Wilfork speaks

[Deus Irae]

I'm comparing apples to apples, you're comparing criminal law to union contracts.

I'm saying that under the CBA, something like leaving work is already considered part of the agreement. Just like in my job, I can leave work as per the union contract. I won't get paid, but that's my choice.

That doesn't mean I'm not honoring the CBA. I am. The CBA makes provisions for people leaving work. If it didn't, then the Patriots could take drastic action like demanding that Wilfork return the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus.

But the Patriots aren't even allowed to do that. It's not within the Patriots' rights per the CBA. This means that players are protected to a certain extent by a contract they made with the owners that allows them to hold out without the owners' ability to take drastic action against them. Essentially, the owners have a franchise tag (a mechanism that exists in no other field) and the players have holdouts. That's how it's always been in the last several CBAs.

What the CBA has done is anticipate some ways in which players will violate their contracts and placed disciplinary measures down in writing. It's the same as many other aspects of life. You CAN speed. It's physically possible. However, there's a penalty if you get caught, and that penalty is understood in advance. You CAN commit murder. The law doesn't actually prevent it. However, if you get caught, you get punished, unless you're O.J. Simpson or a police officer in a major metropolitan area.

This is no different, no matter how often you claim it is.

 

[mgteich]

If I understand your position correctly, the team should play hardball in order to get a better 2011 draft pick than they would get if Wilfork was not franchised next year. After all, Wilfork would certainly not sign any franchise tag until the last day of the franchise period. We would not have Wilfork's services for 2009 camp or for half of the season, and would not have the 2010 franchise cap money until after the franchise deadline.
=============================
The patriots have never done this. I do not expect them to do this now.

"Willing" is irrelevant. If Vince is committed to holding out that long and the Pats are concerned about giving a player with weight concerns a blockbuster, long term deal, then holding out to week 10 is an eventuality.

I think the preseason games are totally unnecessary. Vetrean players can step right in after camp and play. Brady was GTG w/o any meaningful preseason play, before his knee injury, a year ago.





The Pats know what Vince is worth to them. If they re-sign him for Y dollars, great. If Vince wants more than that, I would endure what comes. I just threw SF out there b/c they seem to be a logical choice. I'm sure that there are plenty of teams that would want Vince, 4-3 teams too.



Apples and oranges. Peppers is coming off a great season after a bad one 2 years ago. Peppers is almost 2 years older and plays DE. Vince is a proven 3-4 NT. That kind of player will certainly fetch a #1. If the Pats let Vince walk, they'll only get, at best, an end 3rd rounder.

To clarify, I want Vince to stay. If the Pats feel he's worth the money, so be it. If not, I would hope the Pats would stay the course and keep the tag handy and make him play in the NFC. Vince is a market commodity.

What I don't want to see is Vince leave like Asante did, with little or no compensation.

 

[Dragda]

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..

Hmmm. I don't think he's all that special. He's good, starter quality certainly, but nowhere near the best at his position. He's the best on the Patriots roster. I think Ron Brace will make us forget all about Wilfork.

I usually wait until the player leaves town before I throw them under the bus. I wanted to get in on the ground floor this time.

 

[slash83]

Hmmm. I don't think he's all that special. He's good, starter quality certainly, but nowhere near the best at his position. He's the best on the Patriots roster. I think Ron Brace will make us forget all about Wilfork.

I usually wait until the player leaves town before I throw them under the bus. I wanted to get in on the ground floor this time.

There isn't a nt in the NFL I would take over vince, even if I wasn't a pats fan. As for ron brace the guy isn't near the athlete vince is. Vince is a special player the patriots were damn lucky to be able to draft him. Who knows brace might turn out to be decent but the chances of him being nearly as good as vince are very slim.

 

[Pats726]

There isn't a nt in the NFL I would take over vince, even if I wasn't a pats fan. As for ron brace the guy isn't near the athlete vince is. Vince is a special player the patriots were damn lucky to be able to draft him. Who knows brace might turn out to be decent but the chances of him being nearly as good as vince are very slim.

I agree..we'll see what happens with Brace..but VW is one of the best FAR from average..

 

[Maroney TD]

What the CBA has done is anticipate some ways in which players will violate their contracts and placed disciplinary measures down in writing. It's the same as many other aspects of life. You CAN speed. It's physically possible. However, there's a penalty if you get caught, and that penalty is understood in advance. You CAN commit murder. The law doesn't actually prevent it. However, if you get caught, you get punished, unless you're O.J. Simpson or a police officer in a major metropolitan area.

