I don't think anybody's saying that a CB has more impact than a QB. But shutdown corners DO make the D better, and have an impact on points allowed and yards allowed directly. The goal of the game is to score more points, and having a great corner to nullify the opponents best receiving threat in a passing league puts the team in a better position to win. Revis' 50-54 record is misleading because it included the Bucs 4-12 record from a year when their offense completely fell apart, and his rookie year where the Jets went 4-12 with Pennington injured for half the season. That isn't really fair. Revis can't play on offense and it takes a TEAM to win games, not a single player. QB has a bigger impact, but in a passing league, having a solid CB unit makes a big difference. Look at what Seattle did to Denver. When Revis emerged, he pretty much negated the transition from Favre to rookie Sanchez. Think about it. 2008 and 2009 had the same record with an elite QB in 2008 and an elite CB in 2009, and in 2009 the Jets offense was 3 & out central. Of course the D was too, so it helped negate that. Plus the final score is a result of the combined efforts on BOTH sides of the ball. If you have an offense that puts up 30 a game it's great, but if your defense allows 32 points per game, the team will lose more often than not. If your offense averages 19 a game and your defense allows 17, you will win. Both sides impact the game equally, unless your offense is completely inept.
By his 3rd season Peyton Manning was 4 games over .500 and playing in his 2nd straight playoffs. This despite coming into the NFL on a team that went 3-13 without him and then 3-13 with him as a rookie. You think I crusade against Revis and you're wrong. I crusade against the notion that a CB is even on the same plane of existence as a QB in terms of importance in the overall scheme of things.
It's a balancing act. Year / Pts allowed / Pts scored / Diff / Record 2009 / 14.8 / 21.8 / +1 / 9-7 2010 / 19.0 / 22.9 / +9 / 11-5 2011 / 22.7 / 23.6 / -3 / 8-8 2012 / 23.4 / 17.6 / -14 / 6-10 2013 / 24.2 / 18.1 / -14 / 8-8 2010 featured many close wins as did 2013. D is pretty much just as important as O, although I'll agree the QB has the biggest impact overall. It's a pass stopping league. Revis directly impacted 2009 and helped negate Sanchez's TOs. In 2010 Sanchez limited his TOs and the D still forced a good amount. Then it went down hill and Sanchez started becoming the turnover machine and the D forced less TOs, especially in 2012 and 2013 without him. Revis basically negated the Sanchez bottom of the league factor.
It's not a balancing act. Franchise CB does not exist. Ty Law was on a bunch of Patriots teams that looked just like the Jets of the last 3 years and then Brady came along and they were a big winner. My hassle with Revis is he thinks he's worth QB money and he just isn't. I'd love to have him playing on the Jets for $9-$10M a year but the guy over-estimates his actual value, will not settle for what the cap will support on a winning team and so he's the greatest nomad since Attila the Hun at this point in his career.
I agree that he's been overpaid. I was talking about his impact on the game. It's noticeable and does directly translate to wins. The job of the defense is to prevent the offense from scoring and he locks down his man every game. He does his job. Of course the rest of the secondary matters as well the front line. Even a franchise QB will be extremely limited with bad receivers and a porous oline. It may impact the game the most and demand the most pay, but it isn't the be all end all. I've seen QBs carried by WRs, just as I've seen WRs carried by QBs. Remember how many close games the Patriots had last season? Revis will ensure they aren't close any more. It's going to be noticeable as much as I root for a Patriots collapse, they scare me this year. It definitely is a balancing act, however. If you score more points than you give up, generally you will win. The only other factor involved that doesn't show in those stats is points off TOs. Our defensive points allowed is actually much better when you subtract all the pick 6s and turnovers deep in our zone leading to easy FGs.
Everybody's impact translates directly to wins (and in the case of bad players losses) however it's the level of impact that's what matters, and some positions just don't have that level of impact to translate into many wins. Some positions don't have to be more than average for their impact to be similar to a great player's impact because the position just doesn't translate into very much value overall. The Steelers made a great run from 2004 to 2010, winning two Super Bowls along the way, with Ike Taylor as their number 1 CB and the other guy always being a young player or journeyman who just managed not to get burned repeatedly playing opposite him. That's what you want out of your CB's in the cap era. Would it be nice to have a great pair of CB's shutting down receivers on the outside? Of course it would, but not if it takes real value out of the middle of the field where most games are won. The Giants won two Super Bowls between 2007 and 2011 without ever having anything resembling a shutdown CB on their roster. The position just isn't that important in the overall scheme of things when there is a hard cap that defines how much money you can spend on all your players. What you want is guys who don't smell like burnt toast all the time. That's a win at CB these days because it lets you spend money on a bunch of different players in the defense who will actually be tested on every play.
With an average corner, you need safety help on the #1 WR most of the time, and they usually still produce well. With Revis, not only does he negate the opposing team's best receiving threat, he frees up another guy to blitz to assist elsewhere. That's pretty much like having an extra player on the field. It makes a big difference. It's a pass stopping league. Corners are important. Not as important as QBs, but just as equally as WRs.
You're assuming that a blitzing DB is a positive thing. I see a blitzing DB as break even at best. I'd rather have that guy lurking in the defensive backfield making the reads harder. Obviously Rex Ryan feels differently, however after 2010 it's not clear that he's right. The NFL adjusted to the insane blitzing and his defenses have become less effective. The Jets faltered not because the CB play got worse but because the OL play did. They faltered because TJ moved on and LT got old and nobody else was able to make much of an impact behind a suddenly less effective line. They faltered because Mark Sanchez couldn't handle the pressure that the OL began to allow on a regular basis. It's a mistake to look at the 2009 and 2010 Jets as the model Rex Ryan team. In fact they were teams with a very strong veteran presence that was aging out in a hurry. Once the vets began to go the teams declined. Revis went later, after the team was already in decline. His presence in 2011 didn't halt the decline.
