Vince Wilfork...on WEEI...

[mgcolby]

Wasn't so tough to dig up posts # 83 and 107.

Some people you just can't reach, so you get what had here this week!

Well at least he chose option #2, to keep talking out of his ass.

 

[Wolfpack]

Reading is fundamental and you're not doing an exact quote there. You're misrepresenting what I wrote and merging my posts together, which is what I noted about your posting.

Now you've been reduced to simply lying, another sign of how bankrupt your arguments are. Your EXACT QUOTE, reprinted IN FULL, letter for letter from post #199 was

"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."

I have neither altered, misquoted, merged nor changed anything from that post. But if I am being accused of misrepresenting what you wrote, here is your chance to clarify what you meant.

Exactly what 6 weeks were you referring to? I was interpreting that statement to mean the 6 weeks at the very end of the year, which is the bare minimum the guy has to do in order to get credit for having played in the 2010 season.

If my interpretation was incorrect, then please let me know exactly what you meant by "If Vince comes in for 6 weeks". TYIA.

 

[Wolfpack]

no he isn't.....but in my opinion he has every right and reason to do so......especially with the way belichick runs things.........

He has every right to say whatever he wants. And the Patriots have every right to sit there, say absolutely nothing, and franchise him. Which is what I believe they will do.

 

[PittPatriot]

Now you've been reduced to simply lying, another sign of how bankrupt your arguments are. Your EXACT QUOTE, reprinted IN FULL, letter for letter from post #199 was

"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."

I have neither altered, misquoted, merged nor changed anything from that post. But if I am being accused of misrepresenting what you wrote, here is your chance to clarify what you meant.

Exactly what 6 weeks were you referring to? I was interpreting that statement to mean the 6 weeks at the very end of the year, which is the bare minimum the guy has to do in order to get credit for having played in the 2010 season.

If my interpretation was incorrect, then please let me know exactly what you meant by "If Vince comes in for 6 weeks". TYIA.

Did you go to Moo U? Did you graduate? Sorry, had to give you some NCSU joshing....

I don't think Deus is assuming Vince will dominate for those 6 weeks, he's just saying that IF he did, it would not hurt his bargaining stance when negotiating with the other teams.

 

[Wolfpack]

Did you go to Moo U? Did you graduate? Sorry, had to give you some NCSU joshing....

It's all cool - I know we suck Right now I am a graduate student there.

I don't think Deus is assuming Vince will dominate for those 6 weeks, he's just saying that IF he did, it would not hurt his bargaining stance when negotiating with the other teams.

Well he asked why I thought Vince would hurt his future bargaining power by sitting out the maximum amount of time he could this season. So I responded with my belief that playing only 6 weeks would hurt him in contract negotiations next year, even if he was a fully unrestricted free agent.

 

[Rob0729]

I don't even get why people are even discussing if Wilfork sits out the first 10 games. The odds of that happening are next to nil. It has been 13 years since a franchised player has sat out rather than playing under his franchise tender. Why would people assume that Wilfork would break that streak? He has given no indication he would.

Why are we beating each other over the head what would happen game 11 if he sat out the first 10 when I have a better chance of winning the lottery than the Pats have to worry about Vince sitting out.

 

[Wolfpack]

You don't trade a player like Wilfork to a division rival especially one who is possibly your biggest contender for the division unless they give away the farm for him and even then you gotta think four times.

I think maybe what he meant was the Jets may be willing to give up 2 1st rounders to grab Wilfork - especially since this year's 1st rounder is so low. It may be in the realm of possibility but I consider it very unlikely. If they did then there is nothing the Patriots could do about it.

(Well actually the Patriots would still have the chance to match the Jets' offer but I am assuming the Jets would offer an amount more than the Patriots were willing to spend, or include one of those "poison pills.")

 

[Wolfpack]

I don't even get why people are even discussing if Wilfork sits out the first 10 games. The odds of that happening are next to nil. It has been 13 years since a franchised player has sat out rather than playing under his franchise tender. Why would people assume that Wilfork would break that streak? He has given no indication he would.

