Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PatriotsDaily.com, Jan 28, 2010.
Should The Patriots Re-Sign Vince Wilfork?
I said I doubt they will and that I'd be fine with that if they could get a 1st for him.
But I'm the stupidest poster here so for PD to even write about this topic is worrisome.
There is no question the Pats need him on this team. If the Pats let him walk I believe it would be the biggest mistake in the BB era here in NE. I believe that the Pats should give him a long term deal, not Haynesworth type money, but enough to make him happy. The guy is only 28, give him a 5 or 6 year deal. That only brings him to 33 or 34, he definitely has 5 or 6 years left in the tank. He isnt an every down DLmen, like the article said he only plays about 50% of the snaps. If they let him walk that creates another huge need on defense, maybe even more pressing than a pass rusher. The Pats cannot afford to lose this guy and have yet another huge hole to fill on this defense.
I agree with what you are saying. If they franchise him, they will
probably end up having to trade him for a 2011 draft pick.
Should the Pats re-sign Wilfork? That would be like asking if we should try to breathe today. Of course they should try re-sign him. Outside of Brady, Wilfork is the most important guy on this team.
Sign him up longterm maybe 6 years, backload the contract. Cut/trade him in the final year... sorry this a BEEEEZNISS
For the record, I think that Wilfork is worth $10M a year. I agree that he is worth more than anyone but Brady. That being said, I don't think such a deal will be signed by the patriots without much more clarity regarding the CBA.
Also, I am not at all sure that the patriots are willing to pay Wilfork huge bucks in any case. They may be willing to have Williams/Brace or Cody/Brace. The big decision may be whether to accept a 1st or have Wilfork play his last year and have no compensation other than a 2012 3rd.
we need to re- sign him. No one is more imprtant to the defense than Wilfork. Im disgusted with the thought that ron brace could potentially be the starter at the position next year. Wilfork was due a better contract years ago. since our last superbowl victory there has vbeen a disturbing trend of letting young talent that we drafted and cultivated go (Samuel, Branch, Givens, Seymour, even david thomas). sure, some of them werent as valuable to their new teams but they were valuable to US,and thats all that matters. by losing those guys we lost a valuable link to the past success of this team, hence the lack of leadership. Lets not do the same with the most valuable asset on defense, Pay him accordingly.
Are you disgusted with idea of Cody or Williams starting at NT next year with Brace as the backup?
Even though Cody has experience in this type of system, I do not want him. The questions about his work ethic and conditioning are enough for me. However, I reserve the right to change my mind as the draft nears.
Depends on where they will be drafted. Our biggest need right now is obviously the pass rush and that should be addressed with our first round pick because they are not any solid FA players that I see the Pats taking a shot at. If we select one of those players with one of our 2nd round picks then I am open to the idea, but definitely not using our 1st round pick on one of them.
With that being said I think the Patriots need to resign Wilfork, his value to this team is incredibly high, not only with his play but also his leadership. The defense lacked leadership this past season and if Wilfork is let go who is the veteran leader on that defense that knows the Patriot way and how to win? There really isnt that guy besides Wilfork. Letting Wilfork walk away would be taking a 2 steps backwards instead of a step forward.
I will leave the negotiating process or lack of in another thread.........
the question is whether the pats are going to simply blow the defense up.......
currently on the roster and under contract:
you could say that the pats are only set at starter in 3 spots (4 if you include butler)
maybe the idea is to tag and trade wilfork. maybe the chiefs, browns, or broncos would entertain the notion of giving up their 2010 first rounder to the pats.......maybe the deal is already in place with one of the former pats cronies
even with wilfork, the defense is full of holes....who knows, maybe BB is sick of not being able to find the kind of 3-4 LB's he wants and is going to switch to a tampa 2
the defense has been getting slower and less athletic since 2004
As you will see in the combine, Dan Wlliams is NOT slow.
The idea of tagging and then trading Wilfork for a 2010 first rounder is an interesting one. I am still not sure if it is worth it though. Wilfork has proven he is one of the top DT's in the league.
BB will never switch his defense from the 3-4, he has never coached a team that didnt use the 3-4
Dumb article. The lines been holding the fort while we try to play a 3-4 with one or two linebackers.
He'll be 34 at the end of a contract. Nose tackles get better with age. Strength endures, it's the legs of speedsters that go.
He even gives examples of older succesful NTs.
Since he makes no points well, I'd say we should sign Wilfork if we can.
If we can?
If Kraft wants to pay Wilfork $10M a year, I suspect the deal CAN be done.
you're talking about a guy who is not here........you are also talking about going into the season without a guy who has shown he can play the nose as a regular
makes some sense if you are blowing the defense up........but the defense is already blown up anyway.
and cody runs a 5.8/40.......you could probably wake up traylor right now and he could outrun that
depends on the mindset of the front office......maybe they look at the rest of the defensive roster and tell themselves it won't matter in 2010 if they have wilfork or not.......they are going to be mediocre and must go through the pains of devevloping younger players now instead of trying to keep the status quo going........
who knows.....maybe they think they will move wilfork, get the first rounder, and then backfill with someone like ryan pickett for less money and pick up the draft pick along the way.......
