Felger: Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: Felger:Wilfork offered to Raiders first

no.......not since they have brace on the bench

I don't buy it mostly because it doesn't make sense........wilforks franchise number is 7M......he's guaranteed to be here 2 years.......he's also younger

It seems that Felger may be inferring that the Pats were shopping Vince. It seems that the Raiders called and it's evident they need D line help to stop the run.

Therefore, the discussion has to start somewhere. I woulf guess Vince was the stalking horse because we are talking the Raiders. Also, with the Raiders, you never know what you can steal.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Re: Felger:Wilfork offered to Raiders first

I think Felger feels he's died and gone to heaven with this story. He loves to pit people against each other even if it's a detriment to the teams he covers.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

Not to date myself but part of me thinks that Will McDonough would have had the answer to every single one of our questions in about 15 minutes.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

EEI is at least trying, cleaned up those long twice hourly breaks and made them into 90 seconds.. that is a welcome change, also this week they spent beaucoup time on the Patriots... some of it was silly, but better than listeining to crap about arm slots and the like.

Agree 100%

 

[italia44]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

I changed the thread title, in that case (from "was offered to" to "was talked about with")

I wasn't taking a shot at you,shmessey....the thread title was fine.

I wasn't only remarking that felger is bouncing from one theory to the next...I think he has ADD!

 

[Synovia]

Re: Felger:Wilfork offered to Raiders first

It seems that Felger may be inferring that the Pats were shopping Vince. It seems that the Raiders called and it's evident they need D line help to stop the run.

Right, him being talked about could have been:


AL:"we'll give you a 2nd round pick for Wilfork"
BB:"no."
AL:"How bout Seymour"
BB:"Make it a future 1st, and you have a deal"

 

[Deus Irae]

I believe this was already talked about, or at least mentioned, in the thread about the Raiders play-by-play guy, actually.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Felger:Wilfork offered to Raiders first

Right, him being talked about could have been:


AL:"we'll give you a 2nd round pick for Wilfork"
BB:"no."
AL:"How bout Seymour"
BB:"Make it a future 1st, and you have a deal"

You forgot a line...

AL:"we'll give you a 2nd round pick for Wilfork"
BB:"no."
AL:"How bout Seymour"
BB:"Make it a future 1st, and you have a deal"
AL: "Let me think it over my Metimucial and prune shake"

 

[shmessy]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

I wasn't taking a shot at you,shmessey....the thread title was fine.

I wasn't only remarking that felger is bouncing from one theory to the next...I think he has ADD!

There never was any offense taken, Italia. I appreciated the clarification and immediately thought it was important to clarify the thread title, since "offered to" conveyed a very different meaning than "was talked about". Once it was noted in this thread that Felcher was changing his original verbage, I felt it was necessary to edit the title to be more accurate.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

Belichick must really like Ron Brace.

Or Myron Pryor, considering the fact that we kept Wilfork.

 

[The Boston Patriot]

Says from a reliable source and wilfork knows that.

Borges probably,,,

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Ha, I believe it was SVN that said in a previous thread that Felger would stir this up soon enough. Good call

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Is this really news?

The Raiders came calling and were offering up to a 1st (either 2010 or 2011).

BB by all accounts, appears to be "changing things up on the front 7", and has also had the benefit of doubt of watching the rooks through the entire OTA's and pre-season knows exactly what he wants, coupled with his long term goals of the team and what is, and isn't likely as it relates who can be signed long term or not.

Sounds like the Raiders came calling with an offer of 2010 1st for Wilfork, and through a series of back and forth, the trade came out as a 2011 1st for Seymour.............

All perfectly acceptable and not the least bit objectionable to Wilfork.

For all we know, the Vikings came to Bill with "we'll give you every pick in every draft for the next 10 years for Brady. That doesn't translate to "BB shopping Brady"

More Mediot "make something from nothing".

 

[BPF]

Michael Lombardi was on 98.5 Monday and said that the Raiders asked for Wilfork when they were discussing Burgess and that the Patriots said no. He also said that the Pats were asking for a 2nd and a 5th in 2010 initially for Seymour and that the Raiders offered a 1 in 2010 -- then the Pats asked for the 1 in 2011 and it was done.

 

[BradyFTW!]

His source is the Raiders' PA guy (who is close to Al Davis), isn't it? He was saying that the Patriots initially offered Wilfork, but the Raiders wanted Seymour instead.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

Belichick must really like Ron Brace.

But Brace is an NT/DT. He's not an end like Seymour. The guy who will likely replace Seymour is Green.

 

[Brady to Brown]

I don't believe this for a second.

Maybe Al said I will give you a first for Wilfork, at which point Belichick laughed.

No way.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

I like Felger more than most (he's entertaining, if nothing else) and I think this is probably true. One of my first thoughts when the trade happened was "why not Wilfork?" It seemed like for both sides, a Wilfork trade would've made more sense (presuming the Raiders actually intend to sign the player long term, which apparently, they didn't think that far ahead).

Personally, I'd rather have one year of Seymour than one year of Wilfork, and I guess the Raiders felt the same way or the price was too high.

I would probably agree that I would rather have Seymour for 2009 than Wilfork (but Seymour appears MUCH more prone to losing time to an injury) but who would you rather have for 2010-2013? THAT really is the issue. The Pats didnt chose to not want Seymour this year, they chose to not want him beyond this year at the required price. Then they chose to get something in exchange for the one year of service.

 

[aeg]

Re: Felger:Wilfork Was Talked About with Raiders first

Not to date myself but part of me thinks that Will McDonough would have had the answer to every single one of our questions in about 15 minutes.

Second that!

 

[IcyPatriot]

So what is Bob Lobel saying?

Where is Lobel ... he always had good analysis when he was corned.