Wilfork speaks

[Fencer]

Once he misses a mandatory day, he's no better than Branch. Too bad, Wilfork, now we know what you really are.

Wilfork is a human being who wants to be paid market rates for his services and wants to use all legal and ethical means to ensure that.

How exactly does a political conservative have a problem with that?

 

[ALP]

I love how NFL players think a good business move is asking for a new contract while you DISHONOR your original contract. You can tell these morons don't know **** outside of football when they pull this crap.

I understand his beef, but why are you sitting out? I understand he wants a new deal, he should. Now is the time to do it before his price goes insane (ala Samuel) I think players should at least, ya know, HONOR their original contracts before asking for a more lucrative one.

Great business move.

if i were him i wouldnt be at camps either....hes played this position at this system for how long? he knwos all the things he needs to, and for a big man, if hes in shape, why not care for ur body and start the season when reg season starts?

until training camp, until its mandatory, let him miss as much as possible...as long as he is here when it gets mandatory, im happy

 

[tombonneau]

Wow. Lot's of Company Men in this thread. I always love the "honor a contract you signed" attack. It's like some of you people are watching an entirely different league/business than I am.

Teams can cut players whenever they want and never have to pay them another dime off their contract. In fact, I would say for every one player that holds out, about 20 are cut and never see another cent of the money that a team "promised" them in a signed contract.

This is all part of the business of football, and for people personally attack a player who holds out as part of negotiations -- esp. one who has given back so much to the community as Vince has -- dumbfound me.

Anyway, as far as how this effects the Patriots, I'm sure this is exactly what they expected to happen, so no big deal. It's like in Die Hard when the police arrive. Hans knew this would happen all along and already had a plan for it. (In fact, as it turns out, the police were "somewhat necessary.")

 

[Deus Irae]

Wilfork is a human being who wants to be paid market rates for his services and wants to use all legal and ethical means to ensure that.

How exactly does a political conservative have a problem with that?

Given that it's prohibited by the CBA and even has its own penalty built in, subjecting it to team discipline, calling it "legal and ethical" makes no sense. It's 'illegal' in the sense of it violating the terms of the contract and the CBA.

 

[pats_premi]

I don't blame Vince for wanting a new contract. Tommie Harris who drafted 7 places ahead of Vince signed 4 year $40million contract extension last year.
It's unfortuante that player like Wilfork and Seymour have to resort to holding out in order to get Patriot's attention.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wow. Lot's of Company Men in this thread. I always love the "honor a contract you signed" attack. It's like some of you people are watching an entirely different league/business than I am.

Teams can cut players whenever they want and never have to pay them another dime off their contract. In fact, I would say for every one player that holds out, about 20 are cut and never see another cent of the money that a team "promised" them in a signed contract.

This is all part of the business of football, and for people personally attack a player who holds out as part of negotiations -- esp. one who has given back so much to the community as Vince has -- dumbfound me.

Anyway, as far as how this effects the Patriots, I'm sure this is exactly what they expected to happen, so no big deal. It's like in Die Hard when the police arrive. Hans knew this would happen all along and already had a plan for it. (In fact, as it turns out, the police were "somewhat necessary.")

Teams deal with contracts as allowed by current contract law and the CBA. The "but the team can cut him" is just a straw man.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Wow. Lot's of Company Men in this thread. I always love the "honor a contract you signed" attack. It's like some of you people are watching an entirely different league/business than I am.

Teams can cut players whenever they want and never have to pay them another dime off their contract. In fact, I would say for every one player that holds out, about 20 are cut and never see another cent of the money that a team "promised" them in a signed contract.

Exactly. And, as you must be well aware, teams are simply exercising their rights under the contract. Teams do not break the contract when they exercise their rights.

Teams do not "promise" to pay them *all* the money unconditionally. The money that they do promise to pay unconditionally (often called "guaranteed money") is paid unconditionally (or at least with very few and hard to break restrictions). They rest of the money is paid conditionally. And when the conditions are met, they pay the money. How unfair! /sarcasm

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Teams deal with contracts as allowed by current contract law and the CBA. The "but the team can cut him" is just a straw man.

Yep, every player knows that contracts are a one-way committment and that other than the signing bonus they have no guarantees about anything. They must wish they had the CBA terms of the NBA and MLB, but they don't. Wilfork will honor his contract but will use all means necessary to angle for a better next deal, as well he should.

 

[BelichickFan]

Wilfork is a human being who wants to be paid market rates for his services and wants to use all legal and ethical means to ensure that.

How exactly does a political conservative have a problem with that?

This isn't a political issue for me, that's all irrelevant with the money they all make. If he sits out time and starts to threaten our team then I will choose not to like him as much as I have until now.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Another Asante Samuel,Deion Branch ect:

 

[tombonneau]

Exactly. And, as you must be well aware, teams are simply exercising their rights under the contract. Teams do not break the contract when they exercise their rights.

Teams do not "promise" to pay them *all* the money unconditionally. The money that they do promise to pay unconditionally (often called "guaranteed money") is paid unconditionally (or at least with very few and hard to break restrictions). They rest of the money is paid conditionally. And when the conditions are met, they pay the money. How unfair! /sarcasm

I fully understand that as contracts are written teams can cut players as they please and only be on the hook for the signing bonus. I get it. Players get it.

