Wilfork and uncapped year question?

Inquiring minds want to know... thank you for any responses.

1) If 2010 is uncapped, is Wilfork an RFA?
2) If he is an RFA do the Patriots tender him similar to traditional RFAs? (example, high tender, low tender, etc.)
3) Assumption that similar to a franchise player he will have to receive at least 110% of current salary? which will be about $2.5M

If this is true we can franchise Seymour and extend Wilfork at the highest tender for about $14M.

4) When do we find out if 2010 is uncapped?

As far as question #4 goes, 2010 is uncapped unless something changes. NFLPA needs to decide on a replacement for Gene Upshaw first, and then they can start working on a new CBA.

1) No, Wilfork would be an UFA.
2) Wilfork would be franchised if necessary, and again in 2011.
3) I don't think that we'd franchise Seymour.
4) I don't know the CBA deadline, but it should be in 2010. Unless a new CBA is signed, 2010 is an uncapped year.

cstjohn17 said:

Inquiring minds want to know... thank you for any responses.

1) If 2010 is uncapped, is Wilfork an RFA?
2) If he is an RFA do the Patriots tender him similar to traditional RFAs? (example, high tender, low tender, etc.)
3) Assumption that similar to a franchise player he will have to receive at least 110% of current salary? which will be about $2.5M

If this is true we can franchise Seymour and extend Wilfork at the highest tender for about $14M.

4) When do we find out if 2010 is uncapped?

Click to expand...

jmt57 said:

As far as question #4 goes, 2010 is uncapped unless something changes. NFLPA needs to decide on a replacement for Gene Upshaw first, and then they can start working on a new CBA.

Click to expand...

Gene Upshaw is dead.

He was perhaps the most management friendly union leader in the history of professional sports. Don't expect the next guy to cut the deals that Upshaw cut when he was alive.

If 2010 is uncapped, we can Franchise TAG 2 players...

What it means: Possibilities abound for uncapped NFL year - USATODAY.com

mgteich said:

1) No, Wilfork would be an UFA.
2) Wilfork would be franchised if necessary, and again in 2011.
3) I don't think that we'd franchise Seymour.
4) I don't know the CBA deadline, but it should be in 2010. Unless a new CBA is signed, 2010 is an uncapped year.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much.

In an uncapped year is the rule that players with 6 years or more are free agents (UFA) and players with less than 6 years are restricted (RFAs)?

I am starting to believe that in 2010 we will only have one of the big three free agents as Patriots (Wilfork, Seymour and Mankins).

I certainly don't have a full understanding of the CBA, however, if 2010 is truly uncapped, is there any reason a team couldn't give a player an extended contract with a huge salary in the first season with smaller amounts in subsequent years in the expectation that there will be a cap eventually?

So a 6 year, 80 million contract would be structured as:
2010: 75 million
2011: 1 million
2012: 1 million
2013: 1 million
2014: 1 million
2015: 1 million

If this is the case, would it not be in Wilforks best interest to wait to sign a huge contract next season?

Scott37 said:

I certainly don't have a full understanding of the CBA, however, if 2010 is truly uncapped, is there any reason a team couldn't give a player an extended contract with a huge salary in the first season with smaller amounts in subsequent years in the expectation that there will be a cap eventually?

So a 6 year, 80 million contract would be structured as:
2010: 75 million
2011: 1 million
2012: 1 million
2013: 1 million
2014: 1 million
2015: 1 million

If this is the case, would it not be in Wilforks best interest to wait to sign a huge contract next season?

Click to expand...

If the players aren't interested I will take that kind of salary.

Scott37 said:

I certainly don't have a full understanding of the CBA, however, if 2010 is truly uncapped, is there any reason a team couldn't give a player an extended contract with a huge salary in the first season with smaller amounts in subsequent years in the expectation that there will be a cap eventually?

So a 6 year, 80 million contract would be structured as:
2010: 75 million
2011: 1 million
2012: 1 million
2013: 1 million
2014: 1 million
2015: 1 million

If this is the case, would it not be in Wilforks best interest to wait to sign a huge contract next season?

Click to expand...

I picture Vince Wilfork trying to run in Tracy Morgan's solid gold shoes from 30 Rock.

Scott37 said:

I certainly don't have a full understanding of the CBA, however, if 2010 is truly uncapped, is there any reason a team couldn't give a player an extended contract with a huge salary in the first season with smaller amounts in subsequent years in the expectation that there will be a cap eventually?

So a 6 year, 80 million contract would be structured as:
2010: 75 million
2011: 1 million
2012: 1 million
2013: 1 million
2014: 1 million
2015: 1 million

If this is the case, would it not be in Wilforks best interest to wait to sign a huge contract next season?

Click to expand...

Doesn't anyone have any insight on this question?

Scott37 said:

Doesn't anyone have any insight on this question?

Click to expand...

Well Scott, while this may be a great way to avoid cap troubles and please the player. If Wilfork were to be awful after 2010 or have a career threatening injury and it was in the best interests of the team to cut him, now the Patriots just paid him 75 mill for 1 year. It is sort of the opposite of backloading a contract.

Plus, even if he was healthy, sooner or later Wilfork would get tired of being paid only $1 mill a year and likely be less motivated to play. And there would be no threat of the Patriots cutting him because he is such a low cap hit. Plus I wouldn't be shocked if that started dipping into veteran minimums at some point.

TeamPats said:

Well Scott, while this may be a great way to avoid cap troubles and please the player. If Wilfork were to be awful after 2010 or have a career threatening injury and it was in the best interests of the team to cut him, now the Patriots just paid him 75 mill for 1 year. It is sort of the opposite of backloading a contract.

Plus, even if he was healthy, sooner or later Wilfork would get tired of being paid only $1 mill a year and likely be less motivated to play. And there would be no threat of the Patriots cutting him because he is such a low cap hit. Plus I wouldn't be shocked if that started dipping into veteran minimums at some point.

Click to expand...

But, it's still a very good question. He was just going to extremes to give you an example.

For instance, look at Haynesworth's contract. $50 million over 4 years.

Now, imagine we were in position to give Haynesworth a $50 million contract next year. What if we paid $20 million in the first year, then $10 million in each year after that? Guaranteeing a few of those years?

I did go a bit to the extreme. My point is that in general a player is given a large signing bonus, which is generally prorated across the life of a contract for cap purposes. If 2010 is truly uncapped why not state the entire bonus as first year salary, then post smaller figures over the remaining years with the expectation that there will be some type of cap in the future.

Scott37 said:

I did go a bit to the extreme. My point is that in general a player is given a large signing bonus, which is generally prorated across the life of a contract for cap purposes. If 2010 is truly uncapped why not state the entire bonus as first year salary, then post smaller figures over the remaining years with the expectation that there will be some type of cap in the future.

Click to expand...

Death, career ending injury, nagging performance limiting injury(s), Bill Polian rule change #137-1,359 affecting the defense, etc. There's all sorts of good reasons to minimize giant lump sum payouts.

Not to mention the usual moron who forgets how much money he's already made and will hold out in year 4 of the said 80-million contract because he is "currently underpaid"