I didn't know 7 year contract were allowed under the current CBA. In any case, 7 yr 70 million, with $30M-$38M guaranteed as a starting price from Wilfork is not terrible to me. I think that 4 years $32M is reasonable. A fifth year option and bonus and the last three years $38M is a bit much, but that is where Wilfork is rumored by Curran to be starting. Any final contract wold likely be lower.
If Curren said speculated rather than heard then he's just guessing and that's never been his strong suit. Even less so with this team since he went national.
As for the CBA it has never limited the length of contracts, just the length of available amortization years. They are currently capped at 5.
Limits on contract construction as well as the potential for an uncapped year and all the poison pills that deeper analysis would tend to indicate as favoring owners heading into 2010 (short term control options such as two transition or one franchise and one transition tag (as well as 6 year RFA's), no cap floor as well as ceiling, restrictions on signing FA by playoff teams, cash flow concerns on the eve of a potential work stoppage tempering the contract climate...
If guys don't take what's offered they potentially face losing the ability to make up for perceived losses. If there are no games in 2011, Wilfork and Seymour could find themselves shopping their services as FA in 2012 when both will be on the wrong side of 30 and could be coming off a season of inactivity. In Wilfork's case that is why he can't hold out into the season, and he seems to know it. His fines and loss of salary and a recapture of a portion of his signing bonus would likely net Vince $0 if he showed up in week 10. Fines alone for skipping mandatory OTA's and camp under the CBA negotiated in 2006 now add up to over half a million... And BB has already proven he will not tolerate the distraction so worst case scenario Wilfork is on the block in September and owes NE $500K+ from his new deal elsewhere. And we all know how well that scenario worked out for Meion, who isn't even in the discussion of top 20 #1 WR's anymore and who is likely playing for his football life and any semblance of the remainder of that fat contract he signed this season. Wilfork has been surrounded by top tier talent and coached by the defensive genius of his generation here. It's anyone's guess how he'd fare in an alternate universe like the one Branch found himself inhabiting...
I think they made a mistake when they did what they felt they had to do to get Seymour in back in 2005. I understand why they did it with a possibility to threepeat staring them in the face. But it didn't work out and probably was wishful thinking from the get go. Team was beat up and too dead tired to continue overachieving. Back to Back 20 game seasons and all... And if you're going to do whatever it takes, do it pre-emptively on your own initiative as opposed to allowing a player to force your hand in public. My one critique on this regime has been with the exception of Brady they don't seem inclined to get to know their players true intentions and therefore they appear to continue to be disappointed in and blindsided by them. I appreciate they don't want to coddle them, but you can still figure them out. Like the aging veteran, move on from them a year early if that's what it takes to avoid being a year late. Instead of focusing on winning a negotiation just give 'em your best offer and if they scoff at it move on.
But the Seymour deal set a dangerous precedent that has now raised it's ugly head in succeeding seasons. The system works it's magic best when guys are either all in or all out and we just move on. That is the real foundation on which it rests. Maybe that's why we haven't won one since 2004. Once you start catering to a select few/talents who are more concerned about personal financial goals than the team goal of winning football championships it gets increasingly difficult to sell the next guy/football player in line steps up mentality as truly functional.
Guys who are all in except where their contract is concerned are not all in. Tommy has tried to tell his teamates that at a certain level you have to look at what another million nets you (including vs. what it nets your team). And if you really need that money there are lots of other ways (a lot less physically demanding as well) to earn it on a winning team in a major market with an ownership that has cultivated tons of marketing and advertising and media business partners. Those deals rightfully go to the guys who are all in. And the first signs a guy isn't truly all in to that is when he starts talking about himself in the third person or blathering about just wanting to be respected...
This recurring drama must really get old for Brady. He's consistently set the tone across the board for how to handle your business on and off the field for 9 seasons. And one selfish player was allowed to set the alternate precedent and create the ultimate bad example. That he is still here is what convinced the others to take their shot. Someone should start asking the holdouts who this team should cut or not have signed or what unit or positional depth they should downgrade to accommodate them financially. Bob has never pocketed a nickle of revenue, it all gets put back into the product within the confines of the cap. So when a player holds out here he's really asking the team to make a choice, choose me over my teamates whose contracts are also coming up or over a deeper and more talented team 1-53 to perform with.
