and last year his play saw a definite decline in the second half of the year. As I'll once again repeat since I have no doubt you'll turn this point into something that it's not, he is certainly still a great CB, but it's very likely he will never have another season like 2009 again. There's nothing wrong with that, because it's unreasonable to expect him to play like that every year, but it's simply the truth.

Even if it is just rep, it's still preventing every QB except Ryan Fitzpatrick from throwing to their #1 targets.

If you want to be technical, there has been a trend over these past few years that the receivers Revis tends to face on a more regular basis seem to have more success against him than others. As it's not just Stevie Johnson, but Wes Welker and Brandon Marshall have also had their fair share of success.

Ask me, he's been great every time he stepped on the field.

Again, go back and watch the first half of 2010 and if you really want to say he's "been great every time he stepped on the field", your entire case lost absolutely any legitimacy that it had left, because nobody who watched that should try to make that case.

He's not replaceable. Not with draft picks and not with a trade. The Jets without Revis would be far far worse than they are today.

How exactly do you define "not replaceable"? Are you saying it's highly unlikely the Jets would find another CB who could come in and play at the same exact level as Revis? That's probably true, but that says absolutely nothing for whether or not the Jets could continue to have a very good defense in spite of that. After all, there's 9 other top-10 defenses out there who don't have Darelle Revis on their team. Now I know your counter to that argument will be they have other defensive playmakers on their team. While that is true, it also completely contradicts your case that Revis is irreplaceable, as if defenses are able to thrive with other non-Revis defenders that itself is definitive evidence that Revis' value to a defense absolutely can be replaced, so there's no reason the Jets could not do the same.

You want to put the onus on me, i want to put the onus on you for denegrating the best Jet we've seen since Joe Willy.

Denigrating? Are you serious? Are you aware that you have completely changed the entire argument I've made in your response? That should tell you one thing, if you have to change my argument in order to counter it, that probably doesn't say a whole lot for the legitimacy of your stance. I've repeatedly said Revis is a great player, I simply said the Jets do not live and die by him, as you insist they do but refuse to even attempt to support with anything but conjecture.

Making it seem like he's only average, living off rep or doesn't deserve the immense money he's going to receive. In most of our cases, Revis is best Jet we've ever seen. I get it you don't like his hold out tactics. But so what that's what stars do. No one ever told Michael Jordan to be happy to be the 2nd, 3rd or 4th highest paid player on the team.

And so what does this all boil down to? For as long as this post is, there was still not a single piece of evidence provided to give any support whatsoever that the Jets would be incapable of having a quality defense without Revis. So once again I'll say, the Jets are better with Revis than without him, but they most certainly do not live and die by him.

[Matt39]

I'd obviously rather have Revis than not, but if the season goes the way I think its going to go...I'd definitely consider trading him for picks. And then hope Tannenbaum isnt the one making the picks.

[bitonti]

You are once again blatantly ignoring the fact that Revis spent half of 2010 out of shape & even after returning from injury, playing hurt, and due to that, his play was mediocre at best. I've brought it up repeatedly to see how many times you would ignore it, and even after I called you out on ignoring it, you did so again anyway because, as always, you absolutely refuse to acknowledge anything that hurts your case.

I'm ignoring it cause you are wrong. He didn't play poorly in 2010. He didn't play as well as in 2009 but that's a far cry from poorly. And by the end of the year he was essential to their playoff run. You want to point out the regular season games, that's fine, I'll point out the playoffs. And the hold out was on the Jets head, they should have paid him at the combine. there was no reason to let it go that long.

Nice try, but I didn't say that. I went out of my way to make the point that he is still a great player, but has not come close to duplicating that season which he still wants to be paid based on and some people still hold him up based on.

The reason why Revis can never have another 2009 is because teams don't test him any more. His reputation is such that most teams won't even throw his way. It's not because Revis was great in 2009 and isn't as great now. If he changed his name and number and was player X he'd have another 2009. But QB's are under strict orders not to even look his way. That's the reality of the situation.

If you want to be technical, there has been a trend over these past few years that the receivers Revis tends to face on a more regular basis seem to have more success against him than others. As it's not just Stevie Johnson, but Wes Welker and Brandon Marshall have also had their fair share of success.

Last year Revis had a 100 yard INT return for TD on MNF and it was against Brandon Marshall. Where's all this success?

Now I know your counter to that argument will be they have other defensive playmakers on their team. While that is true, it also completely contradicts your case that Revis is irreplaceable, as if defenses are able to thrive with other non-Revis defenders that itself is definitive evidence that Revis' value to a defense absolutely can be replaced, so there's no reason the Jets could not do the same.

