Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

06 Mar 2010

Vince Wilfork Gets Mammoth Deal

Apparently, Asante Samuel was wrong: The Patriots do care about Vince Wilfork. The Patriots gave their nose tackle a five-year extension on Friday worth $40 million, with an $18 million signing bonus and $25 million in guaranteed money.

They also re-signed Tully Banta Cain (three years, $13.5 million) and Stephen Neal (two years, around $6 million).

Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 06 Mar 2010

17 comments, Last at 09 Mar 2010, 4:56pm by CaffeineMan


by C (not verified) :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 7:56am

Patriots signing interal guys.

If some other team signed Vince Wilfork, it would be probably story #2 on the NFLN behind Julius Peppers, but the Patriots RE-sign him and it's quiet.

The Patriots just quietly signed 3 starters, and are doing well in free agency yet they won't get the hype a team like the Bears will, for signing Peppers and a backup RB.

by FooBarFooFoo (not verified) :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 8:11am

Overpaid on TBC.

Lost on both attempts (Peppers, Boldin) to make the team better.

Though I like the Neal deal.

What about Logan Mankins? Jarvis Green, Leigh Bodden?

And even if they sign all these guys, the team won't be a tad better than in 2009. They won't be able to draft that many guys to fill all the wholes, and he who believes the draft picks will make an immediate impact, look at the past years. Belichicks draft record is not as good as everybody thinks.

by Karl Cuba :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 11:58am

Totally agree that they overpaid Big Fat Linebacker but I vaguely remember hearing somewhere that they had agreed a deal with Mankins. If you put the pile of draft picks in a very strong draft together with some development from last year's chunky class on what is a very good team anyway the Pats look to be doing just fine.

by CaffeineMan :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 8:10pm

I think these are pretty reasonable deals, given what was out there. 3-4 NT's are rare and important. TBC got 10 sacks last year, only 0.5 less than Peppers. I'm not saying he's great, but 4.5 mil is not really a lot of money in an uncapped year and I bet the contract guaranteeed money is front loaded. TBC was not the problem with the Pats pass rush.

The big thing about Wilfork is whether he can stay healthy. I think part of his performance problem last year was because of his ankle and foot injuries.

As to Mankins, he is an RFA, tendered at the highest level (1st and 3rd).

by RickD :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 12:34pm

You think Vince Wilfork is a "Big Fat Linebacker"?

Um, OK.

by RickD :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 12:40pm

Or did you mean TBC? I never thought of him as fat.

He's not an elite pass rusher but considering that he's all the Pats have, it wouldn't make sense to let him walk.

Now they need to bring in somebody else. (And get rid of Derrick Burgess, though that might not need to be said.)

by CaffeineMan :: Tue, 03/09/2010 - 4:56pm

I figured it was TBC. I think Mr. Cuba is a Niners fan, disappointed that TBC was not the every-down LB that they hoped when they signed him. I think the Pats have the proper perspective on him: not much else available, worth keeping at the price, on a front loaded contract.

by tuluse :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 6:26pm

Well it's not very interesting to talk about a team keeping players. What's there to say? The team will be the same except slight improvement or get slightly worse do to age.

It's much more fun to talk about how new players will affect a team.

by ChicagoRaider :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 9:39am

And Suh could get more than that! Imagine.

by loneweasel (not verified) :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 10:19am

Since Wilfork is staying in NE, presumably he's no longer an overrated lazy malcontent like every other athelete who left Boston, according the Tawmmies.

by Alternator :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 7:57pm

Sarcasm of comment aside, you have cause and effect reversed. The Pats tend to resign guys they think are key, if the players don't try to break the bank, and they let go of the ones who are viewed as over the hill, or about to become so.

The track record of the guys the Patriots have let go bears out the premise that the coaching staff can tell when a player is on his last legs. How exactly would re-signing a player that most view as top-two in his position, if not the outright best, contradict the "they know when to let them go" idea?

by jackgibbs :: Sat, 03/06/2010 - 12:50pm

sigh. so much for the sell high and converting to the 4-3. looks like another season of watching gary guyton and pierre woods play the trail technique on running plays

by RickD :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 12:36pm

Why the hell would the Pats ditch an elite nose tackle to switch to the 4-3?

Bill Belichick has won 5 Super Bowls with a 3-4 defense. You think he's going to switch to a 4-3 now?

by jackgibbs :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 5:58pm

I think he's smart enough to match scheme to personnel. since wilfork is the only guy on the defense that is a perfect fit for a 3-4, it would make sense (to me, anyway) to get more draft picks in this deep defensive class to replace the scrubs that currently surround the elite nose tackle. mayo looks like he could be a great mlb in a 4-3, play to his strengths and get gary guyton off the field. now, I'm stuck hoping for some mid-round linebacker gold, AS WELL AS 3-4 ends to replace seymour and jarvis green. Not to mention Ron Brace didn't look like he could even spell wilfork as a nose tackle. why not get him in the a gap and see what he could do? now he's just another guy on the sideline 80% of snaps

by Boo-urns (not verified) :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 3:30pm

for those of not following closely, how does this deal relate to the uncapped year? is it correct that the Pats can sign a bunch of guy, weight the contracts to 2010 payments, and basically not worry about the salary cap ramifications? If so, you might see teams like the Pats open up their wallets much more this year.

by Theo :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 6:44pm

Tully Banta Cain

All I can think of is "how can you be an NFL player and make SO MUCH money with a name like Tully Banta Cain"?!

(yeah my question has been answered in the mid 1600's by some famous poet... but still...)

by jackgibbs :: Sun, 03/07/2010 - 6:47pm

haha. I was all like, huh? and then I remembered my freshman english curriculum