The Vince Wilfork situation (merged)

[goldenaleus]

3 year 29M with 23M guaranteed? That can't be right, but if it is, the Pats are SERIOUSLY overpaying for Wilfork and must have no faith in their rookie DT from last year from BC, forgot his name.

That's just a ridiculous contract.

He'll be hard to tag and trade because I doubt anyone offers him better than that. 7M for one year and then a supplemental 3rd, I guess.

The rookie DT is Ron Brace.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

It's not the amount, it's the longevity of the contract he's turning down. I believe he wants a minimum of 5 years.

I know that, but given the CBA landscape he's not going to get one. It's all about the guaranteed money on these deals and a 5 year deal adds another $12-15M to the guarantee demand and there is no way he gets that when a potential lockout looms 1 year in. And if Haynesworth is his goal it's about AAV too since this one doesn't even quite hit double digits and Haynesworth's is 4/$12.

They are essentially offering him the backend of the Seymour deal. In Richard's case that made sense because they had durability and leadership concerns. I think they have similar though not identical concerns with Vince. Vince has been a lot more durable to date but long range concerns abound. He hasn't been a vocal leader in a good or a bad way, but they need good, strong vocal leadership on that side of the ball. Vince's personality is more the big tedy bear everyone is drawn to, not the big guy you don't want to cross. And then there is the matter of the lockout, which makes this probably a better offer than you're going to see this offseason. I wonder if this deal is still on the table or if that was the offer if this year could have been rolled in with that final rookie deal season...as was the case with Seymour's 3 year deal.

I really think watching this offseason unfold will be enlightening for all concerned. If the majority of the 200 RFA's who shoulda been UFA's don't get long term offers or get short term offers Vince may begin to feel differently about his circumstances. He just shouldn't wait too long because if FA is quiet out of the gate he may find he doesn't have nearly the leverage he assumed he would.

If that offer is correct I wouldn't be surprised if they exclusive tag him since it does seem as if they really want him here at least for the forseeable future.

The interest level in Peppers will be instructive too. If he's sitting there a week into FA it won't be a good omen for Vince contractually and he better hope when he does sign with someone it isn't the NEP or Vince may have lost any shot at a deal other than playing under his franchise tag.

Re-reading that Givens article about his FA experience, for all the bluster these guys are extremely insecure and borderline desperate for validation as FA opens. That is why so few of them end up taking the kind of hardline stand Branch did, which is also why that really blindsided the team. They know how these guys think. BB is fond of saying if you really want to hurt a player, don't take his money away, take his stage away. However this shakes out, Vince won't not be on the field come August. Because off it he's just another loveable big, fat guy with a wife and a mortgage and a lifestyle to maintain and kids to raise and educate and no job...who could slip on the soap getting out of the shower and become unemployable by the time a new CBA is agreed to...

He and his representation, not sure if that's just Bianca or if an agent is involved, need to find a way to spin either the tag or a 3 year deal into a victory in the next couple of months so Vince can just concentrate on being a force on the field in the NFL.

 

[zimmy]

I don't see it as a ridiculous offer. I think its a very clever and fair offer. The shortness of the extension is the key. 3 years allow them to get Wilfork's prime and not be lumbered with a couple of dead years with Wilfork at a huge cap number. It's a bit similar to the Seymour deal. I assume as much as possible would hit in the uncapped year.

Wilfork probably wants a longer deal though. If he wants more guaranteed money (which I think he does) then that franchise tag is coming his way.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

Im glad Espn was on the ball by saying Vince Wilfork was franchised yesterda...

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't see it as a ridiculous offer. I think its a very clever and fair offer. The shortness of the extension is the key. 3 years allow them to get Wilfork's prime and not be lumbered with a couple of dead years with Wilfork at a huge cap number. It's a bit similar to the Seymour deal. I assume as much as possible would hit in the uncapped year.

Wilfork probably wants a longer deal though. If he wants more guaranteed money (which I think he does) then that franchise tag is coming his way.