This is no different, no matter how often you claim it is.

Yes, comparing murder to holding out is definitely apples to apples. Listen, players have one course of action and it's to hold out. It's built into the CBA that if a player holds out that the team can fine them. Comparing a contract situation to a criminal act is completely ludacris. It has nothing to do with breaking the law which is why your comparison doesn't work at all.

Players have a very short window to earn money in their career so I don't begrudge them trying to get their money while they can. If they have a career ending injury their earnings potential is over.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I must not have been clear. Rich players are ripped for wanting more money when the money they have is a lot more than what the general public has. Owners are not ripped when they engage in activities that will further increase their substantial wealth.

Or from a different point of view, players are ripped for breaking the contracts that they signed. Owners are not ripped because they honor the contracts they signed.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I must not have been clear. Rich players are ripped for wanting more money when the money they have is a lot more than what the general public has. Owners are not ripped when they engage in activities that will further increase their substantial wealth.

Actually I've been mildly critical of Kraft for ticket and parking prices and for Patriot Place which might be a financial diversion or risk and problem, or conversely a big investment win.

I just don't want to read whining about anybody's finances, be it an owner's laments about the CBA, or whatever, or a player's regret that he might leave a mill or so on the table.

 

[mgteich]

I still don't understand. Let us consider a 3-year contract with a $3M bonus and salaries of $2M, $2.6M, $3.4M for three years of service.

So the contract calls for payments of $5M, $2.6M and $3.4M. Both parties accepted this deal for player services. In baseball, the monies would be guaranteed and the contract would be binding for three years on both parties.

CONDITION ONE - THE PLAYER SUX AFTER TWO YEARS
The team decides to tear up to contract and cut the player and pay $0.00 for Year 3.
There are no problems. Everyone is fine with this.

CONDITION TWO - THE PLAYER IS AN AWESOME ALL-PRO PLAYER IN HIS SECOND YEAR
The player walks out and wants more money.
This is terrible and the player should be tarred and feathered.

Or from a different point of view, players are ripped for breaking the contracts that they signed. Owners are not ripped because they honor the contracts they signed.

 

[Mark Morse]

Set 4-year contracts (1st round) and 3-year contracts thereafter would be a great step forward. These set contracts would include incentive bonuses and signing bonuses. The may even be the ability to choose among two or three contracts.

The draft, the first contract, franchise, and the fixed percentages of revenue (through the salary cap) are what makes the system work for the owners.

I like this prpoposal and would like to make an additions. The outrageous guaranteed money paid to rookies that haven't proven a thing needs to be reduced as well. The top 10 picks in the draft are upside down because of thsi guaranteed money. The teams with the top three picks are really hamstrung and are taking huge risks on these rookies.

I would like to see the percentage of revenue going to the players reduced, giving back to the owners in return for not adding the 2 more regular season games. The owners in turn can only charge full price for regular season games and reduce pre-season by 50%.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes, comparing murder to holding out is definitely apples to apples. Listen, players have one course of action and it's to hold out. It's built into the CBA that if a player holds out that the team can fine them. Comparing a contract situation to a criminal act is completely ludacris. It has nothing to do with breaking the law which is why your comparison doesn't work at all.

Players have a very short window to earn money in their career so I don't begrudge them trying to get their money while they can. If they have a career ending injury their earnings potential is over.

1.) I originally used speeding. Furthermore, exceeding the speed limit is not generally a criminal act.

2.) Just because you say it's apples and oranges doesn't make it so. The analogies referred to malfeasance which had punishments known before the act(s) got committed. There's not any apples to oranges issue.

3.) Players have other avenues. They could just not re-sign with that team. Of course, they could have decided not to sign that contract in the first place.

4.) I don't begrudge the players the money, and I've stated that already. I begrudge them certain methods of obtaining that money.

So, you were basically wrong about everything except realizing that murder is a criminal act.

 

[Deus Irae]

I still don't understand. Let us consider a 3-year contract with a $3M bonus and salaries of $2M, $2.6M, $3.4M for three years of service.

So the contract calls for payments of $5M, $2.6M and $3.4M. Both parties accepted this deal for player services. In baseball, the monies would be guaranteed and the contract would be binding for three years on both parties.

CONDITION ONE - THE PLAYER SUX AFTER TWO YEARS
The team decides to tear up to contract and cut the player and pay $0.00 for Year 3.
There are no problems. Everyone is fine with this.

CONDITION TWO - THE PLAYER IS AN AWESOME ALL-PRO PLAYER IN HIS SECOND YEAR
The player walks out and wants more money.
This is terrible and the player should be tarred and feathered.

