Lombardi on Wilfork situation

[condon84]

Yes, I would want that. Now look at it through the Patriots' eyes: would you want to pay a Haynesworth-esque contract to a guy who's nearing 30, shows up to TC increasingly overweight every year, is a two-down player, and who has a family history of major helath issues? Fair is a relative term, and without knowing how much Wilfork wants, we can only speculate either way.

Obviously the Pats are going to push Wilfork's negatives to push down the number, but that's not going to stop Wilfork and his agent from thinking Wilfork deserves a top salary comparable to the top defensive players in the league. Whether the Pats agree to pay that or not is the fork in the road. And I think it's this fork that's going to lead Vince into a holdout.

We've seen this before.

 

[Frezo]

Let's assume for a moment that Vince gets a juicy big money long term contract from another team. It stands to reason that he will be expected to be an every down player. That's roughly a 30% increase in plays from what he's used to. At his age and frame that could shave as much as two years off his career. He's in a good situation with the Pats. They understand his limitations, he knows the system, knows the players, etc. I wonder if things like this cross players' minds or do they just see the immediate big $$$ dangling in front of their noses.

 

[alvinnf]

Let's assume for a moment that Vince gets a juicy big money long term contract from another team. It stands to reason that he will be expected to be an every down player. That's roughly a 30% increase in plays from what he's used to. At his age and frame that could shave as much as two years off his career. He's in a good situation with the Pats. They understand his limitations, he knows the system, knows the players, etc. I wonder if things like this cross players' minds or do they just see the immediate big $$$ dangling in front of their noses.

Money = Stature in the NFL. 2 or 3 downs......

 

[Patjew]

Sunday at the Post | National Football Post

" Jason La Canfora of NFL.com reported that he expects the Patriots to franchise DT Vince Wolfork if they don’t get a long deal — which I expect will happen right before the Feb. 25 deadline. Wilfork isn’t going anywhere, Pats fans."

decipher this. does he mean lombardi expects the franchise tag before Feb 25, or a long term deal will be struck right before the 25th?

Seems like he's saying the latter.

 

[muzz]

I personally don't think he's getting a long term deal here either way.
I think 3-4 years at most, at <9 mill per IF they even BOTHER with him.
I'm betting on the Franchise tag ( "OOO My, I have to try and feed my family on < 8 Mill? How am I gonna feed MYSELF with such a ****!y deal"?).

He is a 2 down player, a good 2 down player player no doubt, but nonetheless..........

Not only that but it would upset the apple cart and screwup everything.

He's not worth anywhere near Haynesworth $, AAMOF Haynesworth isn't worth anywhere near Haynesworth $, but he found a ****** to pay him at the detriment to the rest of his team......

How'd that work out? :bricks:

 

[peterforpats]

looking at VW I SUSPECT HE HAS ALREADY BEEN TO SAM'S CLUB!! he obviously has done bulk purchasing already.

 

[woolster22]

I'd give Vince 3/4 years at 9.5 max. Frontload the first year as there will be no cap, and the hits down the road are not so bad. Let us assume 40 over 4. You could do that with 16/8/8/8. Would that really be that much of a stretch? I can't see him being upset with the 24 million in the first two, and 32 through three. Worst case scenario the 4th year he gets the gate, and he is still getting paid close to 11 mil/yr over the first three. This is also assuming there is no signing bonus, etc. I have no idea how contracts and what not play out in the NFL, but something along these lines would seem more than amicable to both sides. Drop 20% of the contracts value into an uncapped year, and pay the man 8 mil/yr beyond that. How you'd factor in a signing bonus, incentives, etc is beyond me, but something to the above effect would seem to work in my mind. Then again, I am not in charge of the NE Patriots, but I would gamble VW would be more than happy with that offer.

 

[Reckedtrek]

I'm getting tired of people (like McGinnest) saying to the Pats on ESPN- "just pay the man". Okay Willie- pay him what? Whatever he wants? If he wants $15 million, hell if he wants $20 million a year just pay him, huh? It's one thing when fans sit around and debate stuff like this like in this thread. It's another when a known NFL player goes on ESPN to shoot his mouth off when he likely knows little about what's really going on. If he even talks to VW he only getting one side of the story anyway.

If both sides are being reasonable this should work out quickly. If not and one or both sides are just being rediculous it's not going to go well. I can see both sides points and hope they get it done. I'm guessing big Vince has a good amount of cash left- he shops at WalMart because I've seen him there before!

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Didn't Reiss post that Vince played 51% of the defensive snaps last year? 9 million a year seems like a lot of money for a PT player.

However he would make great trade bait. Not many pro bowl DT/NT's on the trade market.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Didn't Reiss post that Vince played 51% of the defensive snaps last year? 9 million a year seems like a lot of money for a PT player.

