Why did Davis not include conditions? - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

Ice_Ice_Brady · 09-09-2009, 04:32 PM

The Patriots and Raiders are both safe. Seymour is the one who has virtually no options. There is no no-trade clause in his contract (are there any of those in the NFL?) There are thousands of trades every year in professional sports. The player must take on this risk when he decides to play.

Seymour can either play, or sit out the entire season, in which case his contract rolls over through 2010 and he's back in the same position, one year older and much less marketable. My guess is he'll do the logical thing and play out his contract year, then hit a huge payday with the Redskins or Jets, for about $75M, and then tank it for the rest of his career.

In terms of conditions, there are probably implied conditions in every trade, which are industry standards.

***Frezo*** · 09-09-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pujo

I'm not sure, but some of the earlier articles on the fiasco said that it's standard for a trade to be rescinded if the player doesn't pass a physical, and that until Seymour did that it would be the Pats who would have to send a 5-day letter, not the Raiders. Maybe the Raiders are holding out hope that he shows up, else they might have recourse to void the trade.

Keep in mind that trades aren't technically made for flesh and blood. The Raiders traded for Seymour's contract. They now own that contract. Per that contract Seymour is bound to the Raiders to fulfill that contract as are the Raiders to Seymour. The Pats are out of it.

Now if Seymour does not report, (would be stupid), the two franchises can reach a deal. BB could offer Davis one of next year's #2s, take Seymour back and then trade him to KC for a 2nd and a 5th. If Davis refuses, the Raiders are still responsible for Seymour's contract.

I'm not sure what this means, but someone needs to say at a Holiday Inn Express tonight and FIO.