Vince Wilfork...on WEEI...

[mgteich]

But Wilfork could be a royal PITA if he simply did not participate until the WED before Game One. Wilfork would lose no pay and miss no games. And no, he wouldn't be ready.

Samuel tried this tactic and it worked aas well as could be expected.

If the Front Office and Wilfork are still discussing extension before Training Camp, I could see them agreeing to one more year.

 

[Deus Irae]

Well that's part of the point I am making. You can't just show up on Thanksgiving and expect to be dominating by week 17 when everyone else has been together since August.

Do you honestly think Vince Wilfork could just stroll into town on week 12 and Belichick will rush him right back into the same role he had before? No way that happens. Wilfork is smart enough to know that that strategy is just cutting off his nose to spite his face.

What Belichick does with him once he gets there is irrelevant. The reason that players don't use this strategy is that they don't like the lost money. However, that money is only worth getting if you don't get injured. A franchised player who gets injured in his franchised year is screwed out of far more than he could possibly have gained. Playing fewer games means taking fewer risks.

 

[Wolfpack]

What Belichick does with him once he gets there is irrelevant.

Um, yeah it kinda is totally relevant. You said "If Vince comes in for 6 weeks and is his old, dominant self by the end of the year, the offers will still be there." Well it'll be tough to return to his old, dominating seld when he isn't playing anywhere near the same role he has always had.

You seem to think Wilfork can miss 10 weeks, stroll back into Foxboro, get his old job back no questions asked (because we all know how much Bill Belichick loves to cater to disgruntled players), and return to dominating form all by week 17. It just doesn't work that way.

The reason that players don't use this strategy is that they don't like the lost money. However, that money is only worth getting if you don't get injured. A franchised player who gets injured in his franchised year is screwed out of far more than he could possibly have gained. Playing fewer games means taking fewer risks.

The reason they don't use that strategy is because it is a lose/lose scenario. You lose in the short term by missing out on roughly 2/3rd your franchise year's salary, and you lose in the long term because you've just destroyed your value on the open market by essentially taking a year off. And it's all money that you will NEVER recover.

Vince Wilfork is no different from the dozens of other NFLers who have been in the same situation. If push comes to shove and the Patriots franchise him and can't swing a deal to trade him, he'll whine and moan - and then he'll report and play the full season.

 

[p8ryts]

Re: Vince Wilfork....on WEEI...

I've agreed with nearly every move BB has made with regards to letting high priced free agents go, whether it be trading them, cutting them, or letting them walk. I supported the Seymour and Branch trades, thought Ty Law wanted too many years, thought Milloy was over the hill, and thought Asante wasn't worth what the Eagles gave him. But letting Vince walk I cannot accept.

He is a premier NT, a team leader, and has done all the right things. For the first time, I don't think players would simply shrug off letting a player go as "The Patriot Way". I think trading Vince, letting him walk, or even franchising him could have a negative impact throughout the locker room. Unless he is asking for an astronomical contract with too many years, the Pats have to pony up and re-sign Vince.

This team has won with no name NT's before. The complaint all year was lack of leadership so how effective was his leadership? I like Wilfork also but it remains he is a two down player that still gets blown out of the hole sometimes, see Ravens opening play.
If he wants big money he needs to on the field for three downs. 7 million franchised is a lot for two downs. I'm not convinced retaining or not retaining Wilfork makes or breaks this team in the future.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

the real irony is that seymour threw a hissy fit......he got rewarded

branch threw a hissy fit.......he got rewarded

wilfork went by principle and played out his contract ... and he gets this

I do find it utterly stupid that the pats pick wilfork to make some kind of statement or change in policy.

and I'll be willing to bet that wilfork saw this coming over a year ago and is prepared to take the financial hit to see it through and hold out until mid season. and to those who think that will affect his value much, all one has to look at is the list of teams who would line up at the opportunity to upgrade their NT: KC,denver,SD,pittsburgh,cleveland,nyj,dolphins,niners....interesting that 5 of those teams have past ties either with the pats or wilfork himself.