Actually it is the opposite. The defense has been getting faster and more athletic.
That shouldn't in any way to be confused with getting better since 2004 which it defintely hasn't been.
Ditto. I agree that if the Pats ever need to swallow their contract philosophy on a player, it can be argued that Wilfork is one guy they absolutely need and has earned that respect up to this point.
See if the Pats do what you're saying and settle for mediocrity they are taking another step backwards. That phase was supposed to be this past season in developing a young defense and getting them experience. I dont see them as being mediocre this season with the addition of a pass rusher, that is what they need to get over the hump and be a solid defense. The secondary got the experience that it needed this past season and take a step in the right direction to getting back towards the dominant Patriot defenses of the Super Bowl years. Wilfork is a major part in the defense, probably the most valuable player on that side of the ball.
Samuel wanted shutdown corner money to be solid, gambling #1 corner. There are better ways to use that money.
Branch decided not to honor the last year of his contract, and you can't set the precedent that you're going to let any player tear up the last year of his deal for a better one. You'll be flooded with holdouts.
Givens was a nice player.
Seymour was highly unlikely to resign after this year, so we dealt him for a good chance at a top 10 pick. Given the last two top ten picks for BB were Seymour and Mayo, I feel confident we will get a great player for 6+ years in the future, as opposed to a great player for one year now. Also, I would not call Seymour "young" talent. Talent sure, but he's almost 30 now.
David Thomas has had some nice moments for the Saints, but he brought nothing to the table that Watson and Baker can't do in tandem.
And Dan Williams runs a 5.23.
I don't negotitate contracts. I'm just saying the reasoning in the article is faulty.
I hope they can resign him. Just as the secondary looks promising for the future, i don't think an entire rebuild of the front seven will augur well for the next few years.
Exactly. In another thread, I pointed out that franchising Wilfork and trading him could really lose the locker room for Belichick. Wilfork is unquestionably a leader on defense, and one of the few veterans left on the team.
If we franchise him, we send the message to our team that the Patriots aren't willing to reward stand-out players for their contributions. You have to take a pay cut if you want to stay here. That is going to create a very unattractive environment for any potential free agents.
The Patriots need to show that they don't consider their players to be poker chips. I think the Richard Seymour and Mike Vrabel trades did more to hurt the locker room than people might imagine. It said, "We don't care how important you are, everyone is expendable." While that's true in the NFL, the Patriots simultaneously haven't shown that they are willing to go to the opposite end of the spectrum and reward their best players.
Re-sign Wilfork to a deal he wants. I think many of our locker room issues with regard to respect for Belichick would begin to ease if the Pats showed they truly value their players. I get the feeling that many guys on the team aren't buying into Belichick's system because of the way they think he deals with players. Rewarding Wilfork, after all he's done the past year to not push it, would go a long way toward repairing that trust.
I was just throwing that out there as a possibility....I mean one could argue that they were successful with finding the fattest guy around that year (washington, traylor) rather than having the franchise NT....does free up $$$ to pursue other talents and needs
maybe the concept of long term big money commitment to wilfork prevents the pats from pursuing someone like peppers and that having a cheaper alternative in someone like pickett makes it doable.......and picking up a first rounder along the way that can turn into rolando mcclain
theoretically speaking if the pats trade wilfork to denver or KC, and then the pats use that pick for rolando mcclain, their own first rounder on jared odrick, sign peppers and pickett, and then maybe jerry hughes in the 2nd round, you suddenly have:
its a huge stretch, but it is possible that keeping wilfork prevents the kind of overall makeover that BB is looking for.......maybe the issue is the bigger picture
yes they should re-sign wilfork, and i don't agree with some OP who say we shoud trade him for a #1 and then draft a rookie NT with that pick....? thats just crazy.
if they are going to trade him for a #1 then there is no reason to run the 3-4 next year. they don't have the LB's to run it and have a hard time finding them.
move to the 4-3 and put guyton, and mayo. were they can have more of a impact guyton at 4-3 OLB and mayo at MLB. use the two #1's on two fast DE's like Everson Griffen, and Carlos Dunlap, put warren and wright at DT and draft. Eric Norwood, in the 2th round to play the other OLB spot.
and dan williams aint exaclty known as the hardest worker or the sharpest tool in the shed.....
I believe in the absence of wilfork, that his replacement is already in the NFL
I see what you're saying and I am not necessarily saying that I completely disagree with it. Like you said it is a stretch and is asking for a lot to happen and a lot of pieces to fall into place. I just think the Pats are better off signing Wilfork to a long term deal
Separate names with a comma.