I agree 100% that the odds of him sitting out the first 10 games are virtually zero. He is smart enough to realize it is a lose-lose scenario. But there are 2 individuals in here that seem to think that that would be his choice of action.

My prediction remains is the Patriots franchise him and he plays for them in 2010. They may give him the Asante Samuel 1-year-only promise.

 

[mgcolby]

I just read Gasper's article and can not get the revisionist history with Law. I remember Law making the same "slap in the face" statement, yet that 4 year 26 million dollar slap in the face would have actually paid him more than what he actually received on the open market over that 4 year period. And now looking back the Pats were better off without him, he had one good season and a decent season and then fell into complete suck mode. And the 10 picks were lipstick on the pig. He led the NFL in PI's in 2005 which nagated his 10 picks.

I'm surprised he didn't bring up Milloy, I mean he was unbelievable after he left the Pats. And everyone wants to paint BB as the bad guy in that situation, but no one seems to care that the Skins tampered with him. Same with Branch, he had a year left they offered him an extension, but he wanted his last year ripped up. If my memory serves me correctly they offered him a small bump in pay on the final year and that to was not enough, enter the Jets and their tampering ways and well he is gone to Seattle.

Seymour? He really went there? If I recall we paid Seymour rather handsomely, making him the highest paid DL in the league. So we trade him in the final year of his contract, for a 1st rounder no less. Forgive me but I don't remember anything Seymour did in 2009? 2 sacks in week 1. I'm sorry, but Seymour wouldn't have made a difference in the outcome of this season.

Now Asante, good riddence. Sure he will make a pick and might even run it back every once in a while. But more often he will jump a route without safety help and turn a 10 yard dig route into a 20-30 yard gain down the sideline. Eagle fans are now dealing with the same crap. Sure 3 pro-bowls, but does anyone truly give a **** about a popularity contest? Picks are the flashy numbers that people love to cling to when it comes to CB's, but Ty Law's 2005 and Asante's career are perfect examples of how that stat can be very misleading when judged in a vacuum.

Past players have been treated farely and the ones who felt they weren't, went on to much dissapointment with the exception of Asante. Asante is his same ol' self with the contract he wanted, but was and is not worth. Most got the money but fell into the abyss professionally (Woody, Branch, Law, Milloy, McGinest - probably a bad example but nonetheless, Givens etc..), Seymour is yet to be determined. I hope Vince and the Pats work it out, but to constantly lay the blame at the feet of the Pats FO is disingenuous. Gasper should have put a little more balance in that article.

 

[carolinatony]

The ONLY question is...are we better with him or without?
I think we all know the answer so I say Pay him.

Draft picks are nice but are not a proven talent. Vince is.

 

[pabst37]

I think maybe what he meant was the Jets may be willing to give up 2 1st rounders to grab Wilfork - especially since this year's 1st rounder is so low. It may be in the realm of possibility but I consider it very unlikely. If they did then there is nothing the Patriots could do about it.

(Well actually the Patriots would still have the chance to match the Jets' offer but I am assuming the Jets would offer an amount more than the Patriots were willing to spend, or include one of those "poison pills.")

Thank you. That is exactly what I was saying. I don't think it's likely to happen as two 1st round picks is still a lot, but they've shown that their willing to be aggressive to get talented players and as I said it would improve the Jets and weaken a division opponent.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

He has every right to say whatever he wants. And the Patriots have every right to sit there, say absolutely nothing, and franchise him. Which is what I believe they will do.

and he has every right to not sign it until some point in midseason and have the year count and then move on........and nobody outside of the one who booze up on the kool-aid would blame him.....and the pats are SOL at NT

 

[Deus Irae]

Now you've been reduced to simply lying, another sign of how bankrupt your arguments are. Your EXACT QUOTE, reprinted IN FULL, letter for letter from post #199 was

"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."

I have neither altered, misquoted, merged nor changed anything from that post. But if I am being accused of misrepresenting what you wrote, here is your chance to clarify what you meant.

