49ers interested in trading for Revis (link provided)

Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:
...because with Revis - our defense will be a LOT better and that gives up a great chance to make it back to the SuperBowl and win it.

The 49ers problems with defense were mainly with the DL, they need to acquire depth and improve that area, draft a cornerback and a safety as well and they'll be fine with better depth. They also need improved red-zone offense. None of the solutions require a high-priced free agent rental.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by GNielsen:
I suppose it makes some sense as a $6 million 1-year thing to try to go all in for the Super Bowl next year. They could draft a cover safety and some defensive linemen and their defense would be pretty awesome. If Revis is on his game and really shutting down half the field as he has in the past, Fangio would have the freedom to get a little more aggressive with his blitzes. And, you'd like to see the Niners get back to the big game as soon as possible before Frank Gore and Justin Smith run out of gas. If Kaepernick were to stay healthy and progress as most of us think he will, the Niners would be the team to beat in the NFL.

But if you don't win...and history says its a hell of a challenge..........then Revis leaves after a year, you're out a draft pick that could have otherwise been a long-term productive player and you're basically stuck holding the bag.


I like the draft approach, build your team at an affordable price, manage the cap wisely, continually add depth...etc. Mega free agent acquisitions seldom turn out to be what people expected. With Revis coming off a major injury, there's no guarantee that he returns to being the same player that he was, it would suck to overpay for Revis to see that he's dropped off quite a bit.


In B4 "Adrian Peterson is better after tearing up his knee...blah..blah....blah."

a busted draft pick is way worse then taking a chance at a great CB

Originally posted by mryan1004:
I see a lot of people are concerned with this "1 year rental" notion. Try to alter your thoughts and think about a 1 year audition. You know once he gets here and is part of a winning team, he will be happy, if he performs at a high level, who better to be in position to sign him to a long term deal...if he doesn't, there are no obligations beyond that one year commitment. I like the idea, with our second pick and a late pick or two, just not unloading the house.

And what happens if he shows up and holds out, demanding a long-term contract before he'll play, as he's done pretty much every single year with the Jets??? Then what??? Now you get a guy that's a rental who won't even play for the full season.

I get the whole build through the draft argument but, no way 15 rookies take spots on this roster, somethings gotta give.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
a busted draft pick is way worse then taking a chance at a great CB

Coming off a major injury, who will cost a fortune. I'd take my chances with the draft pick, especially this year when there is literally a TON of secondary talent in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

Originally posted by mryan1004:
I see a lot of people are concerned with this "1 year rental" notion. Try to alter your thoughts and think about a 1 year audition. You know once he gets here and is part of a winning team, he will be happy, if he performs at a high level, who better to be in position to sign him to a long term deal...if he doesn't, there are no obligations beyond that one year commitment. I like the idea, with our second pick and a late pick or two, just not unloading the house.

This. I like the way the thinking is going here. When I first started reading this thread, I thought "no effing way" but the more I read through, the more some of these scenarios make sense.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by mryan1004:
I see a lot of people are concerned with this "1 year rental" notion. Try to alter your thoughts and think about a 1 year audition. You know once he gets here and is part of a winning team, he will be happy, if he performs at a high level, who better to be in position to sign him to a long term deal...if he doesn't, there are no obligations beyond that one year commitment. I like the idea, with our second pick and a late pick or two, just not unloading the house.

And what happens if he shows up and holds out, demanding a long-term contract before he'll play, as he's done pretty much every single year with the Jets??? Then what??? Now you get a guy that's a rental who won't even play for the full season.

So you are suggesting he gets traded, then holds out once he's here? There's a thought, I guess thats something they would make every attempt to address before pulling the trigger

Originally posted by valrod33:
We are interested in him as a one year rental


Two sources tell Yahoo Sports the 49ers are "poised to make a run" at Darrelle Revis after stockpiling 15 picks in the 2013 draft.
The Niners only have 12 picks right now, but will get three more via the compensatory process. Per Yahoo's Jason Cole, the 49ers have considered pursuing Revis and not extending his contract, forcing Revis to play out 2013 at $6 million via bonuses and salary. Cole suggests Atlanta could make a Revis run, as well. If San Francisco acquired Revis, it'd likely surrender one of its two top-34 picks, or perhaps even both. Jets GM John Idzik should be on the phone with 49ers GM Trent Baalke. Idzik needs roster-building pieces, and Baalke has them


Im fine with that cuz we have a s**t load of draft picks and lets be real we arent going to use them all anyway and i dont want to pay him 16 million a year and risk losing one of our guys like Crabtree, Anthony Davis or Iupati

No freaking way do the 49ers give up their top two picks on revis. No CB is worth that much.

