Comments on: Afternoon Notes

By: DaveR

DaveR — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:04:39 +0000

And somehow this wound up in the wrong thread. My bad. Nothing to see here… move along!

By: DaveR

DaveR — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:04:08 +0000

3-4 nose tackle, that is.

By: DaveR

DaveR — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:03:46 +0000

Criticizing a 2-4 nose tackle for not getting after the QB and ringing up sacks is like criticizing a QB for not having enough tackles.

By: mandb97

mandb97 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:03:24 +0000

Class, as a nose tackle in a 3-4 his job is to clog up the middle and allow backers and ends to make plays which unfortunately they did not do very much of. If you have a complaint about the ends and the linebackers I can agree with you. As far as sacks go, that is not part of his job. The ends and outside line backers should be the one’s doing that and only Banta-Cain was the one who was remotely consistent in that aspect.

By: Jason Coyote

Jason Coyote — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:22:34 +0000

I agree with your assessment of Edwards, mandb97. Not sure what’s happened to him over the years or if he was always like this.

To try and answer your question, NESN would probably save money paying Caron to call B’s games compared to what a more experienced playcaller like Edwards must make. But I believe Tom has young kids and I’m not sure he’d want to commit to the extra time and travel involved with the job, especially since he gets to call the Beanpot and other Hockey East games. NESN would also have to find a new Sox pregame host.

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:06:14 +0000

I’m on the fence about Wilfork.

I’ve heard it discussed in some circles the Belichick’s 3-4 “two-gap” system is now passe in the modern NFL (the NFL post-”Polian Rules”), and that maybe a change in philosophy is warranted. If they change the philosophy and either switch to a 4-3, or switch to an “attacking 3-4″ style, like the Steelers play, then keeping Wilfork makes less sense.

However, if the Belichick “two-gap” system is NOT passe, and the Pats’ defensive problems the last few years are a result mainly of a lack of talent as compared to the Super Bowl teams, then re-signing Wilfork would seem to be important if Belichick will continue to play the same system.

It should be noted, however, that Wilfork dominated in college as a 4-3 defensive tackle in Miami’s “attacking” style of defense. So, if the Pats do switch to a 4-3, Wilfork likely wouldn’t have too much trouble making the switch to a 4-3 tackle.

Again, I’m on the fence. Part of me wants them to sign him to a big deal just so I don’t have to listen to the Felger’s of the world continue to bash the organization 24/7. These media maggots act like the team just went 12-20 over the last two seasons, not 21-12 (including playoffs, and including 15+ games without Tom Brady at QB).

By: Lance

Lance — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:08:18 +0000

When the Beanpot becomes something other than the BU Invitational then it’ll be a noteworthy sporting event. As it is, if you’ve been to one you’ve pretty much been to all of them the past 15 years.

By: Classless

Classless — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 04:50:42 +0000

Let’s not overstate Wilfork’s value at this point. He is not Albert Haynesworth entering free agency. Wilfork stops the run (well, except in rd 1 against Baltimore. whoops.). He does not get after the QB (note the ZERO sacks this year). The Patriots Defense is being completely overhauled right now and I’m not sure Wilfork should command a huge contract playing mostly 4-3.

I would like him back, but not at his overinflated price.

By: mandb97

mandb97 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:52:08 +0000

My question for NESN, unless he does not want it, is why have they not asked Tom Caron to be the voice of the Boston Bruins. Jack Edwards is just too erratic. One moment he is very good another just a clown of titanic proportions.

By: mandb97

mandb97 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:47:53 +0000

I understand that Wilfork does not have a lot of leverage and he would be paid the average of the top three players in his position which is not chump change. But he was a good soldier in that he did not complain about a six year deal that was not fair. Maybe someone can correct me, but I believe the intent of the rule was that you sign for five years as a first round pick the team has an option for the sixth, but normally would resign the player if they outplayed the contract after the fifth year. Of course, as you go further down the draft, the signing bonus money is not as good and the contract becomes great for the team because they will pick up the contract at cheap money disallowing the player a year to get a better deal. I believe this rule was changed because of how the Patriots were doing business, that is they always picked up the sixth year.

Wilfork should hold out and not accept the franchise because yes, he will be paid very well but he is being prevented from signing a long term deal which would probably contain a hefty signing bonus.

I do not know why the Patriots continually play with fire when it comes to their top players and Wilfork is arguably the second best player on this team.