he knows the market AND what he means to the pats.....and while his leverage is limited, he could easily shoot his way out of town by making his relationship with BB an unworkable one.....there are alot of things you can do without getting slapped with the 'conduct detrimental' when you aren't even under contract

 

[Rob0729]

the real irony is that seymour threw a hissy fit......he got rewarded

branch threw a hissy fit.......he got rewarded

wilfork went by principle and played out his contract ... and he gets this

I do find it utterly stupid that the pats pick wilfork to make some kind of statement or change in policy.

and I'll be willing to bet that wilfork saw this coming over a year ago and is prepared to take the financial hit to see it through and hold out until mid season. and to those who think that will affect his value much, all one has to look at is the list of teams who would line up at the opportunity to upgrade their NT: KC,denver,SD,pittsburgh,cleveland,nyj,dolphins,niners....interesting that 5 of those teams have past ties either with the pats or wilfork himself.

he knows the market AND what he means to the pats.....and while his leverage is limited, he could easily shoot his way out of town by making his relationship with BB an unworkable one.....there are alot of things you can do without getting slapped with the 'conduct detrimental' when you aren't even under contract

What has Wilfork actually gotten? He hasn't had the franchise tag even slapped on him yet. We haven't seen the end game on this yet.

As for Wilfork compared to Seymour, they have both done about the same in the hissyfit department. Seymour never talked publically about his contract like Wilfork has. Both missed portions of mandatory portions of the offseason in protest of their contract situations. I don't see any difference.

Personally, Wilfork repeatedly negotiating his contract in the media in subsequent years doesn't make him nearly as principled as you make him out to be. As far as we know, he could be a greedy SOB who is only interested in money since he already has a Super Bowl ring. Most he isn't totally a mercenary, but he might have unrealistic expectations of his value. The Pats could be 100% in the wrong, but I am guessing there is a middle ground where both sides are unreasonable in certain areas.

I got $1,000 I am willing to give up to bet that Wilfork doesn't miss half the season. You willing to take. Better yet, if Wilfork doesn't sit out the first ten games this up coming season, you leave the board forever. If he does, I will. At least that is a bet that cannot be welsched on. And yes, the deal would be off if he is traded or signs a long term deal. I am only talking if he hits the regular season as a franchised player with no new deal.

 

[mgteich]

Other than spite, please list the advantages of holding out to WILFORK beyond the Wednesday before the first game.

IMHO, any holdout by Wilfork that last until the preseaon will result in a one-year no future franchise deal. Do you disagree? Do you think that the team will continue to have this distraction through the preseason.

My GUESS is that the decisions and actions regarding Wilfork will come before the draft with patriots either
1) signing a long-term extension
2) a sign and trade deal for at least what we got for Cassel (we would then draft a NT)
3) signing a 1-year deal with no future franchise, as they did with Samuel

There is NO reason to extend this distraction/issue past the draft.

the real irony is that seymour threw a hissy fit......he got rewarded

branch threw a hissy fit.......he got rewarded

wilfork went by principle and played out his contract ... and he gets this

I do find it utterly stupid that the pats pick wilfork to make some kind of statement or change in policy.

and I'll be willing to bet that wilfork saw this coming over a year ago and is prepared to take the financial hit to see it through and hold out until mid season. and to those who think that will affect his value much, all one has to look at is the list of teams who would line up at the opportunity to upgrade their NT: KC,denver,SD,pittsburgh,cleveland,nyj,dolphins,niners....interesting that 5 of those teams have past ties either with the pats or wilfork himself.

he knows the market AND what he means to the pats.....and while his leverage is limited, he could easily shoot his way out of town by making his relationship with BB an unworkable one.....there are alot of things you can do without getting slapped with the 'conduct detrimental' when you aren't even under contract

 

[Deus Irae]

Um, yeah it kinda is totally relevant. You said "If Vince comes in for 6 weeks and is his old, dominant self by the end of the year, the offers will still be there." Well it'll be tough to return to his old, dominating seld when he isn't playing anywhere near the same role he has always had.

