OT: Seymour is "Concerned about the Status of the Raiders".

[DaBruinz]

Could he be looking to get out of dodge???

 

[strngplyr]

Considering he never wanted to go in the first place, it wouldn't surprise me. I wonder how long until there are threads about bringing him back if he truly is disgruntled.

 

[Tucker]

considering he never wanted to go in the first place, it wouldn't surprise me. I wonder how long until there are threads about bringing him back if he truly is disgruntled.

3...2...1...

 

[Pessimistic Pete]

Didn't he say something before about not wanting to go back to the Patriots? Not directly but said something like "There's only 30 other teams (excluding Raiders)" I'd play for.

 

[StevePatsFan]

We going to pick this up?

Seymour just signed an extension in February.

Defensive lineman Richard Seymour has agreed to a two-year extension with the Oakland Raiders that will make him the highest-paid defensive player in football, a team source told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.
Source: Richard Seymour, Oakland Raiders agree to extension - ESPN


Doubt it!

Seymour is one of my favorite players the last 10 years, i wish he would be he aint walking through that door.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I know I'm crazy but I actually feel sorry for this multiple 8 figure net worth guy, stuck on the hapless and hopeless Raiders.

 

[neuronet]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer) Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

 

[StevePatsFan]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer) Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

Basically you got it, they didn't feel they could resign Seymour and Wilfork that offseason, they chose Wilfork over RS.

 

[Peachhead]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer)

Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

Yup. You pretty much answered your own question. He was in the last year of his deal and he had already held out (for a few weeks) a year or two earlier to get a minor rework of that deal, and he was making noises that he was going to be very expensive to re-sign.

 

[Fencer]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer) Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

Yep. He was obviously going to demand top dollar, and the team didn't want to use the franchise tag on him, since Wilfork was coming up for renewal the same year.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Yup. You pretty much answered your own question. He was in the last year of his deal and he had already held out (for a few weeks) a year or two earlier to get a minor rework of that deal, and he was making noises that he was going to be very expensive to re-sign.

And to answer the other half of the question—why a 2011 1—it's because Crazy Al was unwilling to part with a 2010 2.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Maybe Al Davis is about to croak?

 

[Ring 6]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer) Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

yup thats it

 

[Ring 6]

And to answer the other half of the question—why a 2011 1—it's because Crazy Al was unwilling to part with a 2010 2.

No, because BB wanted the 2011 instead of the 2010, because rookie cap was coming.

 

[Deus Irae]

Can someone remind me why we traded him? (I'm serious, not being a dumb troll, just a dumb homer) Was it b/c we knew we wouldn't be able to afford his renewal, so decided to get a draft pick for one season without him?

The reason has never been publicly given.

 

[WhiZa]

The reason has never been publicly given.

Is any reason publicly given with the Pats? It was pretty obvious that the Pats would rather give the money to Wilfork then try to resign both. Seymour would of helped the Pats the past 2 years, this is true. But thinking long term Solder will provide more value to the Pats over 4 years then Seymour would of over 1 year.

 

[Ring 6]

The reason has never been publicly given.

Which makes it the same as every other transaction.
But only those in denial don't recognize what it is.

 

[Deus Irae]

Is any reason publicly given with the Pats? It was pretty obvious that the Pats would rather give the money to Wilfork then try to resign both. Seymour would of helped the Pats the past 2 years, this is true. But thinking long term Solder will provide more value to the Pats over 4 years then Seymour would of over 1 year.

Despite the claims of many a Patsfans.com poster, all we have is guesswork as to the reasoning. I was being honest, while at the same time avoiding the "because Belichick screwed up" part of the post that belonged there, because it's territory that's been gone over time and time again.

And your value argument is wrong, IMO but, again, that's been gone over time and again.

 

[WhiZa]

And your value argument is wrong, IMO but, again, that's been gone over time and again.

You are right today, but if we only talked about what value and how it relates to the past and not the future we wouldn't have half as much to talk about

 

[BradyFTW!]

I would do a backflip if we got Seymour back, but for the money that he's making, it won't happen. Not to mention that he's made it pretty clear that he wouldn't come back here anyways.

As far as why we traded him? Because Seymour's 2009 + a compensation pick at the end of the third round was deemed less valuable than the pick that became Solder in 2011. I agree, if it's a given that he was gone, but RDE has been a glaring weak spot since he left. We never adequately replaced him, and it's been hurting us big time for a couple of years now.