The Jets are not choosing between Revis and Demarcus Ware. They are choosing between Revis and not Revis. if you think the 2 first round draft picks or whatever they would get in a trade would equate into another Ware or Revis, that's wishful thinking.

I follow the draft very closely (we all do, as Jets fans), every year, and to get a player like Revis is a lightning strike. Once every generation a team gets a guy like that.

When's the last time the Jets had a defender like REvis? The answer is Never. Not even Klecko is as good as Revis. Whether his 2009 was better than his 2010 or his 2011 is splitting hairs, an off year for Revis is better than an on year for most players.

I've repeatedly said Revis is a great player, I simply said the Jets do not live and die by him, as you insist they do but refuse to even attempt to support with anything but conjecture.

It's all conjecture, your argument too. The 2.5 games the Jets were without Revis in 2010 don't prove jack squat. BL, I don't want to see the Jets try to prove your statement. The only way we will know his effect on the Jets is when he's gone. And I hope that's many years from now, when he retires. Not after this season because the Jets cheap out.

And so what does this all boil down to? For as long as this post is, there was still not a single piece of evidence provided to give any support whatsoever that the Jets would be incapable of having a quality defense without Revis. So once again I'll say, the Jets are better with Revis than without him, but they most certainly do not live and die by him.

again there's no proof that the Jets defense can be quality without him, because they never really were. Beating sub .500 buffalo and sub .500 miami two years ago doesn't prove quality. It proves they can beat bad teams without him. I will agree with that. They aren't beating playoff teams without him. And you will ask for proof of me, I will ask of proof for you. Neither of us can prove these statements. But we both agree he's a great player and the Jets are better with him. So what's the problem? Pay the man and make him a Jet for life. I don't even know what we are arguing about.

[The Crusher]

I could not have said it any better.

So.. have a nice birthday?

[Bleedin Green]

I'm ignoring it cause you are wrong. He didn't play poorly in 2010. He didn't play as well as in 2009 but that's a far cry from poorly. And by the end of the year he was essential to their playoff run. You want to point out the regular season games, that's fine, I'll point out the playoffs. And the hold out was on the Jets head, they should have paid him at the combine. there was no reason to let it go that long.

Well it didn't take you long to start changing the argument again, huh? As I must have said half a dozen times in this thread now, I am specifically pointing to the first half of the 2010 season. Meaning how he performed at the end of 2010 and into the playoffs has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying at all. You want evidence of the Jets defense surviving with Revis, 2010 has evidence in both the form of Revis not playing (even though you decided those games don't count), and other games where he didn't play anywhere close to the level that you are insistent the Jets need a CB to be playing it in order for their defense to survive.

Not to mention, trying to blame the Jets for his poor play is completely irrelevant to the argument, because the point is whether or not the Jets could survive without his play, and so it doesn't matter how or why it happened, that set of circumstances has helped show that they can. I don't know, call me crazy, but if your stance was indisputable as you try to make it out to be, you probably wouldn't need to keep changing the argument, don't you think?

The reason why Revis can never have another 2009 is because teams don't test him any more. His reputation is such that most teams won't even throw his way. It's not because Revis was great in 2009 and isn't as great now. If he changed his name and number and was player X he'd have another 2009. But QB's are under strict orders not to even look his way. That's the reality of the situation.

Here we go, an actual quantifiable argument you're making now. Care to provide the statistics to back this claim up? (I'll give you a hint, they don't exist.) But please, feel free to show something to prove these "facts" you're throwing around.

Last year Revis had a 100 yard INT return for TD on MNF and it was against Brandon Marshall. Where's all this success?

Wow, thank you so much for doing this. This was such a setup and I can't believe you so foolishly fell right into it. I KNEW you were going to cite that game, and I was going to enjoy how much you were going to completely destroy your own argument by doing so. So let's recap: Revis missing 3 games and the Jets D doing fine means nothing because it was ONLY 3 games, but Revis making one play (which I have no idea what that has to do with Marshall) is suddenly a defining measure because it supports your argument? Funny how you forgot to mention that Marshall also had 6 catches for over 100 yards in that game too.

The Jets are not choosing between Revis and Demarcus Ware. They are choosing between Revis and not Revis. if you think the 2 first round draft picks or whatever they would get in a trade would equate into another Ware or Revis, that's wishful thinking.

I follow the draft very closely (we all do, as Jets fans), every year, and to get a player like Revis is a lightning strike. Once every generation a team gets a guy like that.

