Carucci: Pats still interested in Peppers [merged]

[WhiZa]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

All these rumors are just torture to Patriot fans

 

[mgteich]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

Why not just repost all of what was posted last year?

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

Here is what I really want to know about this whole rumor involving Peppers

HAS BELICHICK OR KRAFT EVER INDICATED IN THE SLIGHTEST WHIM THAT THEY ARE SERIOUS ABOUT GOING AFTER PEPPERS OR IS THIS ONE BIG SUPER TREMENDOUS RUMOR BASED ON PATRIOTS NEED AND JUST MADE UP BY THE MEDIA?

I am willing to bet that BB and Kraft have not even mentioned Julius name as a serious pickup at this time.

IMO The guy to watch for is Jason Taylor who is 3,000,000 times more of a chance to land here than Julius who IMO is a media made up rumor,speculation based on need and nothing more.

 

[HarkDawg]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

I'd get him




Our defense has been below avg the last 2 years. (From what it was before)


Peppers would make our team capable of blitzing.


3-4 4-3 argument can go on forever...... I am in favor of a hybrid system.

Wilfork's constant fat gain is an issue..... Tag.... Tag/ Trade if need be.


I have not been impressed with the Pats run D...... how valuable is Vince?


Other teams double team him and becomes a non factor.


Bring in Peppers for 3-4yrs. I want change. If Vince will not sign he can be traded away. <3 the TAG

 

[HarkDawg]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

Just in...


The Patriots "remain very interested in acquiring [Julius] Peppers," sources tell NFL.com.
The Patriots ranked 23rd in sacks last season with just 31, a number that would surely rise with Peppers in the fold. Along with the Eagles, the Patriots are considered the most likely landing spots for Peppers. We'll see if they are willing to pay Peppers, Tom Brady and Vince Wilfork this offseason.
Source: NFL.com
Related: Patriots

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

Vince doesn't want to be tagged because he wants LONG TERM security on top of staying with the team. That means a multi-year contract. Complaining about being tagged does not necessarily mean that he's complaining about the money that comes with it.

He may not want Haynesworth money, but based on the information we have, he definitely wants big money. The money that the Pats are supposably offering is for like $9 million a year with a guarantee in the mid $20 million. If he wasn't looking for significantly bigger money and only a longer term deal, he would be signed right now.

On a general note, why would signing Peppers mean the end of Wilfork's career with the Pats? I still don't see why they can't sign both. Even with Brady's contract, there are far more teams with more than three top paid players who are fielding playoff caliber teams (the Jets, Cowboys, Colts, etc.). Even the Pats in 2008 had four players who were near the top paid players at their position (Seymour, Brady, Thomas, and Moss). Odds are the Pats will be shedding some of their higher salaries in the next year or two anyway (Thomas, Moss, Koppen, Light) either by cutting, trading, or contracts expiring.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

Just in...


The Patriots "remain very interested in acquiring [Julius] Peppers," sources tell NFL.com.
The Patriots ranked 23rd in sacks last season with just 31, a number that would surely rise with Peppers in the fold. Along with the Eagles, the Patriots are considered the most likely landing spots for Peppers. We'll see if they are willing to pay Peppers, Tom Brady and Vince Wilfork this offseason.
Source: NFL.com
Related: Patriots

It's not just in, it just keeps getting rehashed. And like last season Carrucci and Kerwin are likely each others as well as everyone elses sources...

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

He may not want Haynesworth money, but based on the information we have, he definitely wants big money. The money that the Pats are supposably offering is for like $9 million a year with a guarantee in the mid $20 million. If he wasn't looking for significantly bigger money and only a longer term deal, he would be signed right now.

They offered a 3 year deal. You can GUESS that he wants higher per-year money but right now it still seems he wants more years.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

He may not want Haynesworth money, but based on the information we have, he definitely wants big money. The money that the Pats are supposably offering is for like $9 million a year with a guarantee in the mid $20 million. If he wasn't looking for significantly bigger money and only a longer term deal, he would be signed right now.