I really don't know why people here can't figure this out.....


If you want the contracts to be guaranteed, get that put into the CBA. Until you do, quit crying about how they aren't guaranteed.

 

[mgteich]

To be clear, I would expect a set slary and bonus amount for each draft choice in the draft. I would expect that the top 10 would get lost less than now and the rest of the draft would get more, and that the total rookie cap would remain the same.

I like this prpoposal and would like to make an additions. The outrageous guaranteed money paid to rookies that haven't proven a thing needs to be reduced as well. The top 10 picks in the draft are upside down because of thsi guaranteed money. The teams with the top three picks are really hamstrung and are taking huge risks on these rookies.

I would like to see the percentage of revenue going to the players reduced, giving back to the owners in return for not adding the 2 more regular season games. The owners in turn can only charge full price for regular season games and reduce pre-season by 50%.

 

[Maroney TD]

1.) I originally used speeding. Furthermore, exceeding the speed limit is not generally a criminal act.

2.) Just because you say it's apples and oranges doesn't make it so. The analogies referred to malfeasance which had punishments known before the act(s) got committed. There's not any apples to oranges issue.

3.) Players have other avenues. They could just not re-sign with that team. Of course, they could have decided not to sign that contract in the first place.

4.) I don't begrudge the players the money, and I've stated that already. I begrudge them certain methods of obtaining that money.

So, you were basically wrong about everything except realizing that murder is a criminal act.

You are still confusing contracts and laws, which are not the same. It is against the law to speed and the government steps in if you get caught. For a player to hold out is not against the law and the government is in now way involved. It breaks the terms of a contact, which has provisions for such a situation.

So basically you're wrong about everything plus the fact you're being a d-bag about it instead of having a civil conversation.

 

[Maroney TD]

I really don't know why people here can't figure this out.....


If you want the contracts to be guaranteed, get that put into the CBA. Until you do, quit crying about how they aren't guaranteed.

I don't think many people care that it's not guaranteed, we're just waiting for you to stop crying about players holding out. The system is built against the players so holding out is their best avenue to getting more money.

 

[Deus Irae]

You are still confusing contracts and laws, which are not the same. It is against the law to speed and the government steps in if you get caught. For a player to hold out is not against the law and the government is in now way involved. It breaks the terms of a contact, which has provisions for such a situation.

So basically you're wrong about everything plus the fact you're being a d-bag about it instead of having a civil conversation.

I'm not confusing any such thing. Come back when you can grasp the concept of an analogy.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't think many people care that it's not guaranteed, we're just waiting for you to stop crying about players holding out. The system is built against the players so holding out is their best avenue to getting more money.

Obviously they care about it not being guaranteed. If they didn't, they wouldn't bring it up repeatedly.

And, for the record, I didn't cry about players holding out. I simply said that they should fine Wilfork for every mandatory day missed and not rescind the fine once things were resolved. The rest was follow up in response to others.

 

[redsox33]

Def. not suprised by this. Every year athletes who have signed deals to get them money over "x" many years are cut or released before they see that money. So now the players want the money NOW they still want the years but they aren't falling for getting the money later, since it seems there is no way you are going to get it.

 

[BradyFTW!]

There isn't a nt in the NFL I would take over vince, even if I wasn't a pats fan. As for ron brace the guy isn't near the athlete vince is. Vince is a special player the patriots were damn lucky to be able to draft him. Who knows brace might turn out to be decent but the chances of him being nearly as good as vince are very slim.

There are a couple of NTs that I would take over Wilfork, but that doesn't change the fact that he's really good.

BTW, if Wilfork leaves the Pats, can we pretty much just assume that he's going south to Miami? That's where he went to college, and it's no secret that they need a NT down there. That would suck.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Def. not suprised by this. Every year athletes who have signed deals to get them money over "x" many years are cut or released before they see that money. So now the players want the money NOW they still want the years but they aren't falling for getting the money later, since it seems there is no way you are going to get it.

Well... those are the contracts they signed. The collective bargaining agreement doesn't guarantee contracts. If that's a major point of contention for the players, then they should hold out for them in this round of CBA negotiations. At the end of the day, though, all that that would mean was that high-performing guys made less (because there's less free cap space) and underperforming guys would make more (because you can't cut them). The total paid out would still be the same: the cap. IMO, that's why there hasn't been a major push for guaranteed contracts.

But regardless, that's what the players' union agreed to. They agreed to contracts that allowed the teams to terminate them, and that's that.