PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Vince Wilfork


jlscorpio
08-25-2009, 12:27 PM
He's a free agent after this season, and is unhappy in NE. Any chance we could get him for one of our 2nd round picks this year? I'd bite on that. Seems kike he's be a good fit in our new scheme.

Quiet Storm
08-25-2009, 12:32 PM
will he be an UFA after this year?

keg in kc
08-25-2009, 12:37 PM
No chance. They'll never let him walk.

Demonpenz
08-25-2009, 12:43 PM
He's a free agent after this season, and is unhappy in NE. Any chance we could get him for one of our 2nd round picks this year? I'd bite on that. Seems kike he's be a good fit in our new scheme.

I know the chiefs are alittle jewish, but no need for that.

Amnorix
08-25-2009, 12:46 PM
Well, he's very happy in NE, what he's very unhappy about is the fact that the Pats haven't extended him already.

Pats have three potentially high priced FAs next offseason -- Seymour, Wilfork and Mankins. I'm betting we lose at least one of those, and probably two -- Mankins and either Wilfork/Seymour. Of those two, I would tend to think the Pats would keep Wilfork as being harder to replace, and slightly (though not much) younger.

Pats can use the franchise tag on one, obviously.

I think the Pats are waiting to see how this year plays out -- whethre Brace can replace Wilfork adequately, and whether Seymour can stay healthy for a full year, etc., before they make a final decision.

Just Passin' By
08-25-2009, 12:48 PM
He's a free agent after this season, and is unhappy in NE. Any chance we could get him for one of our 2nd round picks this year? I'd bite on that. Seems kike he's be a good fit in our new scheme.

Next year, the Patriots will be able to franchise him. There will also not be a salary cap if they decide to franchise someone else and just pay what they need to in order to keep Wilfork around. The team really has no incentive to trade Wilfork unless they already know that they don't want him around after this season. That doesn't seem to be the case.

beach tribe
08-25-2009, 01:01 PM
Well, he's very happy in NE, what he's very unhappy about is the fact that the Pats haven't extended him already.

Pats have three potentially high priced FAs next offseason -- Seymour, Wilfork and Mankins. I'm betting we lose at least one of those, and probably two -- Mankins and either Wilfork/Seymour. Of those two, I would tend to think the Pats would keep Wilfork as being harder to replace, and slightly (though not much) younger.

Pats can use the franchise tag on one, obviously.

I think the Pats are waiting to see how this year plays out -- whethre Brace can replace Wilfork adequately, and whether Seymour can stay healthy for a full year, etc., before they make a final decision.

We could sure as hell use Mankins.

beach tribe
08-25-2009, 01:02 PM
Next year, the Patriots will be able to franchise him. There will also not be a salary cap if they decide to franchise someone else and just pay what they need to in order to keep Wilfork around. The team really has no incentive to trade Wilfork unless they already know that they don't want him around after this season. That doesn't seem to be the case.

So if the CBA expires, does that mean that there is still a franchise tag?

Amnorix
08-25-2009, 01:08 PM
We could sure as hell use Mankins.

Mankins is a VERY good guard. At or very near Pro Bowl level, never hurt, and a mauler.

But the Pats have more or less proven they're unwilling to spend big money on offensive linemen in general, and interior linemen (center/guard) in particular, so I have little hope of keeping him.

Amnorix
08-25-2009, 01:10 PM
So if the CBA expires, does that mean that there is still a franchise tag?

I haven't looked at this in a while, but my memory is that the CBA does NOT expire after this season. Instead, it expires after 2010.

2010 is the "nuclear option" -- the last year of the CBA where things are so bad for both sides it is designed to force them to extend the CBA. No cap, somehting like 1 franchise tag and two transition tags being available, and some other stuff.

Don't remember the details. Point is, yes the Pats can franchise Wilfork if they want.

Pestilence
08-25-2009, 01:11 PM
Even if the Pats do decide to trade him.....it won't be for a 2nd round pick. They'll want at least a 1st.

And yes....I'd love to pick up Mankins next year if the Pats don't resign him. That still leaves another OG to pick up though. That is unless the newest trade works out and we get a starter out of it.

Chiefnj2
08-25-2009, 01:13 PM
Well, he's very happy in NE, what he's very unhappy about is the fact that the Pats haven't extended him already.

Pats have three potentially high priced FAs next offseason -- Seymour, Wilfork and Mankins. I'm betting we lose at least one of those, and probably two -- Mankins and either Wilfork/Seymour. Of those two, I would tend to think the Pats would keep Wilfork as being harder to replace, and slightly (though not much) younger.

Pats can use the franchise tag on one, obviously.

I think the Pats are waiting to see how this year plays out -- whethre Brace can replace Wilfork adequately, and whether Seymour can stay healthy for a full year, etc., before they make a final decision.

If the season is uncapped you get 2 franchise tags and players need 6 seasons to be eligible for free agency.

JD10367
08-25-2009, 02:49 PM
I agree with Amnorix, if the Pats are forced to choose I think they'll keep Wilfork and lose Seymour.

Mankins, I'm not so sure. I think they're gonna try their best to keep him, knowing how important the O-line is to their game plan. Light, Mankins, and Koppen make up the left side of that protective wall and, IMO, Light is a bit overrated and sometimes gets manhandled, so losing Mankins might have a domino effect.

OctoberFart
08-25-2009, 03:02 PM
If he hits the FA market I'll bet he is a Donkey or Queeef.

Amnorix
08-25-2009, 03:55 PM
I agree with Amnorix, if the Pats are forced to choose I think they'll keep Wilfork and lose Seymour.

Mankins, I'm not so sure. I think they're gonna try their best to keep him, knowing how important the O-line is to their game plan. Light, Mankins, and Koppen make up the left side of that protective wall and, IMO, Light is a bit overrated and sometimes gets manhandled, so losing Mankins might have a domino effect.

Light is solid, but I agree, a bit overrated I think. He's had alot of trouble with speed rushers like FReeney and, back in the day, Jason Taylor. That said, alot of guys have trouble with guys like Freeney and Taylor.

He's solid, but unspectacular.

But I gotta admit, the 2007 Super Bowl left a bitter taste in my mouth. I don't love these guys the way that I used to. If they could have just kept Brady clean, we would've won that game. The Giants brought four, won the battle in the trenches, so the perfect season was lost.

Just Passin' By
08-25-2009, 04:23 PM
If the season is uncapped you get 2 franchise tags and players need 6 seasons to be eligible for free agency.

This is not quite correct, as I understand it. To my knowledge, if the season is uncapped, you can use either 1 franchise tag and a transition tag, or you can use 2 transition tags.

salame
08-25-2009, 06:07 PM
http://strategerie.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/rex-grossman-and-mr-hill.jpg

Ultra Peanut
08-25-2009, 08:23 PM
hahahahaha

Pasta Giant Meatball
08-25-2009, 08:28 PM
I bet you would like that. But, Bill's reaction to that offer would be something like...ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL :spock:

salame
08-25-2009, 08:57 PM
http://www.my-two-cents.net/forenpix/thread-is-gay.jpg