ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Wilfork is a tough situation for me to have an opinion on. On the one hand he is very valuable to the run defense, especially with a question mark at RDE. He's also one of the few veteran leaders left on this team after the departure of Seymour, Harrison, Vrabel, and Bruschi. That increases his value for the short term while we rebuild this defense's identity.
On the other hand, he's a part time player. And regardless of what happens this year, I believe (pure speculation, but it's a hunch) that there WILL be a cap once a new CBA is agreed upon. Tying up too much future cap money on a player who plays 2 downs (not to mention big guys break down more often) and it's questionable.
I think overall though I want him to stay. I just don't see a reasonable way to replace him right now.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Wilfork had 43 tackles in 13 games this season as a 3-4 nose tackle. No sacks, but 3-4 NTs rarely get sacks.
Based purely on my observations watching the games this season, I'm going to guess that 90% of those 43 tackles were within 1 yard or less of the line of scrimmage. Those are drive killers and as good as a sack in my book.
For comparison's sake against other 3-4 nose tackles:
Casey Hampton had 43 tackles and 1 sack in 16 games
B.J. Raji had 25 tackles and 1 sack in 13 games
Haloti Ngata had 35 tackles and 1.5 sacks in 15 games
Quote:
"I don't get sacks," Wilfork said. "I don't get tackles for losses. A 2-yard gain, for me, I like that." This is the self-deprecating attitude found in even the best nose tackles.
Location: Central MA by way of the great state of New Hampshire
Posts: 7,377
Re: How important is Wilfork to the Pats?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoWhalers
Wilfork had 43 tackles in 13 games this season as a 3-4 nose tackle. No sacks, but 3-4 NTs rarely get sacks.
Based purely on my observations watching the games this season, I'm going to guess that 90% of those 43 tackles were within 1 yard or less of the line of scrimmage. Those are drive killers and as good as a sack in my book.
For comparison's sake against other 3-4 nose tackles:
Casey Hampton had 43 tackles and 1 sack in 16 games
B.J. Raji had 25 tackles and 1 sack in 13 games
Haloti Ngata had 35 tackles and 1.5 sacks in 15 games
The guy is elite, but our linebackers were not able to take advantage of that this year.
Ngata plays DT in the 3-4. Gregg plays the nose now.
Your points are taken though. Vince is an outstanding player. Personally, I just don't know if hes worth $30m in guarantees. Then again, it would be terrible if he moved on.
__________________
“I'm not really concerned about the other 31 teams,” - Bill Belichick
"If a player has talent and doesn't succeed, that means that they either don't want to be successful or I have failed as a coach." - Bill Belichick
Last edited by robertweathers; 01-22-2010 at 01:33 PM..
With our current linebacker core he is way important ... right behind Brady. But if we had 4 real good linebackers like before then we just 3 big strong 2-gappers to tie up the O-linemen. We did great under that system ... 3 Super Bowls ... so I'm not worried. Either we pay Vince or we stick Brace there and spend Vince's money on a few linebackers who can fly.
With our current linebacker core he is way important ... right behind Brady. But if we had 4 real good linebackers like before then we just 3 big strong 2-gappers to tie up the O-linemen. We did great under that system ... 3 Super Bowls ... so I'm not worried. Either we pay Vince or we stick Brace there and spend Vince's money on a few linebackers who can fly.
I see your point and understand what your saying, we could let Vince go and use the money saved on LB's who can fly. But the only problem is: A: what money LB's are going to be available B: Lets say we do upgrade at the LB position, how effective are they including Mayo without a mammoth like Wilfork taking at least two OL a play.
I think the trading of Seymour (or Wilfork as previously discussed) was all about money.
2) Seymour is a couple of years older.
3) I think Wilfork will less cantakerous to sign than Seymour, jus a feeling on my part.
Someone mentioned Kelley Gregg, FA in 2000, not even drafted, how I understand it. He is a newer version of that fire hydrant Burt the Giants had during their glory years, I bet BB would like a player like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradyManny
He's as important as any defensive player only playing 50-60% of the defensive snaps can be. He's top 3-5 in importance on this team, as Mayo says, but I do think it's worth throwing the disclaimer in there that he is not a 3-down player.
Personally, I thought Seymour was more important b/c he could play all 3 downs. Clearly the coaching staff and FO thought otherwise. Granted, our run defense wasn't as good this year with or without Wilfork (4.4 YPC in 09 vs. 4.1 in 08; 110 YPG in 09 vs 107 PG in 08) - likely due to the linebacker player, but also the absence of Sey.
But let's put it this way - we have to re-sign Wilfork. If Brace had shown signs of life, maybe we'd have some leverage, but we need big Vince back.
Don't get me wrong, Wilfork is a great player, but the media, commentators and people on this board overrate him. It's probably because of a lack of talent and scheme, but the run defense has been worse since Wilfork has been a full time starter. With that said, there are two reasons the Pats need to keep him. First, because there isn't anybody better in free agency. Second, because it will create another need the Pats can't afford if they ever want to get better. Seriously, if they let Wilfork walk, NT will be the 1st priority in the draft as DE is already a need due to the trade of Seymour. If they continue this cycle of letting talent walk and trying to re-draft them, how are the Patriots ever going to get better at other positions?
Last edited by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?; 01-22-2010 at 07:57 PM..
i think wilfork is an essential part of the patriots. id liike to have him and 2 average DEs PLus above average pass rushing OLBs. i think there has to be some middle ground. i dont know if there are any OLBs available though, so its tough...obviously a ware or merriman type would be great but theyre either unavailable or guys you just dont want on your team. maybe theres an LT in the draft
Re: How important is Wilfork to the Pats?
Linear Mode
