No wonder Seymour fired his 1st agent

[Miguel]

1.) Seymour is probably the only Pro-Bowler from the 2001 draft that is still playing under his rookie contract.
2.) Seymour's rookie deal included $10.2 million in escalators. Seymour earned only $3.25 million of those escalators. When a 4-time Pro Bowler, 3-time All-Pro player, and a mainstay of a team that won 3 Super Bowls in a 5-year span earns less than a third of his escalators, there is something wrong with that contract.

 

[PatsChamps363839]

1.) Seymour is probably the only Pro-Bowler from the 2001 draft that is still playing under his rookie contract.
2.) Seymour's rookie deal included $10.2 million in escalators. Seymour earned only $3.25 million of those escalators. When a 4-time Pro Bowler, 3-time All-Pro player, and a mainstay of a team that won 3 Super Bowls in a 5-year span earns less than a third of his escalators, there is something wrong with that contract.

Seymour is going to demand a big signing bonus. I hope the Patriots can afford his greed.

 

[shakadave]

When a 4-time Pro Bowler, 3-time All-Pro player, and a mainstay of a team that won 3 Super Bowls in a 5-year span earns less than a third of his escalators, there is something wrong with that contract.

I've wondered about this before. What sorts of escalators were in his contract that haven't been met? 2 TDs per year and he only scored 1? 10 sacks a year?

A good agent would have gotten Richard escalators like "punched the LT back on his heels and threw him at the quarterback"!!!

 

[OntarioPatsFan]

Seymour is going to demand a big signing bonus. I hope the Patriots can afford his greed.

Greed? The guy just wants what he's entitled to, being one of the most dominant defensive linemen in the game. I hope Seymour stays in NE, but I'll understand if he moves on for more money, just like Milloy, AV, and Willie Mac.

 

[BelichickFan]

but I'll understand if he moves on for more money, just like Milloy, AV, and Willie Mac.

He'll have to do it as a Franchised player, there's no way he just walks.

 

[festy1986]

Seymor is the Pats best defensive player, makes the biggest impact concerning all other posistions and thus as a result he should earn more money then the rest.

If they let Seymor walk over money, and the reason being he isn't worth it. That excuse won't fly around NE no more, trust me without seymor the team becomes less then average.

But I don't worry bout that, because Seymor will get the money and from the Pats.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Seymor is the Pats best defensive player, makes the biggest impact concerning all other posistions and thus as a result he should earn more money then the rest.

If they let Seymor walk over money, and the reason being he isn't worth it. That excuse won't fly around NE no more, trust me without seymor the team becomes less then average.

But I don't worry bout that, because Seymor will get the money and from the Pats.

Less then average, eh? That lends itself to the sign superstars and ignore the depth arguments so popular in recent weeks.

 

[BelichickFan]

If they let Seymor walk over money, and the reason being he isn't worth it. That excuse won't fly around NE no more

Tough talk from someone who doesn't have to resolve the situation. What if he says $9M a year or Franchise me at $9M. Then he and Brady count for $20M for just two players. I want Seymour as much as anyone but there comes a time to trade and move on. If they can get a mid-late #1 for him in 12 months then which would you rather have, the #1 and $8M or so to spend on other players . . . or Seymour. That money can go a long way. Sure I want Seymour but if he insists on getting the last dollar we may be better off trading him.

As a few people still don't get it - it's not about money, it's about cap space. Kraft would pay him the money but is $8-$10M for Seymour worth $8-$10M less across the roster especially when you can also trade him (see: John Abraham) and get good picks too.

 

[kolbitr]

1.) Seymour is probably the only Pro-Bowler from the 2001 draft that is still playing under his rookie contract.

Out of curiosity, I compiled a list of other Pro Bowlers from the 2001 draft (I have probably missed some, esp. alternates; e.g., did Reggie Wayne make the PB as an alternate?):

Alge Crumpler (3x), Casey Hampton (2x), Chad Johnson (3x), Chris Chambers (1x), Deuce McAllister (2x), Drew Brees (1x), Koren Robinson (1x), Kris Jenkins (1x), LaDainian Tomlinson (3x), Marcus Stroud (3x), Michael Vick (3x), Nate Clements (1x), Richard Seymour (4x), Rudi Johnson (1x, as a 4th-rounder), Santana Moss (1x), Steve Smith (2x, as a 3rd-rounder), Travis Henry (1x).

I have no idea about whether any of these players is still playing under their rookie contracts (obviously, we know some who are not!); Richard Seymour certainly stands out as the only four-time selection (again, unless I have missed an appearance).

