Greg Papa: Raiders play-by-play announcer

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

read it again.....The raiders feel that you need to be 3-4 with Wilfork.....that's THEIR opinion,not mine or anyone else quoted in the post.

I understood you the first time. It was directed towards the Raiders or whoever else wanted him.

 

[italia44]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

I find some of that very hard to believe. Wilfork for Burgess would've made zero sense(unless you're the Raiders of course). No chance that 'talk' existed aside from Davis offering and BB hanging up the phone.

Greg Papa didn't say it was Burgess for Vince,straight-up.He just said the two were involved in trade talks before the Seymour deal.

 

[SVN]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

Greg Papa didn't say it was Burgess for Vince,straight-up.He just said the two were involved in trade talks before the Seymour deal.

even so. the burgess trade rumors were there for a long time. if wilfork wouldve been involved it wouldve been leaked IMO if even greg papa knows it.

 

[italia44]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

even so. the burgess trade rumors were there for a long time. if wilfork wouldve been involved it wouldve been leaked IMO if even greg papa knows it.

you mean like the leaks during the Moss,Welker,Thomas anf Seymour deals?

 

[SVN]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

you mean like the leaks during the Moss,Welker,Thomas anf Seymour deals?

moss was talked before the draft too if i remember correctly.welker ,thomas didnt go/com from the raiders.
either way burgess/wilfork exchange doesnt make much sense.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

1.After thr draft the original discussion between BB and Al Davis was Derek Burgess for Vince Wilfork.

Well, the following would count as a "conversation":

Davis: Would you be willing to give up Vince Wilfork?
Belichick: F*** you. <hangs up phone>

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

I don't think it's out of line to believe that BB would talk trade regarding any player on the team. Especially if it is with the Raiders.

Likely the Raiders showed an interest, but were not willing to pony up what it would take to nab Wilfork. Sending the pick we did for Burgess may have been the grease for the 1st for Sey.

Now this Papa dude is no Raider familia. But he does call the game with Tom Flores, so he may have an inside lane.

 

[LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks]

Watching Felger on Comcast Sportsnet and he had a conference call with Greg Papa,the Raiders play-by-play announcer.

According to Papa:

1.After thr draft the original discussion between BB and Al Davis was Derek Burgess for Vince Wilfork.

2.After aquiring Burgess,the Patriots offered Wilfork for number one draft choice,but Oakland wasn't going to go 3-4,so they declined.

3.Oakland then initiated talks for aquiring Seymour and the deal went thru,quickly.

4.Oakland offered a 2010 first rounder,but BB wanted 2011.

5.Papa predicts that there may be more trade activity between the 2 teams,but couldn't specify what it might entail.

Take it for what it's worth,but Papa seemed to know what he was talking about regarding Al Davis's plan to build a team for now,not later.

Watching the show, Papa was pretty clearly just speculating on most, if not all of this stuff and he's not really dialed in on the Raiders trade talks.

Felger said there had been rumors in Boston that Wilfork was in trade talks regarding the Patriots and Raiders a few weeks ago (which I don't recall at all). Then he asked Papa whether he had heard the same and Papa said something like "well that wouldn't surprise me, I was actually secretly hoping Oakland would land Wilfork back at the draft when the Derrick Burgess rumors were out there and you were hearing how Wilfork's contract might become a problem". He never came out and said that Oakland turned down Wilfork for a 1st. He mentioned that he, and speculated that the Raiders, would value Seymour more because Seymour was a better fit for a 4-3 defense in his eyes. He basically said he didn't think Wilfork could play in the 4-3.

Regarding who initiated the trade talks, Felger asked him and Papa guessed that Oakland was the one because he says they really needed a guy like Seymour.

He predicted there would be more trades between these teams based on BB's and Al's relationship and success dealing with each other in the past. Felger asked him why they seem to have such a good relationship and Papa said that Al has always liked BB and nearly hired him over Gruden.

This guy was definitely not Adam Schefter esque in his reporting and not some big time NFL insider. He was asked a lot of questions by Felger and went with what he thought was educated speculation (though thinking he could ever get Wilfork for Derrick Burgess wasn't so educated).

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Watching the show, Papa was pretty clearly just speculating on most, if not all of this stuff and he's not really dialed in on the Raiders trade talks.

Felger said there had been rumors in Boston that Wilfork was in trade talks regarding the Patriots and Raiders a few weeks ago (which I don't recall at all). Then he asked Papa whether he had heard the same and Papa said something like "well that wouldn't surprise me, I was actually secretly hoping Oakland would land Wilfork back at the draft when the Derrick Burgess rumors were out there and you were hearing how Wilfork's contract might become a problem". He never came out and said that Oakland turned down Wilfork for a 1st. He mentioned that he, and speculated that the Raiders, would value Seymour more because Seymour was a better fit for a 4-3 defense in his eyes. He basically said he didn't think Wilfork could play in the 4-3.

Regarding who initiated the trade talks, Felger asked him and Papa guessed that Oakland was the one because he says they really needed a guy like Seymour.

He predicted there would be more trades between these teams based on BB's and Al's relationship and success dealing with each other in the past. Felger asked him why they seem to have such a good relationship and Papa said that Al has always liked BB and nearly hired him over Gruden.

