Patriots Brass Concerned about Wilfork?

[patfanken]

Just another "report" based on NOTHING! A fabrication designed to cement and image in the public's eye that the era of the Patriots of dominance is OVER........AND that's just great by me. I have missed being the under dog for a long time now, and its great to have our team underestimated.

Personally I think its ludicrous for fans to get upset about all these rankings, etc that come out during the slowest part of the off season. Its nothing more than a guy with an agenda's opinion. The only difference is that HIS opinion has a wider audience than yours or mine,

 

[Deus Irae]

I remember at least one 'significant' poster on this site talking about weight concerns with Wilfork before the contract was signed. There were others discussing it as well but, but here are a couple of his posts:

Both this player and this team know that given Vince's genetic makeup his carrying this weight well into his 30's projects as risk of more than a career. They also both know that maintaining playing weight and condition during a hold out or lock out could be problematic. He did what he obviously felt was in Vince Wilfork's best interest in 2008-09.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/317995-vince-wilfork-weei-page6.html#post1711728

Perillo yesterday touched on this relating how every year Vince predicts he will arrive in camp in better condition carrying less weight. So far he hasn't. Paul thinks the team shares the concern about his ability to carry his weight long range. As well as a concern about paying top tier money for a DL who is essentially a 2 down lineman. And one who might really struggle to maintain weight and conditioning if there is a lockout in 2011.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/318233-pd-should-patriots-even-re-sign-wilfork.html#post1711969

Now that the deal is made and someone in the media is bringing up the weight issue in a post-agreement setting, the board's becoming all about shooting the messenger again.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Now that the deal is made and someone in the media is bringing it up, the board's becoming all about shooting the messenger again.

Uh, if you re-read the posts the vast majority agree that Wilfie's weight should be an ongoing concern. Maybe 6 outa 20 posts were critical of the writer.

 

[Deus Irae]

Uh, if you re-read the posts the vast majority agree that Wilfie's weight should be an ongoing concern. Maybe 6 outa 20 posts were critical of the writer.

Yes, several posts were about shooting the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself, just as happened with the SMY thread, and the Silver thread, etc.... That was my point.

 

[MassPats38]

Yes, several posts were about shooting the messenger rather than dealing with the message itself, just as happened with the SMY thread, and the Silver thread, etc.... That was my point.

If the message is in the form on an unsubstantiated opinion catering to the non-Patriots fan base, then the messenger can expect to be shot at by the Patriots fan base. If you carry a hostile opinion, prepare to be treated as a hostile.

I try not to read a single opinion (e.g., SMY) and paint the author in that light (for example, Silver does not show a trend of those opinions, and is generally pretty good at reporting facts), but if you show a trend of hostile opinions (like Easterbrook and Borges on the subject of Belichick), expect to be shot on sight. That pattern becomes who you are as a writer, and the writer should expect no less.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I remember at least one 'significant' poster on this site talking about weight concerns with Wilfork before the contract was signed. There were others discussing it as well but, but here are a couple of his posts:



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/317995-vince-wilfork-weei-page6.html#post1711728



http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/318233-pd-should-patriots-even-re-sign-wilfork.html#post1711969

Now that the deal is made and someone in the media is bringing up the weight issue in a post-agreement setting, the board's becoming all about shooting the messenger again.

Both the team and the player (and his family) have always expressed concern about his weight potentially impacting his longevity. And in fashioning the contract they did they apparently felt they addressed their level of concern sufficiently with escalating weight and workout clauses. They never to my knowledge questioned his desire or intention to continue to perform at a high level once they showed him the money, which is what Ian sensed Cole was intimating they did in his piece. Nor did I.

As Cole breaks down 3-4 defenses throughout the NFL, he makes a statement regarding Vince Wilfork that sounds more like something he’s actually heard instead of an opinion.

“There’s a lot of concern with the Patriots management that Vince Wilfork is going to bloat now that he has gotten paid.”

That statement basically would leave the average fan to believe that someone within Patriots management actually believes that Wilfork is going to underperform this season now that he’s gotten a new contract. It’s kind of funny to hear considering that there have been no such reports this offseason regarding this subject from any other member of the Boston media.

 

[Deus Irae]

If the message is in the form on an unsubstantiated opinion catering to the non-Patriots fan base, then the messenger can expect to be shot at by the Patriots fan base. If you carry a hostile opinion, prepare to be treated as a hostile.

Your assertion about an "unsubstantiated opinion" has no evidence to back it up with regards to the article in question.

I try not to read a single opinion (e.g., SMY) and paint the author in that light (for example, Silver does not show a trend of those opinions, and is generally pretty good at reporting facts), but if you show a trend of hostile opinions (like Easterbrook and Borges on the subject of Belichick), expect to be shot on sight. That pattern becomes who you are as a writer, and the writer should expect no less.

If the story's accurate, the story's accurate, regardless of the perceived bias of the responsible author. Attacking the author doesn't change that.

 

[MassPats38]

Your assertion about an "unsubstantiated opinion" has no evidence to back it up with regards to the article in question.

I have said it before, and now repeat this, hopefully for the last time. The Silver article says "people close to Brady feel the organization isn’t displaying much urgency toward ensuring" Brady is satisfied financially. The title is "Growing Disconnect." If the conclusion is the title, the premise in the form of this quote does not support it. That is basic logic. If you are having a hard time fathoming this, I do not know how it can be stated any clearer than that. If you know of some other inside fact in that story, feel free to quote it as I have read that story repeatedly and found none.

If the source said he was unhappy, or felt a rift between Brady's and the organization's objectives, that would support the conclusion. Put Silver on the stand under oath and ask him to state his observations as to Brady's posture on the contract negotiations and, if this article reflect his understanding, he would have to answer "I lack personal knowledge of Tom Brady's position." Speculation/conjecture.

If the story's accurate, the story's accurate, regardless of the perceived bias of the responsible author. Attacking the author doesn't change that.

You seem to be struggling with the concept of reporting opinions and reporting fact-based stories. The stories discussed of late are no more than individual opinions lacking a present factual basis. If you like the opinion, say so rather than claiming the story is a fact. If it meets with your approval, defend the opinion rather than relying on the story as a basis in fact. It simply isn't.

If an author like Easterbrook walks in with an opinion constantly hostile the Pats, he deserves the reception he gets. If you find his opinion, or that of any author who embraces a consistently hostile view, appealing, then you, too, have a right to your opinion. That is not "shooting the messenger" as that phrase is typically defined, as "messengers" carry facts, not their individual opinions. Opinions are from individuals, and individuals absolutely can be called to the mat on their opinions. And yes, opinions are likely always accurate as they reflect the personal views of the author. That does not mean those opinions comport with reality.

For example, Silver saying Brady had a torn ACL was a fact-based story from inside sources - this story relies on inside dope indicating the absence of movement on a contract, which could imply any number of possible occurrences other than the conclusion offered. That is pure opinion and conjecture, extrapolating from loosely gathered, potentially unrelated occurrences.

 

[Ring 6]

I think the issue is that he implies someone in the Patriots organization intimated to him that they are concerned Wilfork will slack off. While it is possible, given the history of information flow from the Front Office to the media, it is very unlikely that such a comment would be made to anyone, and even less likely that it be made to a guy who has no history wth them.
The mo of the Patriots fromt office is totally opposite of one that would make such a comment, so the believability factor of the article is very questionable.
It doesnt make much difference either way. I am sure that every player who ever received a top tiercontract had someone predict the impending laziness. Hell, some are even questioning Tom Brady's commitment. The fly in the ointment is that even if the 'fact' were correct the chance that it would have been communicated to him is slim at best.