The dollars seem high for a NT thats doesn't generate a pass rush but yes, I agree. The years seem ok.

If their is a lock out not sure if the year gets pushed or the year is lost all together. At any rate, Vince will be 33 in 2013.

 

[Patspsycho]

I know that, but given the CBA landscape he's not going to get one. It's all about the guaranteed money on these deals and a 5 year deal adds another $12-15M to the guarantee demand and there is no way he gets that when a potential lockout looms 1 year in. And if Haynesworth is his goal it's about AAV too since this one doesn't even quite hit double digits and Haynesworth's is 4/$12.

They are essentially offering him the backend of the Seymour deal. In Richard's case that made sense because they had durability and leadership concerns. I think they have similar though not identical concerns with Vince. Vince has been a lot more durable to date but long range concerns abound. He hasn't been a vocal leader in a good or a bad way, but they need good, strong vocal leadership on that side of the ball. Vince's personality is more the big tedy bear everyone is drawn to, not the big guy you don't want to cross. And then there is the matter of the lockout, which makes this probably a better offer than you're going to see this offseason. I wonder if this deal is still on the table or if that was the offer if this year could have been rolled in with that final rookie deal season...as was the case with Seymour's 3 year deal.

I really think watching this offseason unfold will be enlightening for all concerned. If the majority of the 200 RFA's who shoulda been UFA's don't get long term offers or get short term offers Vince may begin to feel differently about his circumstances. He just shouldn't wait too long because if FA is quiet out of the gate he may find he doesn't have nearly the leverage he assumed he would.

If that offer is correct I wouldn't be surprised if they exclusive tag him since it does seem as if they really want him here at least for the forseeable future.

The interest level in Peppers will be instructive too. If he's sitting there a week into FA it won't be a good omen for Vince contractually and he better hope when he does sign with someone it isn't the NEP or Vince may have lost any shot at a deal other than playing under his franchise tag.

Re-reading that Givens article about his FA experience, for all the bluster these guys are extremely insecure and borderline desperate for validation as FA opens. That is why so few of them end up taking the kind of hardline stand Branch did, which is also why that really blindsided the team. They know how these guys think. BB is fond of saying if you really want to hurt a player, don't take his money away, take his stage away. However this shakes out, Vince won't not be on the field come August. Because off it he's just another loveable big, fat guy with a wife and a mortgage and a lifestyle to maintain and kids to raise and educate and no job...who could slip on the soap getting out of the shower and become unemployable by the time a new CBA is agreed to...

He and his representation, not sure if that's just Bianca or if an agent is involved, need to find a way to spin either the tag or a 3 year deal into a victory in the next couple of months so Vince can just concentrate on being a force on the field in the NFL.

The big thing about Wilfork is that aside from the contractual grumbling, the guy has no ego and just wants long-term security. He thrives on loyalty and is only too willing to give that back. This is a guy that loves the game and loves to play and it shows. He has been probably the most consistent player and just about never seems to have a bad game. I hate it when the Patriots play hard-ball with those kinds of players.

However, for all we know the 3yr/29m could be just a rumor.. just have to sit tight and see what happens.

BTW where did that "take away his stage" quote come from? That doesn't seem like something BB would say.

 

[Rob0729]

It's not the amount, it's the longevity of the contract he's turning down. I believe he wants a minimum of 5 years.

I seriously doubt that. If Felger's numbers are true, the Pats are looking to guarantee the same amount over the life of the a three year contract that a team would guarantee over five year for the same anual salary. Since in 3 years, Wilfork would be 33, he would unlikely see the fourth and fifth year of a deal if it was at elite money. At three years, he would have a chance to get one more deal with a decent signing bonus.

I think if the length was the only issue, the Pats could easily tack on two or three more years and leave the guarantee the same. It is no skin off their back. It has the money.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The big thing about Wilfork is that aside from the contractual grumbling, the guy has no ego and just wants long-term security.