On a general note, why would signing Peppers mean the end of Wilfork's career with the Pats? I still don't see why they can't sign both. Even with Brady's contract, there are far more teams with more than three top paid players who are fielding playoff caliber teams (the Jets, Cowboys, Colts, etc.). Even the Pats in 2008 had four players who were near the top paid players at their position (Seymour, Brady, Thomas, and Moss). Odds are the Pats will be shedding some of their higher salaries in the next year or two anyway (Thomas, Moss, Koppen, Light) either by cutting, trading, or contracts expiring.

It doesn't. Wilfork would be franchised for a year with the Patriots still being able to work out a deal before next season while Peppers would be signed. That's if the rumors are true.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

They offered a 3 year deal. You can GUESS that he wants higher per-year money but right now it still seems he wants more years.

Again, if it was contract length adding a few years is not anything big since no matter if you sign a 3 year deal or a five year deal, you are very cuttable after three years anyway. Teams don't sweat extending the lengths of the deal. The only hold up would be that Wilfork would want significantly more guaranteed money for the length of the contract.

It is always about money. If it was solely about years, the deal would be done. Tack on two more years at whatever Wilfork wanted and the deal would be done. No big deal for the Pats. They can still cut him after three years if they wanted to. In fact, Wilfork may be significantly undervalued in three years. Wilfork wants more upfront money with those years. Which means it is all about the money.

Just guessing, but I think Wilfork is looking for $30-40 million guaranteed. If the Pats gave him that, he would happily sign a three year deal, a one year deal, or a five year deal. For players, it is all about the guranteed money and the first three years. Anything else is play money because a player in his early 30s may never see that money.

BTW, a player saying he wants a long term deal and the length of the contract is an issue is a way to say that he wants more money with a spin that make him look like the good guy in the negotiations because he looks more loyal to the team than the team is to him. The player knows that with more years, he will get more guaranteed money up front.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

Again, if it was contract length adding a few years is not anything big since no matter if you sign a 3 year deal or a five year deal, you are very cuttable after three years anyway. Teams don't sweat extending the lengths of the deal. The only hold up would be that Wilfork would want significantly more guaranteed money for the length of the contract.

It is always about money. If it was solely about years, the deal would be done. Tack on two more years at whatever Wilfork wanted and the deal would be done. No big deal for the Pats. They can still cut him after three years if they wanted to. In fact, Wilfork may be significantly undervalued in three years. Wilfork wants more upfront money with those years. Which means it is all about the money.

Just guessing, but I think Wilfork is looking for $30-40 million guaranteed. If the Pats gave him that, he would happily sign a three year deal, a one year deal, or a five year deal. For players, it is all about the guranteed money and the first three years. Anything else is play money because a player in his early 30s may never see that money.

BTW, a player saying he wants a long term deal and the length of the contract is an issue is a way to say that he wants more money with a spin that make him look like the good guy in the negotiations because he looks more loyal to the team than the team is to him. The player knows that with more years, he will get more guaranteed money up front.

I see your point, it's all semantics. He still isn't demanding Hanyesworth money.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Reiss: Peppers chatter persists

If we can't have both, keep Wilfork, imo. It's nonsense to think Peppers is going to change everything. A lot of other little things need to happen.

Let's not cut of our nose tackle to spite our defense.

Post of the day.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

I see your point, it's all semantics. He still isn't demanding Hanyesworth money.

We don't know that. Probably not, but not definitely not.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

Good thinking. Let's kick out a guy that we know for a fact works in the system and bring in a guy that has never played OLB in a 3-4 and pay him top money.

Indeed...

"We" apparently can't bring in Branch or Stallworth to see what they've got left, even though they've played on the team before and at least have some familiarity with the offense. "We" can, though, bring in a 30 year old player who's been at DE for his NFL career and have him switch to OLB, while pissing off the best defender on the team by sticking him with the franchise tag even as "we" drop serious coin on the conversion project.

Welcome to the silly season.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

Indeed...