Exactly what 6 weeks were you referring to? I was interpreting that statement to mean the 6 weeks at the very end of the year, which is the bare minimum the guy has to do in order to get credit for having played in the 2010 season.

If my interpretation was incorrect, then please let me know exactly what you meant by "If Vince comes in for 6 weeks". TYIA.

When did reading comprehension become a lost art? Just as you don't expect a player to come off of PUP and be at maximum physical and mental level in the first week (although you'd love it if he was), you don't expect a player coming back in week 10 to do it either. However, and as I noted, repeatedly....

by the end of the year

is not the same as coming in and being dominant from the first second he arrives, and neither is

tend to return mostly to form quite quickly

.

QUITE QUICKLY..... BY THE END OF THE YEAR.... note that neither requires, nor even implies that the player would be 100% up to speed in his first game back.

Instead of claiming that I'm lying, when I'm clearly not, perhaps you should invest in the time required for some remedial English classes.

 

[BennyBledsoe]

31 pages?

Wow.

All amounting to 'Vince is or isn't a 2 down player' and 'is or isn't worth the money'.

In the system we have, he's needed.

As long as he doesn't think he should be paid like someone with more than just run-stuffing skills as a NT then... we're all set.

If he thinks he should get Haynesworth money, it's been nice knowing him.

 

[Rob0729]

Thank you. That is exactly what I was saying. I don't think it's likely to happen as two 1st round picks is still a lot, but they've shown that their willing to be aggressive to get talented players and as I said it would improve the Jets and weaken a division opponent.

Except the Jets can't sign Wilfork even if they are willing to give up 2 first rounder to get him unless there is a new CBA. Being a final four team, they cannot sign Wilfork to a deal that would pay him anywhere close to what he wants. In fact, he would have to sign for less than Jarvis Green might get. The Jets can't sign any big free agents this year because of the final four team rule where the most he can make in 2010 would be $3.25 million.

If Wilfork accepted a deal from the Jets at the maximum they can offer him, the Pats would match it in a second and Wilfok would be playing for the Pats for something like $3.5 million a year. A huge bargain from what even their lowball offer was.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

31 pages?

Wow.

All amounting to 'Vince is or isn't a 2 down player' and 'is or isn't worth the money'.

In the system we have, he's needed.

As long as he doesn't think he should be paid like someone with more than just run-stuffing skills as a NT then... we're all set.

If he thinks he should get Haynesworth money, it's been nice knowing him.

we need wilfork, or someone like ryan pickett who would be available for less $$......get the first rounder for wilfork, get someone else, and keep adding youth to the defense.......if you could turn wilfork into ryan pickett and rolando mcclain, would you? I would

 

[patman12]

heh.....a fricking rocket scientist.......how the hell did you do that?

yes.....they are fact laden posts LMFAO

You were the one who originally wrote: "actually, I missed them.....can you point them out to me?"

I simply facilitated the process that seemed to somehow escape you. You're welcome would have been the appropriate response.

 

[Rob0729]

and he has every right to not sign it until some point in midseason and have the year count and then move on........and nobody outside of the one who booze up on the kool-aid would blame him.....and the pats are SOL at NT

LOL! You act like you are above me in another thread and yet you still take pathetic immature cheap shots at me. See no matter what board you are on, you are a sore loser who can't act like an adult. You were one of the reasons I never posted on ESPN to begin with.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

LOL! You act like you are above me in another thread and yet you still take pathetic immature cheap shots at me. See no matter what board you are on, you are a sore loser who can't act like an adult. You were one of the reasons I never posted on ESPN to begin with.

awww....poor baby

sore loser? I haven't lost

there are no cheap shots.......you are a kool-aid guzzlin yahoo...you should admit it now

 

[tanked_as_usual]

You were the one who originally wrote: "actually, I missed them.....can you point them out to me?"

I simply facilitated the process that seemed to somehow escape you. You're welcome would have been the appropriate response.

I meant fact...I saw the posts.....

just as much conjecture as the next guy