Are we going to lose Wilfork in his prime? - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

***Rob0729*** · 02-11-2009, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

I dont agree with your assessment of the NT's value in our system.
The NT is responsible for 2 gaps. Thats it, and they rarely get a pass rush either.
They are no more critical than any other DL, with one big exception:
If the NT is AWFUL you create cutback lanes on every running play. A NT getting blown off the ball is a severe, perhaps as severe as you can have, problem. But you do not need exceptional play at that spot.

Having a NT who can hold up at the los and make a play now and then is very important, having one that does more than that is not nearly as important as commonly believed. IMO, of course.

If we assume Wilfork is a dominant NT (which I would agree with) then to say that NT is the most important position on the defense, would infer that our defense has been most dominant since Wilfork arrived, and has gooten more dominant as his play improved, and that is aboslutely incorrect.

I think Belichick would disagree. The lack of a NT was the reason the Pats didn't go to the 3-4 as a base until 2003 here. It may or may not be more important than any other position on the line (which I feel it is more important). It is clearly the hardest to fill. Guys who weigh 320 plus who are agile, durable, and have good stamina don't grow on trees.

slash83 · 02-11-2009, 03:53 PM

Wilfork isn't going anywhere I personally don't think there's a player on the defense that bb respects and appreciates more then vince.

Synovia · 02-11-2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

If we assume Wilfork is a dominant NT (which I would agree with) then to say that NT is the most important position on the defense, would infer that our defense has been most dominant since Wilfork arrived, and has gooten more dominant as his play improved, and that is aboslutely incorrect.

I really suggest you take a logic class. Seriously. Absolutely none of that flows.

miDeuce · 02-11-2009, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

Wilfork isn't going anywhere. Seymour may be entering his last year as a Patriot, but Wilfork is clear not. The Pats may not even be worried about franchising Wilfork two years in a row if neccessary. The NT in the 3-4 is the most important position of defense. When you have a dominant NT who is durable and doesn't wear down (two issues with many NTs), you do what you can to keep them.

This article backs you up...

Quote:

"And you build it from the inside out," Collier said. "The nose tackle and the inside linebackers, those are three guys that are very important. But when you go through it, the nose tackle is probably the single-most important guy.

"He has to hold it all together and make it so the guards can't get out on the inside linebackers. Let me put it this way - the nose tackle can make the inside linebackers look pretty good, and if your inside linebackers look pretty good, you're going to play pretty good defense."

BradyBranch39 · 02-11-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

It may cost more, you may lose a guy, but players also tend to play better as the contracts come closer to ending. If he plays it out this year and we Franchise him next year that's two more years of him playing in contract years. There's plenty of time.

Regarding his comment about the cost, the Patriots have extended guys like Warren and Koppen so while he's right that it costs more later, he's clearly not willing to take a discount or he would be extended now. It takes two to tango and from appearances he wants to be extended without taking a discount; there's a risk for the Patriots extending him if he suffers a major injury.

I think we get him once Cassel is off the books.

***mgteich*** · 02-11-2009, 05:36 PM

1) I agree that a NT is the heart of a Belichick 3-4 2-gap defense.
2) Wilfork is going nowhere for at least 3 years, via extension or two franchise tags if necessary.
3) Once Cassel goes, monies will be freed up. Then it will be time to talk of possible extensions. The list of potential extensions is somewhat long: Wilfork, Seymour, Mankins, Kaczur, Hobbs, Faulk.
4) In addition, since there is likely a cap savings, two extensions could be worked even before Cassel leaves: Green and Vrabel.
5) My bet is that they will work it out, but I'm not sure that it will happen for awhile. I fear that Seymour would not be a happy camper if Wilfork was extended at money that wasn't offered to him.

kurtinelson · 02-11-2009, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

After all if Asante was ungrateful and sold out for more $$, weren't the Patriots ungrateful and sold out for not paying him more $$? .

The reason Asante went to the Eagles is that he wanted a chance to play for a Super Bowl contender. That was what he stated at his press conference - he didn't mention anything about money.

***mgteich*** · 02-11-2009, 06:28 PM

Are you being funny on purpose?

Asante could have played for the patriots. Weren't we a Super Bowl contender?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kurtinelson

The reason Asante went to the Eagles is that he wanted a chance to play for a Super Bowl contender. That was what he stated at his press conference - he didn't mention anything about money.

PatsChamp88 · 02-11-2009, 07:26 PM

No way hes going anywhere...

***tanked_as_usual*** · 02-11-2009, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

I think Belichick would disagree. The lack of a NT was the reason the Pats didn't go to the 3-4 as a base until 2003 here. It may or may not be more important than any other position on the line (which I feel it is more important). It is clearly the hardest to fill. Guys who weigh 320 plus who are agile, durable, and have good stamina don't grow on trees.

errr.......the pats went 3-4 since the first moment BB got here