Originally posted by Beeker:

Originally posted by mryan1004:
I see a lot of people are concerned with this "1 year rental" notion. Try to alter your thoughts and think about a 1 year audition. You know once he gets here and is part of a winning team, he will be happy, if he performs at a high level, who better to be in position to sign him to a long term deal...if he doesn't, there are no obligations beyond that one year commitment. I like the idea, with our second pick and a late pick or two, just not unloading the house.

This. I like the way the thinking is going here. When I first started reading this thread, I thought "no effing way" but the more I read through, the more some of these scenarios make sense.

I see this as a very sensible approach and my thinking was right on par with yours from the gate but, I love this scenario.

If we get Revis this year, totally reminds me of the year we got Deion to get over the hump and win a ship.

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
If we get Revis this year, totally reminds me of the year we got Deion to get over the hump and win a ship.

True. But - who do we substitute in for Merton Hanks' neck?

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by GNielsen:

I suppose it makes some sense as a $6 million 1-year thing to try to go all in for the Super Bowl next year. They could draft a cover safety and some defensive linemen and their defense would be pretty awesome. If Revis is on his game and really shutting down half the field as he has in the past, Fangio would have the freedom to get a little more aggressive with his blitzes. And, you'd like to see the Niners get back to the big game as soon as possible before Frank Gore and Justin Smith run out of gas. If Kaepernick were to stay healthy and progress as most of us think he will, the Niners would be the team to beat in the NFL.

But if you don't win...and history says its a hell of a challenge..........then Revis leaves after a year, you're out a draft pick that could have otherwise been a long-term productive player and you're basically stuck holding the bag.


I like the draft approach, build your team at an affordable price, manage the cap wisely, continually add depth...etc. Mega free agent acquisitions seldom turn out to be what people expected. With Revis coming off a major injury, there's no guarantee that he returns to being the same player that he was, it would suck to overpay for Revis to see that he's dropped off quite a bit.


In B4 "Adrian Peterson is better after tearing up his knee...blah..blah....blah."

Exactly, I completely agree. Giving up a first round pick or even a 2nd for a player coming off a torn up knee for one year is absolutely ridiculous. And if people think that he's going to Re-sign here after 2013 without testing free agency they're absolutely crazy as well. The guy has to be the greediest player in NFL. He holds out every other year, There's no way that he doesn't test Free agency.

Originally posted by blizzuntz:
If we get Revis this year, totally reminds me of the year we got Deion to get over the hump and win a ship.

it does???

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
The 49ers problems with defense were mainly with the DL, they need to acquire depth and improve that area, draft a cornerback and a safety as well and they'll be fine with better depth. They also need improved red-zone offense. None of the solutions require a high-priced free agent rental.

It's my opinion that you can build your defense in two ways: you can build with a great pass-rush, or you can build an outstanding secondary.

I think we're the type of team who has a great pass-rush, but our lack of depth after Justin Smith went down and our fatigue late in the year stifled that pass-rush. And as an example of a great secondary, the Seahawks are a team with a great secondary.

Personally, I think it's easier/wiser to build around a great pass-rush. Many, but not all, the throws against us in the playoffs were perfect throws by the quarterback. We just didn't have the pass-rush at the moment to disrupt the QB's rhythm and accuracy. I think the secondary was in the right position, save for a few plays, most of the time. It's just that the opposing quarterbacks were able to throw a good ball.

Another reason why I think it's easier to build around a good pass-rush is because I think sometimes if you have a good set of guys, you can rotate in and out and have a great rush, regardless of who's playing. I think the problem with building a strong secondary is that there's few high-level cover cornerbacks in the league. In my mind, there's Darrelle Revis and probably 3 or 4 other guys that you can really comfortably leave on an island.

With that said, I'm on the fence. Obviously, steadily improving our defensive line and secondary through the draft has been effective. We've gone deep into the playoffs two years in a row with a roster that was steadily built through the draft and a few free agent acquisitions here and there. But I can understand if Baalke aggressively goes after Revis.

Darrelle Revis WILL make the other guys around him better. As it stands now, we basically play two safeties back and allow the cornerbacks to play their man underneath. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. With someone like Revis, who CAN cover the opponent's best receiver one on one in certain situations, we can really mix up our coverages and probably even blitz a bit more.

It sounds great... but it's a gamble to trade for him. Who knows what happens in our one year, and if we retain him when his contract is up?

Originally posted by Beeker:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

If we get Revis this year, totally reminds me of the year we got Deion to get over the hump and win a ship.

True. But - who do we substitute in for Merton Hanks' neck?

LOL put the original bird neck on antler spray ASAP!!