You seem to think Wilfork can miss 10 weeks, stroll back into Foxboro, get his old job back no questions asked (because we all know how much Bill Belichick loves to cater to disgruntled players), and return to dominating form all by week 17. It just doesn't work that way.
The reason they don't use that strategy is because it is a lose/lose scenario. You lose in the short term by missing out on roughly 2/3rd your franchise year's salary, and you lose in the long term because you've just destroyed your value on the open market by essentially taking a year off. And it's all money that you will NEVER recover.

The issue isn't whether or not BB will act like a petulant child, although that's how you're painting him. The issue is what the impact will be upon Wilfork. And, as I noted, players that get injured during a franchise year lose millions of dollars on the next contract, and they'll never get that back.

As for returning to form, veterans in their prime tend to return mostly to form quite quickly, as long as they weren't lazy in the offseason. That's part of why they hate training camp, since it becomes a grind rather than something needed to get back into shape.

As for what Wilfork will actually do, that really wasn't what I asked you, so I'll leave that part to its own devices.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

What has Wilfork actually gotten? He hasn't had the franchise tag even slapped on him yet. We haven't seen the end game on this yet.

As for Wilfork compared to Seymour, they have both done about the same in the hissyfit department. Seymour never talked publically about his contract like Wilfork has. Both missed portions of mandatory portions of the offseason in protest of their contract situations. I don't see any difference.

Personally, Wilfork repeatedly negotiating his contract in the media in subsequent years doesn't make him nearly as principled as you make him out to be. As far as we know, he could be a greedy SOB who is only interested in money since he already has a Super Bowl ring. Most he isn't totally a mercenary, but he might have unrealistic expectations of his value. The Pats could be 100% in the wrong, but I am guessing there is a middle ground where both sides are unreasonable in certain areas.

I got $1,000 I am willing to give up to bet that Wilfork doesn't miss half the season. You willing to take. Better yet, if Wilfork doesn't sit out the first ten games this up coming season, you leave the board forever. If he does, I will. At least that is a bet that cannot be welsched on. And yes, the deal would be off if he is traded or signs a long term deal. I am only talking if he hits the regular season as a franchised player with no new deal.

wilfork has not done the same.......seymour never saw the end of his contract, so the similarities end right there. wilfork did not skip a beat while he was under contract. he is not under contract now, so speaking up now is different than speaking up while under contract

wilfork isn't negotiating anything in public.....there have been no negotiations in case you didn't know....if he was greedy and only cared about money, then he would have made this stink a year ago.

the funny lesson that is going to be learned by players is to not wait until your contract is up.......you have much more leverage while you have a year left on your deal.

maybe wilfork will show up week one.....he has to sign the tender first. but wilfork does not come across as the kind of person who will eat his words, and he has spoken........without some kind of action beyond the franchise tag, this will get worse and the much more important things is that the pats and their defensive situation cannot afford to have this question mark lingering all summer long, so their position is tenuous, also.

wilfork is a family man and thinks prudently.....he's no dummy......but he is also extremely tough in his convictions.....there's no arm twisting the front office can do.....all that will do is make things worse......

as for betting, in the event you are right, you can live with your own glory, but the notion that this will work out any certain way because other situations have is ridiculous

 

[mgteich]

Q1) Would Wilfork accept a no future franchise or trade one year contract (at the franchise rate)?
Q2) Would the patriots offer such a contract?

