So good ole Vincent Wilfork is interested in becoming a Texan?

10MM is a tight window to fit those two, the draft class, and whatever vet minimum filler you want to sign.

 

They very well could have met this morning, 8am, and walked out 9-9:30 with no deal. Not highly implausible.

Also, could be Lopez is 100% right - and wrong. He left without a deal but only because he doesn't plan to sign anything until he's met with all teams. Who knows?

Yeah, don't know if that's Lopez adding speculation based on what's already been reported/rumored, or if it's part of his scoop. Would agree it discredits him a bit if he's reporting he was told that in conjunction with Wilfork leaving.

Ah, so in this one, isolated case, McClain has suddenly become credible?

 

Sure... but you have to also consider the ultimate outcomes of the Ed Reed situation and how it parallels here.

Wilfork could very well be over the hill... could very well be looking for one last big payday... could very well be shopping offers around and simply trying to get the "biggest" one.

If he comes "back" here ready to sign, after all of this, do you then "reject" it this time?

 

They can still restructure/release players. JJo and Graham remain easy targets.

 

10 mil is what they have to spend after factoring in the draft class.

 

You know what's funny? After I hit submit this last time, I thought to myself, "WTF are you doing, loser?!?!" I don't honestly care if it's right or wrong; sincerely. I don't even care if they do/don't sign Vince Wilfork. I just thought the idea that someone might change/cancel plans being a red flag seemed silly. Still do.

 

This is why I hope we don't sign him. We're not a NT away from making a Superbowl run, so what would be the point of signing him (unless it was on the cheap)?

 

Even if those plans were already written down in the day planner? That's a serious ink on paper commitment.

 

lol we all know that somebody can become magically credible or not as long as it supports their argument :grin:

 

It doesn't worry me. It's just correlation/coincidence.

The only thing that does worry me is that the Texans are the ones doing the evaluating, and they don't seem to have the keen eye for when someone is washed up or not.

 

We might be a NT away from making a playoff run, though.

 

It does sound implausible actually. As of 8:15 this morning they had not met yet. Brian Smith was on the radio and said they would be getting together today and that it was better than 50/50 that he would sign here. So between 8:15 when they hadn't met to 10Am, John Lopez scooped the entire NFL media that has been following Wilfork and got his first breaking news on the subject.

Yeah right.

Like I said, McClain is not credible at all with his predictions, but when it comes to simple facts that the Texans want out there, he's credible. He's their mouthpiece on things like that.

But, for what it's worth, he's not the only one saying he's still in town. Braddock is saying the same thing.

 

If he was the difference between us and the playoffs, would you be ok with it?

I know I would.

As long as the contract isn't some kind of albatross that we'll be paying for 3 years later.

 

Have they let a player go that they thought was "washed up"... and that player went on to be better elsewhere?

Also, the ones doing the talent evaluating are much different than in the past.... thus using previous regimes track records' and reputations' doesn't mean much in this scenario.

 

Well a legit NT (which Wilfork might not even be at this point) would go a long way towards making the Texans defense one of the best in the league. Given the easy schedule, the Texans could easily be in the playoffs and as the last several years have proven, once you're in the playoffs, anything can happen.

Personally though, I'd probably move on past Wilfork if he's not willing to take closer to 3 mil a year because he's simply not worth more when guys like Terrance Knighton only get 4 mil a year.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Checked earlier. On-going RT <a href="https://twitter.com/ThatWhiteKidd__">@ThatWhiteKidd__</a> any updates on how Vince is liking houston?</p>&mdash; Jayson Braddock (@JaysonBraddock) <a href="https://twitter.com/JaysonBraddock/status/577524332877869056">March 16, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

The Texans haven't been around long enough for someone to become "washed up" under their watch. Except Andre, who is probably going to roflstomp in Indy.

Depends on who is actually in charge.

Is it just me, or does it seem that no one can ever be pinned down as the one responsible for the screw ups? (or for that matter, credit for the success)

Let's hope it's not the same guy who thought Ed Reed was a good idea.

 

LOL yeah he'll probably "roflstomp" the league for 800 yards and 4 TD's.

 

But even Andre was more about "money". Same goes for Glover Quinn (who they needed to "let go" to go after Reed), Barwin, Demeco, and Winston.

You said you didn't trust the Texans decision making on whether or not a player was washed up... but sounds like you'r just leery of them making a mistake in one direction (vs. the other way... and it can also be applied in determining who "not" to sign).

Pretty easy to tell that BOB is in charge... not just of the offense but the entire team. Kubiak was similar, but obviously had more input/control of the offense... and eventually left the defense to "anybody else" (which leaves room for owners/GM's to make decisions to go after Ed Reed).

 

You used Wilfork and Reed's actions as a reason to link the two together.

I don't consider their actions to be indicative of how Wilfork will play out as a Texan.

I think what is more of a factor is that the people doing the evaluating (the FO, not BOB/staff) got it way, way wrong with Reed.

If Kubiak and company were responsible for Reed, then great, concern dismissed.