 

[mgteich]

The reason for working so hard on the cap is so that we can afford players like Brady and Seymour for $10M a year each,

Tough talk from someone who doesn't have to resolve the situation. What if he says $9M a year or Franchise me at $9M. Then he and Brady count for $20M for just two players. I want Seymour as much as anyone but there comes a time to trade and move on. If they can get a mid-late #1 for him in 12 months then which would you rather have, the #1 and $8M or so to spend on other players . . . or Seymour. That money can go a long way. Sure I want Seymour but if he insists on getting the last dollar we may be better off trading him.

As a few people still don't get it - it's not about money, it's about cap space. Kraft would pay him the money but is $8-$10M for Seymour worth $8-$10M less across the roster especially when you can also trade him (see: John Abraham) and get good picks too.

 

[BelichickFan]

The reason for working so hard on the cap is so that we can afford players like Brady and Seymour for $10M a year each,

I'm not sure about that. I think Brady is probably the only one. As long as we have Belichick and Brady and can spread the rest of the cap out among the team we'll be fine IMO.

 

[festy1986]

Tough talk from someone who doesn't have to resolve the situation. What if he says $9M a year or Franchise me at $9M. Then he and Brady count for $20M for just two players. I want Seymour as much as anyone but there comes a time to trade and move on. If they can get a mid-late #1 for him in 12 months then which would you rather have, the #1 and $8M or so to spend on other players . . . or Seymour. That money can go a long way. Sure I want Seymour but if he insists on getting the last dollar we may be better off trading him.

As a few people still don't get it - it's not about money, it's about cap space. Kraft would pay him the money but is $8-$10M for Seymour worth $8-$10M less across the roster especially when you can also trade him (see: John Abraham) and get good picks too.

He is worth it, I've seen the results when Seymor isn't on the field and I know I like them a lot more when he is on the field.

 

[BelichickFan]

He is worth it, I've seen the results when Seymor isn't on the field and I know I like them a lot more when he is on the field.

I like Seymour as much as anyone. And you're right, there's a big difference when he's on the field. But if it comes to it and we get a mid #1 for him, use $1.5M or so cap room on the pick and have, say, $6M left that would have gone to Seymour, that #1 pick and $6M would make a big difference on the field too. Perhaps as much, or even more, than Seymour.

 

[smg93]

The reason for working so hard on the cap is so that we can afford players like Brady and Seymour for $10M a year each,

I agree with this. We've often said on this board that the philosophy is to pay the few key members of the team, and then fill it with a strong middle class. If Seymour isn't a key member of the defense, then frankly no one else is in my opinion. I don't think that Brady alone can keep this franchise as one of the top in the league.

Just see what happened at the beginning of last year when the defense was horrible. We couldn't stop anyone from scoring a bunch of points. We were very fortunate that in the first six games, Brady was able to score more points than half the teams we faced. But .500 is not a record we can strive for and expect to be a playoff contender.

If the only "untouchable" is Brady, then we better get used to having our defense give up lots of points if #93 leaves and having Tom try to win by scoring more and more points. That is just not going to work in my opinion because defense is the key to championships. We have been very lucky to be able to have Seymour's services these past 5 or so years at a relative discount so that we could bring in people like Colvin and keep players like McGinest and Vinatieri on the payroll without filling the team with minimum salary type veterans who would have had to start games instead of just replacing injured starters. The Pats would have suffered even more if those vets were the ones who got injured and then they too would have had to been replaced by street free agents, rookies, and the like.

It is now the time and place to pay Seymour like the cornerstone of the defense that he is. 20% of the cap to pay Brady on Offense and Seymour on Defense is reasonable to me because both those guys make everyone else around them play better. Richard is in his mid 20's and will be a star for at least the next five years. Pay him now because the longer we wait, the price just goes up. He has paid his dues. 4 time Pro Bowler still playing in his rookie contract speaks volumes about how valuable he has been to the team. This isn't about sentimentality. It's about what makes sense. You've got two key players in Brady and Seymour signed till the end of the decade and now is the time to find more players from the draft like we've had in the past to come in and become great role players to support our stars. Sign up the guy you have now instead of hoping that this years pick is going to end up like a new #93.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Wow. I went over to NFL.com, to check some info to back up the main point of this post. They have him listed as a DT, not a DE... more fuel for that fire.

To the point, i.e., escalators. You have to imagine they're based on a lot of stats. The thing with the 2-gap system the Pats play is, there won't be too many sexy numbers coming from a defensive lineman. Now, making it to and winning super bowls and pro bowls, Seymour could and did do, and I'm sure a few dollars were tied to that.

But sacks? The Pats aren't sack happy. Set the magic number at 6, and Seymour reaches it once, in 2003, with 8. The linebackers do most of the tackling, so for solo tackles, 35's his highest total (to be fair, no lineman gets a huge number of tackles.)

