Welcome to PatsFans.com

If the Globe is right

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by betterthanthealternative, Sep 12, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. betterthanthealternative

    betterthanthealternative Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,208
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +58 / 2 / -0

    And a union victory in the grievance could overturn the trade (the logic of which I don't get, but that's another matter), and that takes place after Seymour practices and/or plays for Oakland, how does that work?
  2. pats1

    pats1 Moderator PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    13,261
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    A union victory in the grievance would not overturn the trade. It would only say that the Raiders can not send him a five-day letter.
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2009
  3. SeauOUCH

    SeauOUCH Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It will never happen so don't worry about it. No way in hell Seymour wins this grievance, Oakland owns the contract they send the letter.
  4. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,397
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +215 / 14 / -2

    Thank you for your expect opinion. Surely you are a sports contract attorney or at least an agent.

    Oh, and BTW, you do understand that Seymour has not filed any grievance. The NFLPA has filed one seeking to clarify Oakland's right to send a letter.

  5. SeauOUCH

    SeauOUCH Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yes I know the union filed the grievance & there is no way in hell they will win. I'm not an attorney but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.
  6. captain insano

    captain insano Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +51 / 3 / -9

    #11 Jersey

    lmao:D:D:D:D:D
  7. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,397
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +215 / 14 / -2

    Apparently, you ahve no knowledge of the details of the grievance or the clause of the CBA that is being questioned. It seems a bit strange to abslutely know the result of a grievance without even knowing what is period argued.

    Or perhaps, you just don't like the idea that players have representation by their union.

  8. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,486
    Likes Received:
    246
    Ratings:
    +544 / 6 / -0

    I don't see that the grievance actually has anything to say about the trade at all. From what's been reported, nobody is claiming that the trade wasn't legitimate; it's a procedural matter about the 5-day letter.

    In my non-professional opinion, it would be simply nonsensical for an arbitrator to rule that NEITHER team has the right to send a letter that is procedurally required. If they rule that Oakland may not send it, then New England must. This could help Seymour's attempts to slow the process to a crawl and piss everybody off, but it doesn't seem like a substantive change in a player's rights.
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2009
  9. klinefan

    klinefan Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It is an interesting question...hopefully the league will rule and clear up some things.

    Some reports INITIALLY said that the Pats would send the letter as he's still their player. BB seemed to think he was not. Ultimately the Raiders sent the letter.

    So the question is...WHO does a player belong to AFTER he's been traded but BEFORE he's had his physical?

    I think the league will say he belongs to the Raiders. If they don't, then the Pats would have to have been the ones to send the letter...they would send a letter telling him to report to Oakland and if he doesn't, then the Pats would put him on the reserve list for the year...ie he'd still be a pat in 2010.

    I think the league would want to avoid that. They would want to avoid a player simply not showing up for a physical and remaining on his original team.
  10. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    The union can only file a grievance on behalf of a player. (Per the NFLPA fwiw...).


    Last edited: Sep 12, 2009
  11. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    20,397
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +215 / 14 / -2

    I agree. The most that would happen is that the patriots would need to send a letter. More importantly, the issue may be cleared up or put on a list of items to clarified in the new CBA.

  12. Gwedd

    Gwedd PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    4,967
    Likes Received:
    61
    Ratings:
    +110 / 0 / -1

    #61 Jersey

    I just knew how this thread would go when it began with the words. "If The Globe Is Right..."

    It's almost noon. Time to think about which beer goes best with a balogna sandwich.. :)
  13. PatsFanSince74

    PatsFanSince74 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9,891
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +58 / 1 / -1

    right. it's only by extrapolation that the Globe suggests that this would lead to a series of events wherein the League would invalidate the Trade. IMHO, there is somewhere between .0001 and .001 probability that the League would do that (absent any unknown information and by definition absent Seymour's flunking the physical), since it would set a precedent that any star player with several years left in his career could bully the league into killing a deal he didn't like.

    i don't know what the CBA says about "no trade" clauses, but this suggests that players who feel very strongly about being traded should make working them into their contracts part of their negotiating process. In fact, as I think about it, if there is a provision for a "no trade" clause being part of a contract and if indeed Seymour didn't get that included in his deal, then he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
  14. patchick

    patchick Moderatrix Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    11,486
    Likes Received:
    246
    Ratings:
    +544 / 6 / -0

    Oscar Meyer can only handle a weak lager. If you have a hearty German or kosher bologna you may branch out into ales. If like my daughter you insist on soy bologna, you're stuck with O'Douls.

    It's all in the CBA.
  15. basement zombie

    basement zombie Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Classic! :camera:
  16. NE39

    NE39 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I am pretty sure that is a mute point as far as this trade is concerned. The NFLPA may still wish to grieve it, but with Seymour reporting and playing on Monday the trade is a done deal. No reversals now. No turning back.
  17. Fencer

    Fencer Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,637
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -1

    One can only wish the point and all around it were mute.

    However, we'll have to settle for it being moot.
  18. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,343
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +58 / 2 / -1

    Reasonable speculation.

    Seymour filed the grievance Friday afternoon. By Friday evening he suddenly "found god" (god is a senile rat-like owner in Oakland.) It makes a lot of sense that, after filing the grievance someone in a high position told him he has virtually no chance to win this one, and his 5-day letter is in effect right now.
  19. 5 Rings for Brady!!

    5 Rings for Brady!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    they are not right.
  20. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    :rofl:


    ....
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>