Not sure I agree 100%. He wants long term security and money for his services and worth but I'd stop short in saying that he doesn't want to be paid as one of the top DLs in the league. Its not a shot at him. It's natural. If you think you are the best at your job, wouldn't you want to be paid as the best?

 

[Patspsycho]

I seriously doubt that. If Felger's numbers are true, the Pats are looking to guarantee the same amount over the life of the a three year contract that a team would guarantee over five year for the same anual salary. Since in 3 years, Wilfork would be 33, he would unlikely see the fourth and fifth year of a deal if it was at elite money. At three years, he would have a chance to get one more deal with a decent signing bonus.

I think if the length was the only issue, the Pats could easily tack on two or three more years and leave the guarantee the same. It is no skin off their back. It has the money.

See below:

“I want a long-term deal, or I want to be free,” [Wilfork] said in an appearance Wednesday on WEEI radio.

Wilfork warns Pats: Don’t apply franchise tag | New England Patriots | projo.com | The Providence Journal

 

[upstater1]

Quite apart from Vince's personal situation, and assuming felger's numbers are true, we're also seeing how the Patriots are treating an uncapped year.

Unless there's guaranteed first year money that ISN'T a signing bonus, it would seem that the Patriots are not taking advantage of the uncapped year by frontloading Vince's contract.

I don't see the upside to structuring the contract this way so I'm going to choose to believe that the guaranteed money isn't strictly a signing bonus.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't see the upside to structuring the contract this way so I'm going to choose to believe that the guaranteed money isn't strictly a signing bonus.

Thats my take too, upstater1. The bonus may be paid in installments (see Brady 2006) or as a roster bonus. Vince may just not like the payout portion of the proposal. Who knows.

 

[SanAngeloState]

See below:



Wilfork warns Pats: Don’t apply franchise tag | New England Patriots | projo.com | The Providence Journal

That's classless. He "warns" them? What is that? They have the contractual right to franchise him. He should consider himself lucky to get
7M for one year's work!

Tag him and trade him, hopefully for a first, unless he's so greedy he's priced himself out of the market and no team is willing to give up a pick for him.

He's starting to bug me almost as much as AD.

 

[JMarr]

That's classless. He "warns" them? What is that? They have the contractual right to franchise him. He should consider himself lucky to get
7M for one year's work!

Tag him and trade him, hopefully for a first, unless he's so greedy he's priced himself out of the market and no team is willing to give up a pick for him.

He's starting to bug me almost as much as AD.

B.S. I don't have a problem with anything he said in that interview. In fact, given the fact that he's in the middle of negotiating for his financial future and isn't going to "undervalue" himself publicly, I think he's being as classy about it as is possible:

“I wouldn’t change what I’ve done. If I had to do it all over again, I’d do the same thing. I’d try for a five-year deal — which we tried but, you know, we didn’t get. That’s the only thing I’d change."

Like others have said, he's more than honored his rookie contract with no grumbling, and always been a good soldier here--2 things that are becoming more of a rarity these days.

Yesterday someone said that the Pats have offered him a 3 year $29 million contract, which seems fairly lowball, but if they get it done for anywhere near those figures I would be ecstatic.

 

[RobertWeathers]

B.S. I don't have a problem with anything he said in that interview. In fact, given the fact that he's in the middle of negotiating for his financial future and isn't going to "undervalue" himself publicly, I think he's being as classy about it as is possible:

“I wouldn’t change what I’ve done. If I had to do it all over again, I’d do the same thing. I’d try for a five-year deal — which we tried but, you know, we didn’t get. That’s the only thing I’d change."

Like others have said, he's more than honored his rookie contract with no grumbling, and always been a good soldier here--2 things that are becoming more of a rarity these days.

I agree. Can't complain with VW so far.

Yesterday someone said that the Pats have offered him a 3 year $29 million contract, which seems fairly lowball, but if they get it done for anywhere near those figures I would be ecstatic.

Low-ball? According to who? Its between Haynesworth and Jenkins' deals. Again, we don't know the structure, payout schedule or even if it's real.

