BrickPat

I don't disagree with this but as much as I hate to admit it Felger made a good point with his "the cap is crap" schtick in citing the Manning lead Colts. They never seemed impacted by the dreaded cap when it came to retaining their quality players.

AndyJohnson

I think Vollmer is gone.

Ivan

Back to my original response, you're a troll. You don't understand the argument I made and your response to it is irrelevant.

AndyJohnson

But he is right. The choice was Seymour or Wilfork, they were not willing to pay both at the level they wanted. Seymour was traded a year earlier because he was under contract, and couldn't be traded in 2010 because he would have been a FA.
Every deal has consequences of other players not brought in or resigned. They don't line up one to one. A Seymour contract would still be affecting the cap here. Its not the first year, its all the years, and you can't just throw around your limited number of big money deals indiscriminately, unless you wish to be the Jets.

ATippett56

Sebastian Vollmer is not the be all and end all of right tackles for the New England Patriots. The New England Patriots won two Super Bowls with Tom Ashworth and Brandon Gorin playing right tackle during the 2003-2004 NFL Seasons.

__________________
The End of the Chad Ochostinko Era!

kennyb

I don't know that they ever had a lot of high FA contracts. But I think some teams got away with high contracts b/c the cap was growing. They were gambling that it would continue to grow and it did. Thus the prediction of "cap hell" never came true for many clubs.

Kenneth Sims

Not to mention Greg Robinson-Randall in 2001.

Ivan

First, i have never argued that there are no consequences to big money deals, there is obviously a cap and they have to be under it, however i don't agree that he is right because i don't think Seymour was going to be re-signed under any circumstances, they knew he wanted too much and weren't going to pay it.

Second, I have never argued simply to give Welker anything they demand but have argued that he would take a very fair deal to the patriots, which would be in the 4-40 area, and possibly less.

Third, the question I posed was which re-signings did the Brady. Wilfork, and Mankins deals prevent from happening and still haven't seen evidence of any, other than conjecture that it led them to trade seymour long before signing a deal with Wilfork, which was actually contentious and may not have even happened, in which case you would be arguing that a deal that didn't exist cost them Seymour.

Fourth, they have blown tens and tens of millions of dollars on player moves that didn't help them, so if the concern is that they may overspend on Welker by a couple million a year then they should be able to make that meager amount up simply by being a little smarter in some of their riskieer moves.



Last point, the deal i recommended is 4-40, if you think that will break them by all means make that argument that they can't pay him that and why, i would be interested to see it.

PP2

That's because they chose to play a high-risk game by putting most of their money into the 22 players that are on the field most of the time which meant a season-ending injury would be devastating to them.

We, on the other hand have used a "spread-the-wealth" approach which resulted in a deep bench and every time there's been a major injury to a player, that player was more often than not, adequately replaced.

mgteich

1) We can probably handle 4/$40M, but 3/$30M makes more sense. I would note that the first 2 years would likely need to be guaranteed.

2) We will need restructures by Brady and Wilfork this year or next.

3) Vollmer would likely be gone.

4) The open question is whether is how we will be able to afford to re-sign or replace 2 WR's and 2 CB's. We will draft for our needs at DL.

My gut feeling is that Welker will be franchised, or let loose, or both.