Why do you all presume that both the patriots and Wilfork will be self-destructive and not get this done?

wilfork has not done the same.......seymour never saw the end of his contract, so the similarities end right there. wilfork did not skip a beat while he was under contract. he is not under contract now, so speaking up now is different than speaking up while under contract

wilfork isn't negotiating anything in public.....there have been no negotiations in case you didn't know....if he was greedy and only cared about money, then he would have made this stink a year ago.

the funny lesson that is going to be learned by players is to not wait until your contract is up.......you have much more leverage while you have a year left on your deal.

maybe wilfork will show up week one.....he has to sign the tender first. but wilfork does not come across as the kind of person who will eat his words, and he has spoken........without some kind of action beyond the franchise tag, this will get worse and the much more important things is that the pats and their defensive situation cannot afford to have this question mark lingering all summer long, so their position is tenuous, also.

wilfork is a family man and thinks prudently.....he's no dummy......but he is also extremely tough in his convictions.....there's no arm twisting the front office can do.....all that will do is make things worse......

as for betting, in the event you are right, you can live with your own glory, but the notion that this will work out any certain way because other situations have is ridiculous

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Other than spite, please list the advantages of holding out to WILFORK beyond the Wednesday before the first game.

IMHO, any holdout by Wilfork that last until the preseaon will result in a one-year no future franchise deal. Do you disagree? Do you think that the team will continue to have this distraction through the preseason.

My GUESS is that the decisions and actions regarding Wilfork will come before the draft with patriots either
1) signing a long-term extension
2) a sign and trade deal for at least what we got for Cassel (we would then draft a NT)
3) signing a 1-year deal with no future franchise, as they did with Samuel

There is NO reason to extend this distraction/issue past the draft.

without emotion or principle mixed in, your options all make sense.......but things are getting emotional for wilfork.

I believe the franchise tag only approach will bring distraction through all of training camp and preseason, because based on principle, the franchise tag will only get him to show up 'when he has to show up' in the face of the franchise tag and wilfork's current opinion on it, why would he ever go out of his way? the team has done nothing to go out of their way for their best defensive player.

you can't compare wilfork with asante samuel........wilfork cant take running plays off while on the field or play in a way that avoids injury which is exactly what samuel did.

I think you can expect wilfork to get by on the minimum with the communication that you would get a better-than-ever wilfork with an extension. one that he deserves.

the thing is that I don't believe the pats have even made an offer....not in the last year, anyway.......because if they had, wilfork would be behaving differently.....he feels the tag is imminent because he hasn't heard anything else.

I believe wilfork is a stand-up guy who is looking for what he feels he deserves.......I also believe wilfork is a much more stand-up guy than belichik is......and in the end, wilfork will use this if he has to

 

[Rob0729]

wilfork has not done the same.......seymour never saw the end of his contract, so the similarities end right there. wilfork did not skip a beat while he was under contract. he is not under contract now, so speaking up now is different than speaking up while under contract

wilfork isn't negotiating anything in public.....there have been no negotiations in case you didn't know....if he was greedy and only cared about money, then he would have made this stink a year ago.

the funny lesson that is going to be learned by players is to not wait until your contract is up.......you have much more leverage while you have a year left on your deal.

maybe wilfork will show up week one.....he has to sign the tender first. but wilfork does not come across as the kind of person who will eat his words, and he has spoken........without some kind of action beyond the franchise tag, this will get worse and the much more important things is that the pats and their defensive situation cannot afford to have this question mark lingering all summer long, so their position is tenuous, also.

wilfork is a family man and thinks prudently.....he's no dummy......but he is also extremely tough in his convictions.....there's no arm twisting the front office can do.....all that will do is make things worse......

as for betting, in the event you are right, you can live with your own glory, but the notion that this will work out any certain way because other situations have is ridiculous

First, do you understand what the term "negotiating contract in the media" means? It doesn't mean he tells the media what he thinks he is worth so it will get to Belichick. It means he voices his disatifaction with his contract in the media. That is exactly what he did yesterday. Whether you do it while under contract or as a free agent, airing your beefs with a team to the media lacks class.