"We" apparently can't bring in Branch or Stallworth to see what they've got left, even though they've played on the team before and at least have some familiarity with the offense. "We" can, though, bring in a 30 year old player who's been at DE for his NFL career and have him switch to OLB, while pissing off the best defender on the team by sticking him with the franchise tag even as "we" drop serious coin on the conversion project.

Welcome to the silly season.

I've said my piece in this thread. I'll let you take it from here, if you want it.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

I've said my piece in this thread. I'll let you take it from here, if you want it.

Nah.... I'll come off as being anti-Peppers if I respond to all the "I'll have Julius' baby!" sort of posts we're seeing. Anti-Peppers is not my position. I just have some reservations which make me less than exuberant about a possible signing, and find the willingness of people to ignore those issues for him to be a bit ridiculous.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

Nah.... I'll come off as being anti-Peppers if I respond to all the "I'll have Julius' baby!" sort of posts we're seeing. Anti-Peppers is not my position. I just have some reservations which make me less than exuberant about a possible signing, and find the willingness of people to ignore those issues for him to be a bit ridiculous.

IF we can get a DE capable of controlling the run and taking up two blockers (not sure if there is going to be anybody available in the draft that can do this from day one) and retain Wilfork (which I think it very possible considering the amount of money the Pats have to play around with), then I have no reservations about bringing in Peppers. The mere thought of what he would be able to do behind a guy like Seymour would make me itchy about our pass defense. However, the guys that we already have on the roster do not seem to be those guys. Wright should only be DE in situational (passing downs) while it's the same story with Green. Both Pryor and Brace seem to be more suited to play the DT position. Whether we bring Peppers in or not, I hope an upgrade at that position is at or near the top of BB's list of priorities.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

IF we can get a DE capable of controlling the run and taking up two blockers (not sure if there is going to be anybody available in the draft that can do this from day one) and retain Wilfork (which I think it very possible considering the amount of money the Pats have to play around with), then I have no reservations about bringing in Peppers. The mere thought of what he would be able to do behind a guy like Seymour would make me itchy about our pass defense. However, the guys that we already have on the roster do not seem to be those guys. Wright should only be DE in situational (passing downs) while it's the same story with Green. Both Pryor and Brace seem to be more suited to play the DT position. Whether we bring Peppers in or not, I hope an upgrade at that position is at or near the top of BB's list of priorities.

I agree. Peppers or no Peppers, for a multitude of reasons, the team needs Seymour 2.0 at the other DE/DT position. I'll take another Warren though....

The problem is finding him.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

I agree. Peppers or no Peppers, for a multitude of reasons, the team needs Seymour 2.0 at the other DE/DT position. I'll take another Warren though....

The problem is finding him.

2011 draft.... Just ignore the years 2009 and 2010.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Reiss Blog: Peppers chatter persists

IF we can get a DE capable of controlling the run and taking up two blockers (not sure if there is going to be anybody available in the draft that can do this from day one) and retain Wilfork (which I think it very possible considering the amount of money the Pats have to play around with), then I have no reservations about bringing in Peppers. The mere thought of what he would be able to do behind a guy like Seymour would make me itchy about our pass defense. However, the guys that we already have on the roster do not seem to be those guys. Wright should only be DE in situational (passing downs) while it's the same story with Green. Both Pryor and Brace seem to be more suited to play the DT position. Whether we bring Peppers in or not, I hope an upgrade at that position is at or near the top of BB's list of priorities.

Personally, I will trust Belichick's judgement on the guy. He has converted so many DEs into LBs over the years (McGinest, Bruschi, Vrabel, Colvin although he converted out of college, Lawrence Taylor who converted in college) that I think he has a pretty good eye for who could be converted and who can't. Although he isn't perfect at it. It seems that he truly believes that Peppers can make the conversion.

I personally don't know that if Belichick is right about Peppers (assuming I am reading him right), I don't know if the Pats need what you say for him to be dominant.

I want the Pats to get Peppers just because the guy is an elite player who could be even better coming from the standing position. He could be worse, much worse. But I like his chances of converting to OLB assuming that Belichick believes it strongly.