ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
If Seymour's been saving his money, and he really doesn't want to go to Oakland, he should "just say no". That would be some funny stuff, because Davis can't afford to make the trade and then have him sit out all season. His family would finally have enough to get him committed.
Watching this fan base completely melt down following the Raiders opting out of the trade would be a very funny time.
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
If you were the Raiders, would you sign that agreement. Basically sealing the biggest hose job in NFL history. A one year rental of a pro-bowler so that you can win 4 games, in exchange for what might be a top 10 pick that will likely have a major impact on your team for the better part of a decade.
Even the Raiders aren't that dumb.
People think that the Seymour doesn't have options, but it's the Raiders that should've requested to speak to Seymour about his current contract before the trade occurred. Because of Seymour's age, he has more leverage than people think. Do you really think the Raiders are going to risk having a guy they just traded a 1st round pick for to hold out? The Raiders are going to get as much as they can from a 30 year old DT.
Depending on the terms of the trade, Seymour can refuse to report and screw the Pats and Raiders, thus voiding the trade. Then it's back to the drawing board for the Pats. But seriously, you know the player will report because they want the money.
The only part that seems wrong is that he could be put on the Reserve list immediately, but it really doesn't matter in this case. My understanding was that a step before that was to withhold pay. In any case, the Seymour doesn't show, the raiders would void the deal and then it would be the patriots problem.
The patriots would then trade him somewhere else, this time after talking to Seymour's agent. Or the patriots could send a letter threatening the Reserve list, but then Seymour would simply report to Foxboro for practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewaylifeshouldbe
Just posted this in another Seymour thread (Have to hit them all)-
Belichick wouldn't sign a contract that places it's fulfillment solely in the hands of the player. That would be silly. The league office has approved the trade. Seymour is a Raider.
No, my point is that the Raiders are covering their ***** in case a player decides to pull what Seymour could be pulling. Any smart NFL owner would have that in their agreement. If a player doesn't want to play for my team, the trade is off.
The only part that seems wrong is that he could be put on the Reserve list immediately, but it really doesn't matter in this case. My understanding was that a step before that was to withhold pay. In any case, the Seymour doesn't show, the raiders would void the deal and then it would be the patriots problem.
The patriots would then trade him somewhere else, this time after talking to Seymour's agent. Or the patriots could send a letter threatening the Reserve list, but then Seymour would simply report to Foxboro for practice.
I'm not sure of all that. Opinions seem to be stuck in a gray area. I think he is a Raider right now, but if he fails a physical he will revert to being Patriot property. If what you say is true, any player could nullify a trade by simply not showing up for the physical. I don't recall this ever happening. I believe it would be the responsibility of the Raiders to issue the 5 day letter. Of course any no shows would lose a year's pay and that's probably why it's never happened and why Seymour will likely report for the physical. If he doesn't show up I think he's the Raider's problem and the Pats keep the pick.
The article indicates that if Seymour doesn't show up, they can choose to void the trade and get their pick back. They could be worng.
They also could choose to send him notice of their intent to put him on reserves. They might do that if he had three years left on his contract and they still were willing to part with the draft choice.
In this case, I would think that Oakland would void the contract. It would make no sense for them to choose to lose the choice and then put Seymour on the reserve list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frezo
I'm not sure of all that. Opinions seem to be stuck in a gray area. I think he is a Raider right now, but if he fails a physical he will revert to being Patriot property. If what you say is true, any player could nullify a trade by simply not showing up for the physical. I don't recall this ever happening. I believe it would be the responsibility of the Raiders to issue the 5 day letter. Of course any no shows would lose a year's pay and that's probably why it's never happened and why Seymour will likely report for the physical. If he doesn't show up I think he's the Raider's problem and the Pats keep the pick.
I'm not sure of all that. Opinions seem to be stuck in a gray area. I think he is a Raider right now, but if he fails a physical he will revert to being Patriot property. If what you say is true, any player could nullify a trade by simply not showing up for the physical. I don't recall this ever happening. I believe it would be the responsibility of the Raiders to issue the 5 day letter. Of course any no shows would lose a year's pay and that's probably why it's never happened and why Seymour will likely report for the physical. If he doesn't show up I think he's the Raider's problem and the Pats keep the pick.
I think it's that he has to *pass* the physical to validate the trade. He hasn't done that, and if he refuses to report, he won't be able to.
The article indicates that if Seymour doesn't show up, they can choose to void the trade and get their pick back. They could be worng.
They also could choose to send him notice of their intent to put him on reserves. They might do that if he had three years left on his contract and they still were willing to part with the draft choice.
In this case, I would think that Oakland would void the contract. It would make no sense for them to choose to lose the choice and then put Seymour on the reserve list.
So you feel that if he doesn't show, the Raiders have a choice of upholding the trade contract or voiding it? Could be. I'm just not sure. Mayock didn't seem so sure about it either. I do think he'll show up.
That is my understanding from the reasonably detailed analysis in the Oakland paper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frezo
So you feel that if he doesn't show, the Raiders have a choice of upholding the trade contract or voiding it? Could be. I'm just not sure. Mayock didn't seem so sure about it either. I do think he'll show up.
Re: Rumor: Seymour Trade Not A Done Deal?
Linear Mode