You are bullshitting, it's pretty disappointing to see you latch onto an argument like this and not put forth any effort. You can make that argument without minimizing one of the greatest seasons a cornerback in the NFL has ever had... I'm right.
I don't think so. The Jets still had Revis in 2011 and went 8-8. Is it your argument that they were actually a 6-10 team in 2011 and Revis was the reason they went 8-8? My argument would be that they were a 9-7 team in 2011 and Wayne Hunter was the reason they went 8-8.
Your argument is irrational and lacking in substance. It's based upon the fact that Revis got overpaid, which is true, but doesn't really bother to take the big picture into account.
Yes, of course the Jets would've finished 6-10 or worse in 2011 without Revis. This one is easy. He pretty much won at least two games: 1.)The Dallas opener which was all but over until a Revis interception gave the Jets the win 2.)the Dolphins monday nighter where the offense was non-existent and Revis was tasked one-on-one with the best offensive player in the game for either team and miami's only threat: Brandon Marshall. His 100 yard INT return won the game for the Jets. stop with your Revis crusade. It's getting old. You are better than this anyway.
He really is better than this. I can't blame him because I'm guilty of latching onto arguments like a pit bull myself, but the grand declarations followed by obvious misdirection arguments are beneath him.
You're making huge assumptions here. The Cowboys had the ball on their own 41 with 59 seconds to go in a tie game when Revis intercepted that pass. That's not an all-but-over game. That's a game that Tony Romo had found ways to lose OVER and OVER again in his career with the Cowboys. The pick was big but the idea that the Jets were losing that game if Revis doesn't come up with a pick at that point is faulty. The Cowboys lose that game in many different ways, and have done that since Romo took over at QB. What gave the Jets the win in that game was the blocked punt returned for a TD. Their passing D gave up 326 yards for a 9.5 YPA and 2 TD's. The Fins game is a better choice because 2 Int's will usually win the game for your team. How many games like that did Revis produce in his 88 games with the Jets over the years? That's my point. A franchise QB will win you 2 games like that a year. A CB will win you like 2 games like that over a 6 year period.
Your argument in this course of this thread has gone from saying Revis doesn't win any more games than an average CB // to comparing him to a franchise QB // to asking if he had a more impact than a RT// back to comparing him to a franchise QB... and I'm the one that's being told I am making a lot of assumptions? You need to get your arguments straight. Also, we've both watched a lot of football in our day. Let's not kid ourselves and say the Jets win that Dallas game without the Revis pick or without Revis on the field all together.
Look, you view things through a prism in which the Jets best player was also valuable enough to produce wins consistently. I look at it through a prism in which CB's just aren't that important in the overall scheme of things. I'm sure, absolutely positive, that if Darrelle Revis had been on the field instead of Dee Milliner when the Jets beat the Pats last year that you would have said that the Jets absolutely cannot win that game without Darrelle Revis. Am I right in that? Think about it. Now, if Darrelle Revis had been on the field instead of Dee Milliner when the Jets beat the Saints last year, well that's all about having a great CB against a great QB and passing attack. Right again? CB just isn't that important when the cost of your CB is going to cost you many other pieces in the puzzle. Now of course if you want to make the case that the Jets make the playoffs last year with Darrelle Revis instead of Dee Milliner at CB feel free. We all have our illusions and delusions.
Smart argument: It's not feasible to pay 12-16 million dollars to a cornerback. Dumb argument: The defense that led to two playoff berths and two AFCC appearances would have been just as good if the team's all-world CB was just average, even though the blitzes that made that defense effective were predicated upon an unaccounted for safety.
And again, the Jets lost when the ability to blitz didn't mean anything, as in when the other team was in a spread. Revis was an all-world CB for most of 2009. Until the NFL got film on what Rex and the Jets were doing that meant something. As soon as the NFL figured out what was happening things broke down. Peyton Manning showed the NFL exactly how to beat that defense in the AFC Championship Game. Not even Revis was immune that game. Every Colts receiver wound up catching passes, even the one he was on. Then in 2010 the Jets stopped blitzing and began going to the phantom defense where they brought people up to the line of scrimmage and then moved/dropped them at the snap, leaving wide open areas the offense would never even look at because there was going to be a defender there based on the pre-snap setup only the defenders were elsewhere once the play started. Of course by the AFC Championship Game that had broken down because the Steelers just ran at the Jets until they had to bring the safeties up in run support and then Big Ben found his 4th or 5th WR when he needed too. It's just not possible to look at Revis effect on the Jets defense as more than a transitory thing that flashed into brilliance when his skills and Rex's scheme meshed perfectly. The problem is the NFL adapts and 2009 never happened again.
The Jets lost in 2009 b/c half their secondary went out w/ injuries at Indy. Revis was the main player and shut his guy down as usual but he still needed help which their other guys in the secondary were unable to do. In 2010 the blitzes appeared to have been solved and we weren't as effective but Revis was still the key to that defensive constantly locking up the top WRs of the opponent and when we lost in the title game it was more b/c of our awful run D that day than anything else though ben made a ton of a plays w/ his legs to extend plays.
Peyton Manning showed that a defense that had a bunch of JAGs in the trenches and tried to compensate for it with overload blitzes doesn't work when you have Drew Coleman covering the nickel, and Big Ben proved that he can not get tackled in the pocket long enough that one of his receivers can get open. None of that has to do with Revis, who played stellar in both games. You're misdirecting yet again. I've seen you make a few convincing arguments against overpaying corners, but trying to discredit one of the best that has ever played the position is pretty sad. Yes, having a great corner doesn't equal as many wins as having a great QB. You can figure out an intelligent argument to prove that. This isn't one of them.