As for Wilfork eating his words, how would he eat his words if he singed the the tender. Where did he say he would hold out if he was franchised. He feels the franchise tender is insulting, but he has never said he wouldn't sign it if his choice was either take that money or miss the first ten games of the season. I don't know where you are getting this stuff. Wilfork hasn't even suggested that he wouldn't sign the tender right away (although we know that won't happen).

Again, you have no idea what Wilfork is like or thinking unless you know him personally. I mean Tiger Woods and John Edwards were family men with tough convictions until they turned out to be scumbags. I am not suggesting Wilfork is anything like them, but you don't know the guy.

The reality of the situation could be that Wilfork might be trying to set the market for DTs and asking for ridiculous demands. The Pats might be trying to take care of Wilfork like they did with Seymour (gave a generous short term contract which sacrifices long term security) and he doesn't feel it is enough. Wilfork could feel that since he stupidly signed a six year deal that the Pats should somehow compensate him for the year or two of extra length of his contract which may be over and above what he is worth. We don't know.

I don't blame Wilfork for trying to get every penny he can. If I was a top athlete I would do the same. I just kinda doubt that he is this innocent victim that the evil Patriots are trying to take advantage of. If this ends badly, I am pretty sure there will be plenty of blame to go around including to Wilfork.

As for the bet, I don't really care. You are the one who said you would bet he sits out. I just wanted to see if you would put your money where your mouth is.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

Q1) Would Wilfork accept a no future franchise or trade one year contract (at the franchise rate)?
Q2) Would the patriots offer such a contract?

Why do you all presume that both the patriots and Wilfork will be self-destructive and not get this done?

regarding Q1, I believe he would if there were at least some kind of negotiation about an extension and the ends did not meet........BUT, if they never even make an offer, then I could see wilfork behaving much more emotionally......in a bottom line you get what you give mentality......if the pats made minimum effort in signing him, they why would he do anything but the minumum, which could mean waiting unitl the very last possible moment to sign the tender and show up to get credit for the year?

Q2) the way things look right now, it just seems the only intent the pats ever had was to franchise him.......no negotiations.....I believe the pats are going to have to say something or do something beyond just franchising him in order to keep this from being a distraction and get him to show up for week 1.

I'm not arguing about what the value is for wilfork......my contention is the way the whole thing is being handled.....a few years ago, the 'my way or the highway' mentality that BB used was very effective when the team had been so successful........over the last 5 years, there are lots of teams that share the same level of success as the pats have.....there 'mystique' has evaporated.

 

[Rob0729]

without emotion or principle mixed in, your options all make sense.......but things are getting emotional for wilfork.

I believe the franchise tag only approach will bring distraction through all of training camp and preseason, because based on principle, the franchise tag will only get him to show up 'when he has to show up' in the face of the franchise tag and wilfork's current opinion on it, why would he ever go out of his way? the team has done nothing to go out of their way for their best defensive player.

you can't compare wilfork with asante samuel........wilfork cant take running plays off while on the field or play in a way that avoids injury which is exactly what samuel did.

I think you can expect wilfork to get by on the minimum with the communication that you would get a better-than-ever wilfork with an extension. one that he deserves.

the thing is that I don't believe the pats have even made an offer....not in the last year, anyway.......because if they had, wilfork would be behaving differently.....he feels the tag is imminent because he hasn't heard anything else.

I believe wilfork is a stand-up guy who is looking for what he feels he deserves.......I also believe wilfork is a much more stand-up guy than belichik is......and in the end, wilfork will use this if he has to

You don't think the Pats have even made an offer in the last year? Really?!? I know Belichick is a short term guy and never looks to the future, but even a guy as short sighted as Belichick knows it would be better to get a deal done than lose the guy.

Seriously, you are more emotional about this than Wilfork and letting your judgement cloud your opinion.

