Following the news that Darrelle Revis has signed a one-year, $12 million deal with the New England Patriots, Insider asked four of its experts to weigh in on whether there is any downside for the Pats, whether the terms of the contract were surprising, and if Revis' addition makes New England the favorite in the AFC.
Is there any downside to this deal for the Patriots?
Matt Williamson: If there is, I don't see it. This is a great player in the prime of his career who makes everyone around him better. Revis is a true lockdown cover man that more or less eliminates the opposing offense's top receiver. That is a tremendous tactical advantage, and Bill Belichick will know exactly how to exploit it. Logan Ryan or Alfonzo Dennard will get a ton of over-the-top help from Devin McCourty, who is one of the best in the business at doing exactly that. Plus, expect a lot more blitzing from Belichick now.
Louis Riddick: The downside for the Patriots is that they continue to not be able to address the corner position on a long-term basis. Year after year, a position that is considered one of the five most important in the greater overall context of a 53-man roster continues to be an area of concern, which I am sure is starting to get old internally for them. The downside for Revis is that he is assuming a great deal of risk on a one-year deal. Yes, he is continuing to earn big cash on a yearly basis, but he will be 29 when the season starts, and getting one last big mega-deal has to be a priority of his in the near future.
Mike Sando: Downside for the Pats? Not at all. One-year deals carry no future cap ramifications, and Revis will be supremely motivated to perform.
Field Yates: The only downside to this deal is that it only lasts for one year. Revis is the clear-cut best cornerback in football and, in my estimation, the most valuable defensive player regardless of position. He has had prolonged contractual negotiations throughout his career, and the clock will soon be ticking on the open window for a new deal. That sounds crazy to say, but with a player of his caliber, there will be interest in locking him up for the longer term. From a pure football standpoint, there is zero downside, as Revis showed he was recovered from an ACL tear last season.
Were you surprised to see Revis sign a one-year deal?
Williamson: I was somewhat surprised in that I thought he might make even more. In a way, this deal looks more attractive to me than the one to which Denver signed Aqib Talib, and Revis is the far superior player. I am sure he would make a fuss, and that is putting it mildly, but New England does have the option of giving Revis the franchise tag after this season. Even if they just get the next two seasons from Revis, they are prime years at an acceptable price. That could yield a lot of victories.
Riddick: I am not surprised that either side agreed to this deal, because both the Patriots and Revis always seem to bet on themselves, and not cater to prevailing opinions and/or agree to deals that they do not think fit their long-term plans. From a team standpoint and a player standpoint, you are talking about the ultimate football-business team coming together with the ultimate football-business player.
Sando: I wasn't sure what to expect. We knew Revis cared about the average value per year. We knew he would have a hard time maintaining his $16 million average on a new contract. This deal puts him in position to win a championship and cash in next offseason -- on his terms.
Yates: Yes and no, if that's possible. Yes, because of the fact that there is risk for him if he were to suffer another major injury. His skill set is such that a team would still want to invest in him even in the event of an injury, but his cost would be driven down. The counter to that is that Revis has recently played on what has amounted to a series of one-year deals. The leverage created by always being one step away from bolting to another team allows him to continue to command a large asking price. If he excels again this season, he could look for huge money again next offseason.
What does this do to the Patriots' Super Bowl chances? Would you put them ahead of the Broncos in the AFC?
Williamson: I am not sure this propels New England past Denver, as adding DeMarcus Ware, T.J. Ward and Talib makes the Broncos' defense extremely impressive to go along with a lethal offense. Both squads were hit hard by injury in 2013, and are getting back high-quality pieces. And frankly, even with the injuries, these two teams were noticeably ahead of every other AFC team. Now they are in their own stratosphere in the AFC, and both teams are set up well to find quality in the draft now without reaching for need positions.
Riddick: Until they address the middle of their defense at all three levels -- as well as provide more clarity regarding how they will become more explosive on the perimeter offensively -- I will say that they have not done enough to be considered the favorite ahead of Denver. But they are still a good bet to challenge for the AFC crown.
Sando: I do think the Patriots will be the team to beat in the AFC. Denver draws the NFC West in the scheduling rotation, which could help New England get home-field advantage and put the Patriots in prime position to reach the Super Bowl.
Yates: It bolsters them. I'm not sure this team right now is dramatically better than the one that advanced to the AFC Championship Ggame, but any time you can land a legitimate lockdown cornerback, it helps in a major way. That being said, they still have holes to address at both tight end and wide receiver, and the Broncos have put together a stellar start to the offseason as well. Right now, the Broncos deserve the slight edge, but what's abundantly clear is that these two teams stand above the rest of the AFC.