However he would make great trade bait. Not many pro bowl DT/NT's on the trade market.

VW played about 64% of the snaps last year and slightly less in 2008.

 

[alvinnf]

Maybe Vince needs to stay in the game on 3rd down. It's not like our pass rush was any good with him on the sideline. He can push the pocket and eat up blockers. Maybe we need to play him and pay him.

 

[mgteich]

1. The team will franchise him if there is no deal.
2. The team should not expect to see him until Game One, or perhaps Game Two.
===================
If this secenario (this year and next) is not acceptable to the patriots, then the team can
A) pay the man
B) work with his agent on a sign and trade
C) trade him as soon as he finally signs

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The team will see him because once he signs the tag his money is guaranteed but the tradeoff is he has to report. It does Vince Wilfork no good to skip off season organized conditioning or TC in what will again be a contract season. His best case scenario is getting a deal done now for as much guaranteed money as he can because if not he faces the possibility of being either a UFA in a lockout season or almost as bad one of a couple of hundred UFA's in the first season under a new cap that could be a lot less expansive if not also initially rolled back to 2008 levels.

 

[chevss454]

The team will see him because once he signs the tag his money is guaranteed but the tradeoff is he has to report. It does Vince Wilfork no good to skip off season organized conditioning or TC in what will again be a contract season. His best case scenario is getting a deal done now for as much guaranteed money as he can because if not he faces the possibility of being either a UFA in a lockout season or almost as bad one of a couple of hundred UFA's in the first season under a new cap that could be a lot less expansive if not also initially rolled back to 2008 levels.

Exactly right because all those uncapped year RFA's will UFA's with the new cap. I've seen estimates of up to 400 UFA's when you add on players who will be let go by current teams in cost cutting moves without a cap floor. Chaos reigns!

 

[DaBruinz]

The day he becomes a 3 down player, he can get $12m a year.

So, because Vince isn't a part of the Pats nickle package, by their choice, you want to penalize him?

 

[RobertWeathers]

1. The team will franchise him if there is no deal.
2. The team should not expect to see him until Game One, or perhaps Game Two.
===================
If this secenario (this year and next) is not acceptable to the patriots, then the team can
A) pay the man
B) work with his agent on a sign and trade
C) trade him as soon as he finally signs

Quite frankly, until his contractual situation is fully resolved, the Pats need to expect not to see Wilfork at all.

 

[JMarr]

It's going to be really interesting to see what the Pats' base alignment will be this year, or even if there will be one. I have to believe there's been a method to BB's madness--when the Pats traded Seymour, it signaled the end of the 3-4 in NE, and that BB was already in MAJOR re-building mode. (Don't know if I buy the argument that Oakland's 2011 1st was too good to pass up for Seymour).

Unless he was just winging it , I think BB wants to move a 4-3 base. It makes too much sense because 1) Wilfork is probably demanding insane money, 2) Seymour was the perfect 3-4 DE, and 3) BB's head-scratching decisions regarding the LB/DE position (see Burgess).

Solid LBs are the key to the 3-4, period, and we just don't have anybody that's a good fit in that system. More teams are going to the 3-4, but ironically the 4-3 makes more sense in a pass happy league.

In a base 4-3, Guyton Mayo AD/TBC wouldn't be shabby. Then upgrade Guyton at starter with a high draft pick or FA.

Wilfork is gone. Hopefully BB more or less knew this, even when he traded Seymour. And as trade bait, Vince is as good as it gets. BB will trade or pick up an absolute stud DE (Peppers anyone?) and probably draft another, plus a DT. A Dline of Wright, Warren, Pryor, Burgess/Peppers (!) might be able to bring a lot of heat and also take care of the run.

 

[crowell33]

I don't see Vince wanting quite Haynesworth money but probably somewhere close by. Haynesworth on average has a salary of ~14M. He doesn't get after the passer as well so I could see his camp wanting around 12M per year over 5 years or so.

I cant see the pats paying much over 9M a year though, so the tag 7M makes sense. It should give him a little extra incentive to sign, or else I can only see a holdout / trade happening.

That Wilfork doesn't get after the quarterback as well as Haynesworth, is a huge understatement. Haynesworth had 8.5 sacks the year before his new contract, Wilfork had zero ( 0 ). Wilfork has a TOTAL of 7.5 sacks in his 6 year career.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Quite frankly, until his contractual situation is fully resolved, the Pats need to expect not to see Wilfork at all.

Except that that never happens let alone on the eve of a lockout season.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Except that that never happens let alone on the eve of a lockout season.

Agreed. He'd be a complete fool to sit out but it's a negotiating tool he has at his disposal. My point is that the Pats need to plan accordingly. All part of being proactive and prepared.