Exactly, he is double teamed every play. Makes one hell of a difference when one guy of our front can account for 2 blockers.

This. I mean, don't get me wrong... fairley is talented.... but he would not make the plays he does if Suh wasn't on the team.

Elaboate? It's nothing to do with suh (he's one of the best at the position). I just don't see any DT ever justifying a ~75 million contract. I'd much rather sign a good fill in (Jason Hatcher) from example - who is solid and about $50 million cheaper.

You realize our entire defense falls apart without Suh there right? He is literally the only reason our defense was decent this year. Without him, fairley gets double covered. We don't get near the pressure that we need to.

Yes, last year we didn't get at the QB enough... however we did destroy the run. Had we sent LBs to blitz, we would of had a lot more pressure on the QB. So why didn't we blitz more? Schwartz didn't like to blitz and felt the wide 9 should be good enough at covering receivers (cuz that worked all season, right?).

People whine about the secondary... dear lord we could win a superbowl with the defense we have right now if it is used right. Send lbs blitzing. You do not need an elite secondary. Look at the past few superbowl champions... none of them have had great secondaries. Ravens CBs were awful (yes tehy did have Lewis / Reed), Giants secondary was ass... it was their D-line, GB had a good secondary, then the Saints had an awful secondary too.

So you can win a superbowl w/o a secondary. So then if we don't resign suh... where do we put his money? We have enough to sign our rookies. Assuming we get a top WR what other positions do you want to fill w/ all that money? Maybe another WR? Who will be available... I think the top guys are Eric Decker and Boldin. Are they more valuable than Suh. No... so then what are we signing with "all this money we are freeing up"

So you would rather pay for suh alone then a good DT + a $50 million CB? For example I'd rather have Hatcher + Revis then Suh alone. (Not that we'd use the money like that, just an example of how expensive his contract would be).


Suh is the man but I don't think any DT ever is worth that money.

Yes. I would rather pay Suh. He is the cornerstone of this defense. If he leaves it falls apart.
And with that trade, yes I would much rather have Suh than Hatcher and Revis.

And looking at realistic FA's .... I can not see anything I would be willing to give up on Suh for.

Also Hatcher is good and cheap but those kind of guys don't come by the dozen...he was a third round pick, its gonna be us with Warford in a few years.


And btw anyone else notice how much Jeremy Ross actually helped out squad

I can't agree with this more--even without suh or defensive line can produce plenty of pressure--we need money elsewhere

Keep in mind guys there's something called the Salary cap

After that Super bowl i don't know if i would want a corner of wr in the first...