A Wilfork/NT discussion

[supafly]

I agree with just about everything that AzPatsFan said, and feel that his posts are well thought out and on the money alot.

The only thing I feel differently is that it'll take approx. 7 mill / per to sign Vince long term.

Seymour is the irreplaceable one, slightly ahead of Wilfork--but like I said before, it's an argument that alot wouldn't necessarily agree with

 

[signbabybrady]

First of all define Big Money. The franchise DT rate is only $6.5 million or so. So Wilfork on a long term deal $5.5 million+.

But to your real question. No I don't feel Wilfork is irreplaceable. He is good but not necessarily a HOF player. We have won championships with other NTs, Seymour, (yes Seymour), Washington, Traylor, etc.

There is an irreplaceabl player on the roster. There are a lot of people who are un-informed who seem to think a "Foundation" Defensive lineman who wil go directly to Canton like all the other foundation linemen, Alan Page, Merlin Olsen, Bob Lilley, Dan White, Dan Hampton, Reggie Wright is easily replaceable by some clod drafted in the third round. And we have such a player. The highest draft pick Belichick has made with the Pats, Richard Seymour.

Whether I would keep Richard Seymour is beside the Point, Bill Belichick will. He knows that Seymour stops the run just as much as Wilfork or more.

Bill also knows that Seymour provides ALL the interior defensive line pass rush for virtually the entire three man line. Belichick knows the Seymour IS irreplaceable and will pay and re-sign him, for about the money he is currently making, with a small boost.

He also knows that is the same money the Haynesworth actually as opposed to theoretically, will get. Seymour is finishing up on a 4 year $40 million deal. Haynesworth just signed real $41 million 4 year deal, advertised with never to be seen options, to make it an 8 year deal for $100 million.

incidentally, Belichick wil slit his wrists before he will let either go, I believe. He'd cut half the team to find the money. He knows how you build a Defense.

The Franchise number will be going up next year.....I would be Happy with 6.5 but if I were him I would be asking for more.

I agree that Seymour is the real key he is a bonified hall of famer and he could only be about half way thru his career. I don't want to lose either but it will be costly to keep both.

 

[Isaac]

If we got a Ted Washington or Keith Traylor type (which is easier said than done but..)

Yes, easier said than done...

Ted Washington was one of the great all-time 3-4 NTs. When he played for the Patriots, you simply couldn't run up the middle--it was remarkable. Every time a team tried to run up the middle I'd call out "Don't bother trying!"--and I was always right. I'd compare it to Deion Sanders in his coverage prime. I hope Washington makes the HOF. Wilfork has a long way to go before he is as good as Washington at run-stuffing, but maybe he'll get there (though he ultimately may just not have the body size to truly match Washington).

Keith Traylor was weak and the defense suffered with him.

 

[RayClay]

Nice articles, but i have to laugh at the perpetuation of the huge pool of Patriots De/OLB converts myth.

This allowed New England to stock up on players at a position the Pats' coaching staff specialized in teaching and helped them in acquiring personnel. Since they were looking for a certain type of linebacker, their talent pool was larger than that of other teams, and included college defensive linemen and any undersized defensive lineman struggling to hang on with another NFL team.

Let's see, third round undersized DE convert? Well there's Bruschi...and there's............

OK, how about undersized Defensive lineman struggling to hang on? Well Vrabel wasn't struggling to hang on, but he was stuck behind established starters. And he'd already been converted to linebacker...but we'll include him in that vast category.

Others include...??? Um Colvin was a top free agent coming off double digit sack years.

McGinest was the fourth overall pick. Not exactly cheap because of that huge pool...

Plus, the pool of college linebackers mostly didn't fit our system, in other words, a huge pool of linebackers we wouldn't pick.

This allowed New England to stock up on players at a position the Pats' coaching staff specialized in teaching and helped them in acquiring personnel.

So, we converted and taught Bruschi. He was the huge pool. Vrabel was already a 3-4 linebacker. Who did we teach? Matt Chatham? Maugaula Tuitele? Tully Banta Cain?

 

[Wotan_the_Wanderer]

Plus, the pool of college linebackers mostly didn't fit our system, in other words, a huge pool of linebackers we wouldn't pick.

So, we converted and taught Bruschi. He was the huge pool. Vrabel was already a 3-4 linebacker. Who did we teach? Matt Chatham? Maugaula Tuitele? Tully Banta Cain?

You're right to question that part of the article. Other than Tully, I can only come up with Klecko, though he wasn't a DE and though he was tried at ILB rather than OLB with the Pats, and Justin Kuperikeis (sp?).

I think though that a case can be made the Pats have tried to convert smaller DLinemen into 3-4 LBs, but finding that it's easier said than done, they've had to pay going rate for playmakers like Colvin and AD even with two starting caliber OLB already on the squad.

 

[RayClay]

You're right to question that part of the article. Other than Tully, I can only come up with Klecko, though he wasn't a DE and though he was tried at ILB rather than OLB with the Pats, and Justin Kuperikeis (sp?).

I think though that a case can be made the Pats have tried to convert smaller DLinemen into 3-4 LBs, but finding that it's easier said than done, they've had to pay going rate for playmakers like Colvin and AD even with two starting caliber OLB already on the squad.

I think BB had hoped to find many cheap tweeners who didn't fit well into the 4-3. Then more teams adopted the 3-4 and it simply didn't work out that way.

It's not just this article, many will cite the "fact" that Belichick converts low round DE's into OLB starters. Being the annoying nit that i am, I feel the need to point out that's more wishful thinking than fact.

Of course over the years, between Parcell's drafts and the occasional FA signing, they have acquired enough of these DE/OLB types to play that defense.

 

[satz]

TED vs Vince


In 3-4 the running between tackles is defended by the triangle of 1 NT and 2 ILB. This triangle is the key in defending aginst the RUN.

TED - Bru in his prime and Ted Johnson in his prime and both at 250 and 270 respectively. TED at 350 lb was alot less atheletic but the sheer mass of the triangle was diffcult to move by OL .He was NOT in 3rd down.


Vince - He was a rookie and has a come a long way.He played alot of 3rd down this year which TED never did.
Now lets see the triangle. a aging bru , monty and other crappy ILB. When AD was playing ILB with an aging bru we were avg 80 yds/game. then OLB went down and AD never playerd ILB.

Now Mayo and Guyton inside with vince we are giving up close to 100 lbs in the triangle to the old setup. guyton and mayo are not big enough to asked to take on gaurds all game especially guyton who is taller and build long and lanky with speed.

its hard to compare 2 individuals in a team game .I have used the triangle which is 70% of the snaps and feel it might be a better barometer.

vince will get better as he ages as every NT/DT we have seen historically the NT needs not only strength and size but experience hence you see alot of 35+ NT in the league. He is going be a very good player for us and as NT do not make it to the HOF due to lack of stats ,but he has a real good chance of becoming the first one if he follows the trend of other NT who come on stronger around 28 and play 6 yrs of great football.