 

[mgteich]

You can choose to believe the Front Office, or not. They have many times indicated that no long-term deals would be offered to our top players until there was more clarity with regard to the future of the CBA and the rules for 2010 and 2011 contracts. The top players have been interpreted to mean Brady, Seymour, Wilfork, and Mankins. Gostkowski has been sometimes listed, but he is really a non-issue for 2010 since we can certainly keep him for 2010 for $3M or less as an RFA.

You don't think the Pats have even made an offer in the last year? Really?!? I know Belichick is a short term guy and never looks to the future, but even a guy as short sighted as Belichick knows it would be better to get a deal done than lose the guy.

Seriously, you are more emotional about this than Wilfork and letting your judgement cloud your opinion.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

the real irony is that seymour threw a hissy fit......he got rewarded

branch threw a hissy fit.......he got rewarded

wilfork went by principle and played out his contract ... and he gets this

I do find it utterly stupid that the pats pick wilfork to make some kind of statement or change in policy.

and I'll be willing to bet that wilfork saw this coming over a year ago and is prepared to take the financial hit to see it through and hold out until mid season. and to those who think that will affect his value much, all one has to look at is the list of teams who would line up at the opportunity to upgrade their NT: KC,denver,SD,pittsburgh,cleveland,nyj,dolphins,niners....interesting that 5 of those teams have past ties either with the pats or wilfork himself.

he knows the market AND what he means to the pats.....and while his leverage is limited, he could easily shoot his way out of town by making his relationship with BB an unworkable one.....there are alot of things you can do without getting slapped with the 'conduct detrimental' when you aren't even under contract

You persist in claiming Wilfork knows the market. I don't think anyone does heading into a lockout scenario. Of the eight teams you claim certainly constitute his market, 2 are precluded from signing him unless they lose a FA of equal value. Two more are notoriously cheap and already signed their franchise QB's to double digit committments that will extend into the lockout season, so they aren't likely to invest substantially in a two down talent. 2-3 others have bigger fish to fry, like locating a franchise QB. That leaves Miami who needs lots of help on offense as the wildcat fades out and who is already losing key pieces of their defense that will have to be replaced or their shiny new blitz happy DC will have been a wasted signing.

People in these kinds of situations need to have realistic goals. In a way, both Seymour and Branch had them. Under the present circumstances dictated by an expiring CBA, Vince and his agent should have had getting the best long term deal they could inked in 2008, while there was still time for a team to project the investment in one as a sound one, as their goal. The organization has explained all this to him. And told him he would have to wait for a better offer until the CBA is settled. He admits that. He was given options and made a choice and now he doesn't like it. Boo freakin' hoo.

Both this player and this team know that given Vince's genetic makeup his carrying this weight well into his 30's projects as risk of more than a career. They also both know that maintaining playing weight and condition during a hold out or lock out could be problematic. He did what he obviously felt was in Vince Wilfork's best interest in 2008-09. the NEP will now do what they feel is in the team and the organizations best interest in 2010.

And people wonder why Bill is so fond of observing it is what it is...

 

[Deus Irae]

You don't think the Pats have even made an offer in the last year? Really?!? I know Belichick is a short term guy and never looks to the future, but even a guy as short sighted as Belichick knows it would be better to get a deal done than lose the guy.

Seriously, you are more emotional about this than Wilfork and letting your judgement cloud your opinion.

Wilfork, who just finished the final season of a six-year deal he signed as a rookie prior to the start of the 2004 season, said the two sides haven’t talked since before the start of the season.

It Is What It Is Wilfork talks contract

http://audio.weei.com/m/28574351/vince-wilfork-patriots-dl.htm

You should read the article and listen to the interview.

 

[Rob0729]

You can choose to believe the Front Office, or not. They have many times indicated that no long-term deals would be offered to our top players until there was more clarity with regard to the future of the CBA and the rules for 2010 and 2011 contracts. The top players have been interpreted to mean Brady, Seymour, Wilfork, and Mankins. Gostkowski has been sometimes listed, but he is really a non-issue for 2010 since we can certainly keep him for 2010 for $3M or less as an RFA.

