Wilfork seeking new deal...

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

Per Karen Guregian on the Herald blog:

"Nose tackle Vince Wilfork was among the 15 missing from today’s voluntary team activity. This could be a subtle message to management about the lack of movement on a new contract. Prior to the draft, Wilfork had indicated everyone seemed to be on the same page, and he understood the team had other priorities, but since then, there have apparently been no discussions.

Other notables not present for the session included Tedy Bruschi, Jerod Mayo, Brandon Meriweather, Sammy Morris and Jarvis Green.

Ty Warren also wasn’t there, but he’s rehabbing from off-season abdominal surgery.

In all, 76 of the 91 players currently on the roster participated."

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

What is the big deal? This is an OTA session, not minicamp or training camp. If he doesn't show up for minicamp or training camp, then I'll worry. OTAs are not mandatory are they?

I won't worry either way. He'll play once the regular season starts.

I hope they re-sign him but I don't really care. Sure I'd hate to lose him but if we have to save $10M and use it elsewhere, so be it. Bottom line, once you're in your second+ contract then everyone (except Brady) is expendable unless they take less per year because someone will take the money.

 

[ivanfears]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

according to riess he was not there today, i think he should show up do his job and the rest takes careof itself, by him not showing up i doubt the pats say oh my god we need to sign him rightaway, bad move on wilforks part

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

More than 75 players showed up. No, they are not technically mandatory. However, a player is expected to show up (as for any practice) unless arrangements have been made with the staff.

Yes, it is a bit early to worry.

What is the big deal? This is an OTA session, not minicamp or training camp. If he doesn't show up for minicamp or training camp, then I'll worry. OTAs are not mandatory are they?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

according to riess he was not there today, i think he should show up do his job and the rest takes careof itself, by him not showing up i doubt the pats say oh my god we need to sign him rightaway, bad move on wilforks part

This is a VOLUNTARY OTA. Quite a few players are not there. As is usually the case. Some will have valid reasons that have nothing to do with anything...

 

[DefenseRules]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

This is a VOLUNTARY OTA. Quite a few players are not there. As is usually the case. Some will have valid reasons that have nothing to do with anything...

AMEN Mo. I noticed that Warren, J. Green, Merriweather, Bruschi, and Sammy Morris are among some of the other starters who didn't participate either. Why is there no concern for their absence?

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

I mention the cap situation because it is relevant. I do NOT think that it would be prudent to secure cap money in order to use $10M of cap money to extend Wilfork to a Haynsworth type contract. I do NOT think we have any SERIOUS cap needs since I don't think it prudent to extend Wilfork this season. Some think it reasonable to use $10M of cap money for Pepper or Cassel. I am not one of those folks.

They've got 2/3 of the defensive line set to walk away at the end of the season, and they can only franchise one of them. That leaves the rest of the large group with contracts ending. Assuming that they want to keep the talented players, it would behoove the Patriots to extend some of them this season as a hedge against later developments. If the plan is to let the likes of Wilfork, Seymour, Neal, Mankins, Gostkowski, Kazcur and Watson go, then nothing needs to be done except preparing the fan base for a couple of 2005-like seasons in the near future.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

If the plan is to let the likes of Wilfork, Seymour, Neal, Mankins, Gostkowski, Kazcur and Watson go, then nothing needs to be done except preparing the fan base for a couple of 2005-like seasons in the near future.

Neal and Kaczur are JAGs. I hope they stay but I really don't care. Watson is already replaced but different but similar quality guys. Wilfork, Seymour, Mankins, Gotti, someone will take the money. It'll work out.

 

[NEPatriot]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

I hope Wilfork gets the deal.

 

[Clonamery]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

I'm getting confused (no surprise). Which deal are we talking about: his deal, their deal, a deal or the deal?

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

I agree that Neal and Kaczur are replaceable, although I would not call either a JAG. We do already have players on the roster to compete to replace each of them.

