Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from flip781. Show flip781's posts

    Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    What is the delay in signing Vince Wilfolk ?? I thought one of the the reasons we let Seymour go would be so we could free up money and sign Wilfolk ??? Wilfolk is the best defensive tackle in the league and is still young !! He is definetly the anchor of our defensive line !! When are we going to get him signed to a contract  ?????
    Letting him go would be a major mistake !!!  What is the hold-up ????

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    THE CBA is the hold up. Plain and simple. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    No way we let Wilfork go.  Even if we have to pay him $100 million a season, we're not letting him go!!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from choircontrarian. Show choircontrarian's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    absolutely! i definitely believe that both wilfork and mankins are GONERS after this year. he likely was already informed of that as was asante samuels and ty law bak in the day. hey, come and play and shut your mouth and we wont franchise u if we cant sign u within a 2week exclusive window period after the season. look at how they have drafted. there's no need to keep them. between ron brace, pryor and mike wright or that big asssed 6'8 guy we had earlier, y the heck do we need to spend 100m to keep a wilfork? i like him but it would be bad economics and precedence. all can not be kept! leigh bodden also will be history after this year as his price goes sky up if we choose to retain him. u can also add james sanders to that list too. stuff happens.....
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    In Response to Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????:
    What is the delay in signing Vince Wilfolk ?? I thought one of the the reasons we let Seymour go would be so we could free up money and sign Wilfolk ??? Wilfolk is the best defensive tackle in the league and is still young !! He is definetly the anchor of our defensive line !! When are we going to get him signed to a contract  ????? Letting him go would be a major mistake !!!  What is the hold-up ????
    Posted by flip781


    Don't worry, this is the way the Pats do business. Vince is most likely a franchise guy judging from the way we've done things in the past. And the CBA is not the problem. If 2010 does go uncapped NFL teams will have an extra tag to go along with the standard franchise tag. This is one of the reasons they let Seymour go besides the fact that they got an awesome draft pick. They are clear to do what they need to. So Vince will be around for at least 1 more year if they don't get something worked out.You are most likely going to see Brady's deal reworked in the off season up to a new 5 year deal that will be financially friendly from a team salary stand point and once they get that done they will iron out the other players.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MordecaiBloodmoon. Show MordecaiBloodmoon's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    I don't think Wilfork is gone unless either we switch to a 4-3 as our main D or he expects Haynesworth type money.  Kraft just wants the contract structure to fit with the new CBA
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Is Bellicheck even considering letting Wilfolk go to Free Agency?????

    Wilfork (best D Linemen) and Mankins (best O Linemen) could get tagged. Bodden might like playing for a winner (see Cleveland and Detroit) so he could stick around if he wants to win. Extending Brady and Moss would also be a good idea. Like I keep saying Pats will have 4 of the top 64 picks in the 2010 draft and I like what I have seen from Butler, Meriweather, and MacGown; the loss of Sanders (cut ?) and Bodden (not signed) would not be huge. I am, however, not entirely confident that Brace can play the nose, however, we would still have Warren, Pryor and Wright (some depth) if Vince decided he wanted Haynesworth money. Fork's future contract and re-signing Bodden and extending Mankins will be high on the Pats off-season agenda, but I am certain Belichick will not handicap the team in future by signing the whole world to huge contracts. We discuss where and what will happen with our FAs, but most of that will be taken care next off-season.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share