That is a recent development. Or did the Pats not extend TBC or a few others earlier this season. It wouldn't have stopped them from making offers earlier in the year. I am sure they were negotiating with Wilfork all the way up to the start of the season.

 

[Rob0729]

It Is What It Is Wilfork talks contract

Vince Wilfork, Patriots DL on WEEI

You should read the article and listen to the interview.

So I am right. Thanks for backing me up. Wilfork implies that they did negotiate before the start of the season. So it sounds like that they have offered him contract offer "in the last year". I knew tanked was full of it. Again, I never said the Pats were negotiating in the season. The Pats typically don't negotiate during the season. They do negotiate up to the start of the season though. The season started four months ago, not a year.

Thanks again for backing me up!!!

 

[tanked_as_usual]

First, do you understand what the term "negotiating contract in the media" means? It doesn't mean he tells the media what he thinks he is worth so it will get to Belichick. It means he voices his disatifaction with his contract in the media. That is exactly what he did yesterday. Whether you do it while under contract or as a free agent, airing your beefs with a team to the media lacks class.

class? what kind of class? do you think belichik has class? he is as shrewd and ruthless as he gets....please don't' tell me you think BB is a classy guy......very good and very successful at what he does, but don't confuse that with having class.......he has proven several times in his years that he does not have class and only cares about the bottom line

As for Wilfork eating his words, how would he eat his words if he singed the the tender. Where did he say he would hold out if he was franchised. He feels the franchise tender is insulting, but he has never said he wouldn't sign it if his choice was either take that money or miss the first ten games of the season. I don't know where you are getting this stuff. Wilfork hasn't even suggested that he wouldn't sign the tender right away (although we know that won't happen).

calling the franchise tag 'a slap in the face' pretty much sums it up...maybe not in your literal world, but I can see things figuratively....take from it what you want, but calling it a slap in the face and then signing is eating your words.....to me it is, anyway....like in a separate post....if the pats make minimal effort to sign him, then why should he do anything but the minimum for 2010? teams know if they get him under contract what they get, they know

Again, you have no idea what Wilfork is like or thinking unless you know him personally. I mean Tiger Woods and John Edwards were family men with tough convictions until they turned out to be scumbags. I am not suggesting Wilfork is anything like them, but you don't know the guy.

neither do you.......in fact neither of us can only go on what has been out in the press, along with what we know about the background of those involved....I know enough about wilfork and BB to know that I would trust wilfork before I would trust BB

The reality of the situation could be that Wilfork might be trying to set the market for DTs and asking for ridiculous demands. The Pats might be trying to take care of Wilfork like they did with Seymour (gave a generous short term contract which sacrifices long term security) and he doesn't feel it is enough. Wilfork could feel that since he stupidly signed a six year deal that the Pats should somehow compensate him for the year or two of extra length of his contract which may be over and above what he is worth. We don't know.

no ..... the reality is that you have no idea what is going on .... the only thing that has been said regarding contract negotiations is that there hasn't been any this year. or at least that's what wilfork has lead people to believe. wilfork has stated he wants to be treated fairly......you can elect to not believe him......I am more inclined to believe him than anything the pats FO says or does not say.

the only fact is that wilfork made good on his contract

I don't blame Wilfork for trying to get every penny he can. If I was a top athlete I would do the same. I just kinda doubt that he is this innocent victim that the evil Patriots are trying to take advantage of. If this ends badly, I am pretty sure there will be plenty of blame to go around including to Wilfork.

you are making an assumption that wilfork is making outrageous demands.....I would be more inclined to believe that the pats are lowballing him if even making any offer at all

As for the bet, I don't really care. You are the one who said you would bet he sits out. I just wanted to see if you would put your money where your mouth is.

it was figurative............a form of expressing opinion......you should have been more realistic and offered to be a gazillion dollars or something