I Could See Al Davis Potentially Doing This...... - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

***PatsFanSince74*** · 09-10-2009, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betterthanthealternative

If he fails to report, the Raider's have an insubordinate employee in violation of his contract.

The Pats will sit back and enjoy wheeling and dealing with the Raiders'#1 pick in 2011.

Since there is still disagreement on this, can someone resolve this once and for all for those of us who are still confused? What happens if Seymour refuses to report to the Raiders? (Assume he can pass a legitimate physical.)

A. Is the deal dead with Seymour the responsibility of the Patriots, one way or the other.

B. Or, is the deal still in effect with Seymour the responsibility of the Raiders, one way or the other.

***PatsFanSince74*** · 09-10-2009, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patsfanin Philly

If I'm reading this correctly, once the Patriots traded Seymour's contract and rights to the Raiders and it was approved by the league office, he is now an Oakland Raider. The only thing that would nullify the trade would be his failing a physical...
What if Al Davis in one of his lucid moments decides that he made a bad trade and tells his team physician to flunk Seymour regardless if he were to pass or not? He could set the bar for passing so high that no one could pass...Ignoring the ethical or legal implications for the physician of making a false report, can't you see Al Davis potentially doing this to undo what he may perceive as a bad deal????
Does it then go to the commissioner to decide whether the Raiders acted in bad faith or do they get an independent examination and arbitration????
This thing just keeps getting weirder and weirder....

Whatever the NFL procedure is for a situation where a "receiving" team rejects a traded player on the basis of a physical, I doubt very much that even the befuddled Al Davis would be able to get his team doctors to game a Physical, which would no doubt be subject to review by third party Physicians with big time reputations.

I also doubt very much that the Patriots, who know his physical status better than anyone, would have traded him if they knew there was any reasonable chance that Seymour would flunk a physical.

So, I'd conclude that this is not a reasonable scenario.

Synovia · 09-10-2009, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HEY BRO! WHAT UP?

See the above post. Schefter said that if it gets really ugly, the league can intervene and void the trade completely.

Schefter is wrong.

Synovia · 09-10-2009, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanSince74

Since there is still disagreement on this, can someone resolve this once and for all for those of us who are still confused? What happens if Seymour refuses to report to the Raiders? (Assume he can pass a legitimate physical.)

A. Is the deal dead with Seymour the responsibility of the Patriots, one way or the other.

B. Or, is the deal still in effect with Seymour the responsibility of the Raiders, one way or the other.

The same thing that happened in the Jake Plummer trade: The Raiders own Richard Seymour, and if he ever wants to play football again, it has to be for them. They CAN go after his bonus money, but theres no provision for them getting the pick back.

The only situation where the Raiders get their pick back, is if Seymour shows up to a physical, and fails it.

Synovia · 09-10-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanked_as_usual

there is the possibility this thing grows its own head and forces decisions that has never been made before.....

No, this situation HAS happened before. Jake Plummer was traded and refused to report, and eventually retired. Theres plenty of precedence.

Jimke · 09-10-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synovia

Schefter is wrong.

Would the league intervene to the extent of making the Raiders send

out the 5 day letter as a last resort to get the player to report?

***mayoclinic*** · 09-10-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synovia

Schefter is wrong.

Correct. Seymour would have to file a grievance with the NFLPA, who would have to take it to the NFL. Since the Pats had full rights to Seymour, there is no basis for a grievance.

Synovia · 09-10-2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimke

Would the league intervene to the extent of making the Raiders send

out the 5 day letter as a last resort to get the player to report?

Why would they? The league has no horse in this. It doesn't make a difference whether or not he plays. Now, the league may tell Oakland that its their responsibility to send the letter, and not NE's, but they wont force them to send it.

Pujo · 09-10-2009, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Synovia

The only situation where the Raiders get their pick back, is if Seymour shows up to a physical, and fails it.

I wonder if Seymour is loading up on bacon doublecheeseburgers just for that purpose.

***PatsWickedPissah*** · 09-10-2009, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pujo

I wonder if Seymour is loading up on bacon doublecheeseburgers just for that purpose.

Wild speculation...what happens if Sey sprains an ankle, pulls a hammy, gets a vicious hangnail like MLB weenies or somesuch between now and the physical? He flunks the physical. Trade voided? Enquiring minds want to know!!!