This guy was definitely not Adam Schefter esque in his reporting and not some big time NFL insider. He was asked a lot of questions by Felger and went with what he thought was educated speculation (though thinking he could ever get Wilfork for Derrick Burgess wasn't so educated).

Thanks for clearing up the context and content.

 

[bigfandan]

4.Oakland offered a 2010 first rounder,but BB wanted 2011.

Can't we flip a high #1 in 2010 for a high #1 and #2 (perhaps #3) in 2011? There awalys seem to be teams desparate to win now.

The worst we could do is probably a straightup trade to the next year.

 

[BadMoFo]

Wilfork should love hearing this news.

 

[Gwedd]

I am MUCH more inclined to believe that the announcer is pulling info out of his wazoo. It's much more likely that this info about Wilfork being trade bait was put out there to stir the pot and cause friction between Vince and the FO.

Whenver I consider ANYTHING that the Raiders say or do, I always step back first and think about what Al Davis might have up his sleeve. The man is a scheming old devil, and anytime he has a chance to stick it to some other team, or, preferable, the league, he will do do, as he has demonstrated in the past.

Davis has never forgotten or forgiven the league for the way he was treated about moving to LA, the back to Oakland, and his animosity will continue until he passes on.

However, I could easily believe that this info was GIVEN by Davis to Papa in order to cause this sort of a reaction.

 

[PatsfanGlo]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

Well, the following would count as a "conversation":

:agree:

I've been to couple of Raider's forum and it seems they are all happy about upgrading their run defense. Vince Wilfork was 4-3 DT coming out of college, younger and wider body. Wouldn't it make more sense just from run stopping point of view? But then again, we Are talking about the Raiders.....

 

[patchick]

4.Oakland offered a 2010 first rounder,but BB wanted 2011.

Meanwhile Mike Lombardi says:

"At first, this deal was being framed around a two in 2010, but it moved to a one because the Raiders wanted to keep their draft alive next year."
Diner news: Acquiring Seymour risky move for Raiders - NFL - CBSSports.com Football

IOW, there's a lot of conjecture out there, and anybody who attempts to believe it all will find their brain tied in impossible knots.

 

[Fencer]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

hard to believe BB trading wilfork for burgess straight up..
the rest of the story is predictable.

Especially since it would be like trading Wilfork for a little more than a 3rd.

Doesn't sound like an offer the Pats were close to taking ...

 

[JD10367]

According to Papa:

1.After thr draft the original discussion between BB and Al Davis was Derek Burgess for Vince Wilfork.

And after Belichick stopped laughing hysterically over the phone, and got his breath back, they started seriously discussing something realistic.

1. That would've been a horrible trade. Pats should've offered Wilfork for Peppers.

That woud've been an equally horrible trade.

 

[farn]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

hard to believe BB trading wilfork for burgess straight up..
the rest of the story is predictable.

Come on... seriously... does anyone here even begin to believe they'd give mid-twenties NT Wilfork for 30 year old Burgess who we got for a 3 and 5 ? The rest of the story is possible, at best.

Raise of hands : Wilfork for Burgess ? Maybe if BB was on crack and in the middle of choking Tila T while listening to classy lessons from LT.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Watching the show, Papa was pretty clearly just speculating on most, if not all of this stuff and he's not really dialed in on the Raiders trade talks.

Felger said there had been rumors in Boston that Wilfork was in trade talks regarding the Patriots and Raiders a few weeks ago (which I don't recall at all). Then he asked Papa whether he had heard the same and Papa said something like "well that wouldn't surprise me, I was actually secretly hoping Oakland would land Wilfork back at the draft when the Derrick Burgess rumors were out there and you were hearing how Wilfork's contract might become a problem". He never came out and said that Oakland turned down Wilfork for a 1st. He mentioned that he, and speculated that the Raiders, would value Seymour more because Seymour was a better fit for a 4-3 defense in his eyes. He basically said he didn't think Wilfork could play in the 4-3.

Regarding who initiated the trade talks, Felger asked him and Papa guessed that Oakland was the one because he says they really needed a guy like Seymour.

He predicted there would be more trades between these teams based on BB's and Al's relationship and success dealing with each other in the past. Felger asked him why they seem to have such a good relationship and Papa said that Al has always liked BB and nearly hired him over Gruden.

This guy was definitely not Adam Schefter esque in his reporting and not some big time NFL insider. He was asked a lot of questions by Felger and went with what he thought was educated speculation (though thinking he could ever get Wilfork for Derrick Burgess wasn't so educated).

Thanks, I feel much better now

 

[Bring Back Antowain!]

Re: Greg papa:raidrs play-by-play announcer

I think that's exactly what it means.This is getting kind of scary,because it makes me think that the pats and Wilfork are far apart in money figures.Off the top of my head,I think that there are know,8-10 teams that are playing 3-4.Vince would be very attractive to a team like Green Bay.Don Capers is now helping with their 3-4 transition and IMO,GB is going to win the NFC.

Aquiring Wilfork would make them a lock.

The other thing here is that Vince has gone out and shown that he can be a MONSTER as a DT in a 4-3 scheme,at least in preseason.

If we keep him,he may turn out to be the biggest suprise of all this season.

Then what the heck would Green Bay do with Raji?