He must have reached what he could from Pro Bowl and Super Bowl appearances, obviously - and that agent didn't do his homework on what New England does with its down linemen.

It'll be interesting to see this unfold, once the rules say they can talk again. I could see the logic in a trade, at these kinds of numbers. I could also see the present caution in the FA market as a percursor to redoing that contract with costs loaded somewhat to this year's cap.

One thought - am I the only one who thinks Roosevelt Colvin has not provided value commensurate to cost? There is the possibility of getting a pick or two for Colvin, paying Seymour what he's worth (by the PatsValuMeterâ„¢,) using some of this season's extra cap space to lessen the blow, and structure future hits on Seymour to really take off starting in 2009, when Brady's start coming back from the stratosphere. So he'd get a nice big signing bonus, a nice roster bonus (this year,) then "tame" salaries in 06-08, (say, 8 mill) and a nice additional chunk of guaranteed money in 09, with salary increasing in 09 through, say, 2012.

The only problem with this idea is Colvin might blow up and rip the league a new one in 06, and therefore become a problem by being better than thought. But that's a nice problem to have.

Thoughts?

PFnV

 

[hwc]

Seymour isn't hurtin' in the coin department. On the DE franchise tag list (top 10 cap numbers for DE's in 2005), Seymour is listed at #8 in the NFL. I don't think we need to cry the blues for him. He can feed his family.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

HWC, I take it you're being tongue-in-cheek, what with the Ty Law reference to "feeding his family"?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I agree with this. We've often said on this board that the philosophy is to pay the few key members of the team, and then fill it with a strong middle class. If Seymour isn't a key member of the defense, then frankly no one else is in my opinion. I don't think that Brady alone can keep this franchise as one of the top in the league.

Just see what happened at the beginning of last year when the defense was horrible. We couldn't stop anyone from scoring a bunch of points. We were very fortunate that in the first six games, Brady was able to score more points than half the teams we faced. But .500 is not a record we can strive for and expect to be a playoff contender.

If the only "untouchable" is Brady, then we better get used to having our defense give up lots of points if #93 leaves and having Tom try to win by scoring more and more points. That is just not going to work in my opinion because defense is the key to championships. We have been very lucky to be able to have Seymour's services these past 5 or so years at a relative discount so that we could bring in people like Colvin and keep players like McGinest and Vinatieri on the payroll without filling the team with minimum salary type veterans who would have had to start games instead of just replacing injured starters. The Pats would have suffered even more if those vets were the ones who got injured and then they too would have had to been replaced by street free agents, rookies, and the like.

It is now the time and place to pay Seymour like the cornerstone of the defense that he is. 20% of the cap to pay Brady on Offense and Seymour on Defense is reasonable to me because both those guys make everyone else around them play better. Richard is in his mid 20's and will be a star for at least the next five years. Pay him now because the longer we wait, the price just goes up. He has paid his dues. 4 time Pro Bowler still playing in his rookie contract speaks volumes about how valuable he has been to the team. This isn't about sentimentality. It's about what makes sense. You've got two key players in Brady and Seymour signed till the end of the decade and now is the time to find more players from the draft like we've had in the past to come in and become great role players to support our stars. Sign up the guy you have now instead of hoping that this years pick is going to end up like a new #93.

Sorry, Sey is the best DL in the NFL today, and he is replaceable. That defense that started last season and was horrible featured Seymour. An extension would be welcome, but losing him because he priced himself beyond BB's value board doesn't signal the end of D-line strength for the Patriots. Of course, were that to happen, we'd endure another period of endless whining, avoiding that would almost make it worthwhile to break the budget and return to mediocrity.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

One thought - am I the only one who thinks Roosevelt Colvin has not provided value commensurate to cost? There is the possibility of getting a pick or two for Colvin, paying Seymour what he's worth (by the PatsValuMeterâ„¢,) using some of this season's extra cap space to lessen the blow, and structure future hits on Seymour to really take off starting in 2009, when Brady's start coming back from the stratosphere. So he'd get a nice big signing bonus, a nice roster bonus (this year,) then "tame" salaries in 06-08, (say, 8 mill) and a nice additional chunk of guaranteed money in 09, with salary increasing in 09 through, say, 2012.

The only problem with this idea is Colvin might blow up and rip the league a new one in 06, and therefore become a problem by being better than thought. But that's a nice problem to have.

Thoughts?

PFnV

Colvin hasn't provided value? Wow!

 

[shakadave]

One thought - am I the only one who thinks Roosevelt Colvin has not provided value commensurate to cost?

It's at least possible that you're the only one. Of course we lost "value" while he was injured. But around the middle of this past season, we saw what we paid for --- awesome talent just throwing offenses into disarray. They surely were having to gameplan for Rosie in 2005!