And just BTW, I don't know why we think either will get huge money. It is certainly possible that one of these players will stay. I really don't see a bidding war for Neal!

Watson may be gone this year; in any case, the replacement is already on the roster.

Mankins may choose to stay or not. If Both Neal and Mankins go, we will need to use a high draft choice on an interior lineman. That's worked out well before.

======================================
THE BIG THREE - Seymour, Wilfork and Gostkowski

As you say, I expect at least one to take the money from the patriots, likely Gostkowski. I expect at least one to be franchised. I expect one to move on. I would note that under the current CBA, we will have two tags.

Neal and Kaczur are JAGs. I hope they stay but I really don't care. Watson is already replaced but different but similar quality guys. Wilfork, Seymour, Mankins, Gotti, someone will take the money. It'll work out.

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

I'm getting confused (no surprise). Which deal are we talking about: his deal, their deal, a deal or the deal?

The real deal.

 

[RayClay]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

What does a nose tackle do at one of these scrimmages anyway? I assume it's non-contact.

 

[Mogamedogz]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

The fans responding at the Globe blog who say we should sign him now might not realize the Patriots are up against the cap, and if they extend him now, Vince will earn much much less money in the future because your salary can't be raised by more than 30% year to year.

In an uncapped year, you can make a huge balloon payment to Vince in the form of a huge salary (say, $15 million) and then the next few years you can pay him $5 million, for an average of $6-7 million over the life of the contract. The beauty of that is you incur the bulk of the cost in an uncapped year, and you salary cap for the future benefits from added flexibility.

The Ugly of it is giving him all that money up front.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

There is no cash flow effect. If a player has a $5M first year salary (increasing at 30% a year) and a $25M bonus on a 5 year contract, the cap cost is $10M a year under the normal cap. If there is no cap, the team would change the bonus to salary and have a first year salary of $30M. There is no cash flow difference to the team or the player. In both cases, he gets $30M in the first year.

This deal is a $60M deal ($12M a year) plus any incentives. I woudl presume that the first year is guaranteed, giving the player $30M guaranteed.

The Ugly of giving him all that money up front.

 

[Mogamedogz]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

There is no cash flow effect. If a player has a $5M first year salary (increasing at 30% a year) and a $25M bonus on a 5 year contract, the cap cost is $10M a year under the normal cap. If there is no cap, the team would change the bonus to salary and have a first year salary of $30M. There is no cash flow difference to the team or the player. In both cases, he gets $30M in the first year.

This deal is a $60M deal ($12M a year) plus any incentives. I woudl presume that the first year is guaranteed, giving the player $30M guaranteed.

Im not worried about the cap hit, im worried about Big Vince getting all the $$ up front, and losing a little of his edge because it.

 

[mgteich]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

Then you just don't want to sign or re-sign any top player. All top players require a significant amount of up-front money, or at least guaranteed money.

Im not worried about the cap hit, im worried about Big Vince getting all the $$ up front, and losing a little of his edge because it.

 

[Mogamedogz]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

Then you just don't want to sign or re-sign any top player. All top players require a significant amount of up-front money, or at least guaranteed money.

I'm not against up front $$. I'm just against $30 million dollars up-front (basically guaranteed). That's QB $$. Peyton Manning and Tony Romo got $30M up front. And neither one of those guys pose the risk that Vince does of getting fat and dogging it. (sorry Vince, I still :heart: you.)

 

[Leave No Doubt]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

...... It's a great read tho Does he show up? Nevermind don't tell me, I want to be surprised

 

[upstater1]

Re: Wilfork seeing new deal...

The Ugly of it is giving him all that money up front.

Signing bonuses are given up front, spread over the length of the contract, and they hit your cap each and every year in equal amounts.

By giving him a signing bonus in the form of a guaranteed first year salary, you set up your team to have no cap pressure in the following years.

That's the beauty of an uncapped year.