I just think that it's funny that when a player sees the contract as no longer in his favor, people think he has no recourse and its too bad he shouldn't have signed the contract. And I suspect when it comes time for a new CBA this imbalance will be addressed.

Anyway, my opinion on player hold outs is case-by-case; I'm not so idealistic that I take a universal ethical stance one way or the other.

In Wilfork's case, many would argue he is the best 3-4 NT in the game and has outplayed his contract. I would. So I see no problem with him making a little noise about an extension, esp. on the low back-end of a rookie deal. I felt the same way when Seymour went through something similar a few years ago, and that worked out well. (Just as this will.)

When I usually don't side with players is when a vet re-negotiates a new contract, then one or two years later holds out for even more money. In that case, you just had a chance based on a body of work to negotiate the best deal possible (i.e. an amount not based on where you were drafted and nothing more), so you shouldn't complain too loudly a few years later about out-performing it. Blame your agent.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Once he misses a mandatory day, he's no better than Branch. Too bad, Wilfork, now we know what you really are.

i dont think he's the same as branch


wilfork would be a all pro DT on any 4-3 team and with the pats in the 3-4 he is the best NT in the NFL


branch was never a all pro never had a 1000 yerd season and is injury prone

if he was on the pats right now i dont think he would even be the 4th WR on the team and he was looking to make randy moss money

 

[swheeler23]

I dont blame Vince if he decides to sit out during camp, mans the best player at his position in all of football. Pay the man..

The man has a contract. Honor it.

 

[Fencer]

Given that it's prohibited by the CBA and even has its own penalty built in, subjecting it to team discipline, calling it "legal and ethical" makes no sense. It's 'illegal' in the sense of it violating the terms of the contract and the CBA.

Could the team take him to court and get out of its contract because he was in breach? Could it successfully sue him for damages beyond the penalties specified in the CBA?

If not, then he's not violating the contract. The CBA is surely part of the contract, incorporated by reference.

 

[Fencer]

This isn't a political issue for me, that's all irrelevant with the money they all make.

Do you care about what tax rates are paid by people as wealthy as Wilfork?

If so (and you think they should be low), then I'm right to connect this to your political views.

 

[Holy Diver]

Wow. Lot's of Company Men in this thread. I always love the "honor a contract you signed" attack. It's like some of you people are watching an entirely different league/business than I am.

Teams can cut players whenever they want and never have to pay them another dime off their contract. In fact, I would say for every one player that holds out, about 20 are cut and never see another cent of the money that a team "promised" them in a signed contract.

This is all part of the business of football, and for people personally attack a player who holds out as part of negotiations -- esp. one who has given back so much to the community as Vince has -- dumbfound me.

Anyway, as far as how this effects the Patriots, I'm sure this is exactly what they expected to happen, so no big deal. It's like in Die Hard when the police arrive. Hans knew this would happen all along and already had a plan for it. (In fact, as it turns out, the police were "somewhat necessary.")

we all know what happened to Hans Gruber....

http://www.coverups.com/photos-silly/defenestration_hans_gruber.jpg

 

[tombonneau]

we all know what happened to Hans Gruber....

http://www.coverups.com/photos-silly/defenestration_hans_gruber.jpg

I was hoping for an animated gif.

 

[upstater1]

As long as he accepts the fines, he's not violating his contract.

Military personnel aside, almost everybody in this country has the right to stop working at their job and, as a consequence, not get paid. Football players actually have more complicated restrictions on those rights than most people do. So it's harsh to blame them for taking advantage of the little recourse they do have.

But, we'd lose our jobs if we did that, but Vince can go back to work with only a few fines.

 

[upstater1]

If next year weren't an uncapped year, I'd have more sympathy for Vince. He's done 5 years under the rookie pay scale, and he's a Pro Bowler. By now he should expect to be getting his second contract, as Ty Warren and Richard Seymour did. In other words, the Patriots did for Seymour and Warren what they aren't doing for Vince, and for that reason I think Vince has a good point.

On the other hand, next year is an uncapped year and Vince should realize that.

 

[mgteich]

1) I've been telling you that this would happen ever since we started discussing this.

2) The team has dealt with similar situations with Samuel and Branch AND Seymour. It is curious that no one seems to want to mention that Seymour took a similar stance with two years left in his rookie contract.

3) I didn't like this when Seymour did it. I wanted the team to enforce contracts. The TEAM took a different view. In the end, Wilfork can act as he wishes. The CBA contract provides remedies for those who do not show up for camp or for games.

4) Yes, Wilfork did say he expected to play. He will show up by the sixth game as the CBA requires. BTW, should Wilfork expect that the team will treat him differently than Seymour? If not, he should expect this to be worked out before Training Camp.

5) Wilfork doesn't need mini-camp or Training Camp other than for an opportunity to get injured.

6) Belichick now has his business choices. As I indicated earlier, he can completely cave as he did for Seymour. He can partially cave as he did for Branch and Seymour. To partially cave, I would expect an increase in 2009 compensation as well as a no-franchise condition to a re-written contract to cover 2009. Or he can suddenly change the team approach and play hardball. If he plays hardball, expect to see Wilfork next at the practice on the Wednesday before the 6th game of the season and in the 6th game of the 2010 season if he is franchised.