When's the last time the Jets had a defender like REvis? The answer is Never. Not even Klecko is as good as Revis. Whether his 2009 was better than his 2010 or his 2011 is splitting hairs, an off year for Revis is better than an on year for most players.

It's very possible (perhaps even likely) that the Jets don't get a singular player of Revis' ability in a trade. What you fail to acknowledge is the fact that we're not talking about a one for one trade of singular players. You're talking about numerous players the Jets would have the opportunity to get via the draft or trade PLUS an extensive amount of extra money freed up that could be used to pick up even more new players via FA. So while there might be a downgrade at CB, it could not only be somewhat offset by an acquisition, at the same time there can be upgrades made at various other positions on the team directly related to that move. It's one thing to say in a straight up one for one trade the Jets would probably be worse off, but it's another to say that a variety of players to take in the draft PLUS another $15 million / year to spend cannot possibly account for the loss of one single player. What's worse yet is you're going even further than that to say that all of that wouldn't be enough to keep the defense from going from top 5 to being horrible without Revis, and it is completely baseless.

It's all conjecture, your argument too. The 2.5 games the Jets were without Revis in 2010 don't prove jack squat. BL, I don't want to see the Jets try to prove your statement. The only way we will know his effect on the Jets is when he's gone. And I hope that's many years from now, when he retires. Not after this season because the Jets cheap out.

Actually no, my argument is not conjecture. Just because you decide 3 games isn't enough and his poor play to start the 2010 season is irrelevant, doesn't make it all just go away. That's not enough evidence to convince you? That's your prerogative, but by definition, it is absolutely not conjecture. The same cannot be said for your stance.

again there's no proof that the Jets defense can be quality without him, because they never really were. Beating sub .500 buffalo and sub .500 miami two years ago doesn't prove quality. It proves they can beat bad teams without him. I will agree with that. They aren't beating playoff teams without him. And you will ask for proof of me, I will ask of proof for you. Neither of us can prove these statements. But we both agree he's a great player and the Jets are better with him. So what's the problem? Pay the man and make him a Jet for life. I don't even know what we are arguing about.

We are arguing because you are the one who came in here and told everyone the Jets cannot survive without Revis, and that it was not even debatable. It's a pretty bold stance and an arrogant means to present it, particularly when you refuse to provide anything to support it. Based on what you said, the Jets should not be able to win without Revis. Yet they have. By your logic, the Jets should not even be able to win when Revis has a bad game, yet they have on numerous occasions, continually beating the Bills despite Revis' repeated struggles covering Stevie Johnson (and again, did just fine at the start of 2010 despite his poor performances then, such as that awful Vikings game). The fact that you take it upon yourself to dismiss all of the evidence that says the Jets cannot live without Revis means absolutely nothing. If anything, you're really just making a lot stronger case for those of us who disagree with you.

[bitonti]

It's very possible (perhaps even likely) that the Jets don't get a singular player of Revis' ability in a trade. What you fail to acknowledge is the fact that we're not talking about a one for one trade of singular players. You're talking about numerous players the Jets would have the opportunity to get via the draft or trade PLUS an extensive amount of extra money freed up that could be used to pick up even more new players via FA. So while there might be a downgrade at CB, it could not only be somewhat offset by an acquisition, at the same time there can be upgrades made at various other positions on the team directly related to that move.

quality always trumps quantity. There are stars in this league and they decide the games. there's 90% of the roster that's basically interchangeable, not just with each other, but with some street free agents too. Revis is a star. If you don't get another star to replace him, it's a downgrade. Otherwise that's like taking the Alex Mack, Abram Elam, Kenyon Coleman and Brett Ratliff side of the Mark Sanchez trade. Always take the quality. The quantity you can find elsewhere.

We are arguing because you are the one who came in here and told everyone the Jets cannot survive without Revis, and that it was not even debatable. It's a pretty bold stance and an arrogant means to present it, particularly when you refuse to provide anything to support it. Based on what you said, the Jets should not be able to win without Revis. Yet they have. By your logic, the Jets should not even be able to win when Revis has a bad game, yet they have on numerous occasions, continually beating the Bills despite Revis' repeated struggles covering Stevie Johnson (and again, did just fine at the start of 2010 despite his poor performances then, such as that awful Vikings game). The fact that you take it upon yourself to dismiss all of the evidence that says the Jets cannot live without Revis means absolutely nothing. If anything, you're really just making a lot stronger case for those of us who disagree with you.

They can beat bad teams without Revis. They can't win a ring without him. Lack of proof for these statements doesn't prove the opposite.

