Quote:
Originally Posted by mayoclinic
Give me a break.
I've acknowledged that Seymour was the 2nd most important Patriot after Brady in terms of bringing 3 Lombardi trophies to Foxboro. I've applauded him for his contributions. I've acknowledged that he will be a loss for the DL for 2009, the magnitude of which is not known at this point.
But don't gloss over the other side of things. He's been a crybaby and a malcontent at times before. That fact that the Pats were willing to trade him suggests that patience with his antics had worn thin at Foxboro. The fact that Oakland had to send out the 5 day letter strongly suggests that Seymour had not been in communication with them about simply needing a few days to resolve family issues. And the fact that his side of the story was published by his buddy Borges doesn't lend a lot of credibility to the story.
You're right, we'll probably never know exactly what transpired. But it's not "bashing" a guy to call him out when he acts like a spoiled brat, while at the same time acknowledging his greatness as a player.
If you want to remember Seymour with rose colored glasses, fine. But don't bash others because they aren't willing to buy into the hype.
|
before it was announced that Seymour was reporting, i actually made a couple of posts in another thread that were very critical of Richard, so I don't have rose colored glasses on this one. after it came out that he was indeed reporting, i'll admit that i reacted strongly to what i thought were some gratuitous swipes at the guy. didn't mean to question the motives of yourself or anyone. if you took it that way, i apologize.
when i reviewed the history of the facts that we did have prior to that announcement, Rodney's comments stand large. but, we have to remember that Number 37 has no love lost for a team that basically told him he was "done," so i think we have to take what he said with a grain of salt.
all we know about the letter and the grievance also come to us second hand. i'm not disputing that they were both issued, but my only point in their regard was that there are a range of explanations for their issuance that go beyond some of the hypothetical scenarios, assuming the worst of Seymour, that have been posited here. as i said in another post, i've decided to give him the benefit of the doubt;
however, i can see how others could reasonably decide not to do that. I was reacting to the negative tone as much as to anything else.
time to focus on the season and whip the Jills.