 

[JMarr]

Low-ball? According to who? Its between Haynesworth and Jenkins' deals. Again, we don't know the structure, payout schedule or even if it's real.

Maybe not lowball in $ per year, but at Vince's age, I doubt he's of the opinion that a three year deal qualifies as "long-term."

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Quite apart from Vince's personal situation, and assuming felger's numbers are true, we're also seeing how the Patriots are treating an uncapped year.

Unless there's guaranteed first year money that ISN'T a signing bonus, it would seem that the Patriots are not taking advantage of the uncapped year by frontloading Vince's contract.

I don't see the upside to structuring the contract this way so I'm going to choose to believe that the guaranteed money isn't strictly a signing bonus.

Teams have really moved away from the signing bonus as guarantee structure because of the inability to go after signing bonus on the heels of the Lelie arbitration decision. And the inability to go after roster bonus for the same reason as it is considered earned when paid (Stallworth). I'm sure all of these recent guaranteed deals contain clauses that preclude the guarantee being fulfilled if the player screws up.

You can't tell anything about Vince's deal based on what Felger has reported. Salary can absolutely be part of the guaranteed money. It's possible he's seeing $23M of that deal in the first two with a year 3 salary of $6M. Thing is if that's the case the third year isn't even a given...because dead cap from bonus amortization is often the implied guarantee in any deal. So it could be a 2 year $23M deal that tolls a year during a lockout and leaves Vince longing for more if he is cut in year 3 which turns out to be 2013 at age 32. $9M SB, Salaries of $9M, $4.6M, $6.4M, first year uncapped cap hit $12M, second year cap hit $7.6M, final year dead cap $3M...

That's spitting distance of the uncapped version of the 3 year $30M deal with $23M guaranteed that Seymour got minus that rookie year that pushed that deal to $32M and we know two things now about that deal - Seymour didn't live to see the end of it here, and he will get another deal but it remains to be seen if that one will be for elite money in this labor market. Because Seymour could end up tagged this season and done by 2012. But it still beats being tagged for $7M in 2010 and done by 2012 which is the risk Wilfork has to weigh and balance against any multi year offer.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Maybe not lowball in $ per year, but at Vince's age, I doubt he's of the opinion that a three year deal qualifies as "long-term."

3yrs @ 29m is AAV of $9.7m.

Haynesworth gets $41m in the 1st 3 years for $13.6m/yr ave.

Again, we don't know the payout schedule/guaranteed $$

Is Haynesworth worth $3.9m/yr more than VW....?

 

[BradyFTW!]

3yrs @ 29m is AAV of $9.7m.

Haynesworth gets $41m in the 1st 3 years for $13.6m/yr ave.

Is Haynesworth worth $3.9m/yr more than VW....?

No, but Dan Snyder paid that much best he's an idiot. If Wilfork thinks he can get Haynesworth money, then he's going to be very, very disappointed, because nobody else is dumb enough to pay that much for a DT, so unless Snyder wants to tie up $25M per year on his interior DL...

 

[RobertWeathers]

No, but Dan Snyder paid that much best he's an idiot.

Agreed.

I thought Vince had said that he is not looking for Haynesworth cash. Trying to find he quote..

If that is true, he either wants another mill or so per year or the payment schedule is not to his liking. Years too, I would guess, but the 1st 3 years outlay of cash seems to be the most critical point.

He could go back in the market at 32 years old. Thats not bad.

 

[eagle eye]

I seriously doubt that. If Felger's numbers are true, the Pats are looking to guarantee the same amount over the life of the a three year contract that a team would guarantee over five year for the same anual salary. Since in 3 years, Wilfork would be 33, he would unlikely see the fourth and fifth year of a deal if it was at elite money. At three years, he would have a chance to get one more deal with a decent signing bonus.

I think if the length was the only issue, the Pats could easily tack on two or three more years and leave the guarantee the same. It is no skin off their back. It has the money.

Get with the program man, Wilfork is 28 turning 29 in April.