Let's get real you don't like how he held out and you think contracts are sacrosanct. And Golly gee why can't we go back to the 1950's when men were men and honored their contracts. Capital is great, labor stinks. This isn't about Revis. It's about something larger that is probably political. if you were objective and only talking about football (not that other crap) you'd agree that Revis is the best New York Jets player we've seen since Willy. and him leaving would be a tragedy.

We should start a poll would Darrelle Revis leaving the Jets be a tragedy? I bet the affirmative would win in a landslide. But of course being a future prediction and all I have no proof.

just to be clear the Jets can survive without Revis. They can sell TV rights and PSLs and tickets and survive being a mediocre non-contender. Revis is what makes them legit. Revis is what makes 8-8 a bad year. In Jacksonville, they'd kill for 8-8.

[Bleedin Green]

quality always trumps quantity. There are stars in this league and they decide the games. there's 90% of the roster that's basically interchangeable, not just with each other, but with some street free agents too. Revis is a star. If you don't get another star to replace him, it's a downgrade. Otherwise that's like taking the Alex Mack, Abram Elam, Kenyon Coleman and Brett Ratliff side of the Mark Sanchez trade. Always take the quality. The quantity you can find elsewhere.

They can beat bad teams without Revis. They can't win a ring without him. Lack of proof for these statements doesn't prove the opposite.

Let's get real you don't like how he held out and you think contracts are sacrosanct. And Golly gee why can't we go back to the 1950's when men were men and honored their contracts. Capital is great, labor stinks. This isn't about Revis. It's about something larger that is probably political. if you were objective you'd agree that Revis is the best New York Jets player we've seen since Willy. and him leaving would be a tragedy.

We should start a poll would Darrelle Revis leaving the Jets be a tragedy? I bet the affirmative would win in a landslide. But of course being a future prediction and all I have no proof.

Nope, you're wrong, it's about football. But the last three attempts at changing the argument didn't work, so why not try again, right? So what's the plan this time, see if you can get the thread locked so you can stop having to ignore certain arguments, change others, and make more excuses why you've yet to provide any support for your position? And try as you might, I'm not going to say Revis sucks so that you can proclaim victory. I've never said anything but that he's a great player, but that still doesn't mean the team cannot survive without him. That's an extremely flawed leap in logic without anything else to support it. The quantity vs quality argument you made could also not be more completely off base from the situation I laid out, but I really shouldn't be surprised by this shtick of yours by now.

As far as being incapable of winning a ring without Revis? I hate to have to be the one to break this to you, but the Jets haven't won a ring with Revis either, so a more completely baseless statement could not possibly ever be made. But if we're going to play your little conjecture game, I'd say that if a trade of Revis got the Jets a top draft pick, which they then used on a QB who became a legit franchise QB for them, I think their odds would be far greater of getting a ring than if they were to keep things as is and the current crop of QBs continued to play as they have. Of course I will freely admit that's simply conjecture with obviously little to support it (outside of simple logic that is), but then again I'm not the one saying that there is no debating that because I said so, am I?

Not to mention, even if Revis is part of the reason the Jets D is as good as they are, he is clearly not the only reason, otherwise they would have been far better than they were in his first two years. The evidence actually seems to suggest that there were a number of changes that happened around him which had a greater impact on the overall success of this defense than he did, given he was one of the few unchanged parts of this D from before it's extreme improvement. Now I'm well aware you'll have some excuses ready to go as to why that's completely irrelevant and doesn't count, but I once again point to the fact that literally every single piece of evidence brought forward contradicts the position you have taken. When the only thing you can do is make one excuse after another about why none of it counts, while not ever providing any evidence to contrary, that's a pretty strong indicator that you're just wrong.

[AFJF]

Nonsense. I give Tannenbaum credit when it's due.

Guess I wasn't logged in that day.

[SMC]

this is all gonna be moot when the Jets give Revis a new deal before next season. And he deserves it.

That's the likely result when he is going into the final year of his contract. He'll get his money from the Jets, but not through a holdout this year because there is no incentive for the Jets to redo the deal now.

[KSJets]

I firmly believe the same people here bitching about Revis would have bitched about Namath when he was playing for the Jets had they been alive. Some people just don't know how to deal with having a great, HOF-caliber player on the team.

[wavegirl22]

I firmly believe the same people here bitching about Revis would have bitched about Namath when he was playing for the Jets had they been alive. Some people just don't know how to deal with having a great, HOF-caliber player on the team.

Finally someone making an excellent point!

And the bottom line is that. . ..

Darrelle Revis arrives in Cortland NY on Thursday, July 26, 2012 after ALL THE SPECULATION that he might holdout

[T0mShane]

People. The verb tense is "hold out." Two words. As a noun, "holdout" is fine.