Raiders sent the 5 day letter to Seymour

[NE39]

Now another source is saying the Raiders are denying they sent a letter:

Earlier this evening, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area created a stir on its website by reporting Chronicle Live host Greg Papa -- the radio voice of the Raiders -- said the Raiders issued Richard Seymour a five-day letter to report.

Except, Papa never said such a thing on the air. I would know, because I was a guest on the show when the Seymour stalemate was being discussed.

Several Raiders officials said no letter has been issued to Seymour, who has yet to report to the Raiders since the Patriots traded him Sunday for a 2011 first-round pick.

Papa himself said at Raiders practice he never said it. He described it as a miscommunication after explaining to a co-employee what scenarios the Raiders have before them.

CSNBA then removed the report from its website. Still, that didn't keep ESPN's Adam Schefter from following up with the same story.

So what's really going on?

Nothing that anyone knows of, certainly not on the record with attribution. Raiders coach Tom Cable will meet with media after tonight's practice at The Coliseum.

Seymour is not in Oakland. The Raiders are preparing for Monday night's opener without him, re-signing defensive tackle William Joseph -- the player they cut Sunday to make roster room for Seymour.

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

Wait! This would mean that PFT, ESPN and Schefter were wrong!!!

No way!!!

 

[mgteich]

This sounds like the raiders got a roster exemption for Seymour.

Now another source is saying the Raiders are denying they sent a letter:

 

[Gopats!!!]

This is so aggrevating!!!!!

I totally don't understand why the team is letting seymour toy with them.

I understand there could be private discussions, etc, but it's still immensley irritating!

 

[pao]

My understanding is that if he fails the Raiders' physical, the Patriots can administer one with a doctor of their choice. If those 2 conflict, the league appoints a doctor to examine him and make a final determination regarding his condition.

Now that is interesting. Where did you hear that or do you have a link? First I've heard of htat.

 

[mgteich]

No doctor is going to falsify an injury report for the raiders. Seymour is NOT injured. Someone can come up with the language, but of course there is an appeal process when a player fails a physical which has the effect of nullifying a trade.

Now that is interesting. Where did you hear that or do you have a link? First I've heard of htat.

 

[pao]

I've thought this over and could see a scenario where that could be possible, but unlikely.
If Seymour reports to take the phyiscal and tells the Raiders he won't play for them, then the Raiders would have an incentive to be overly strict in the physical.
There are numerous problems with this theory though.
1) It assumes the Raiders have been convinced by the media that they made a bad trade
2) Why would Seymour take the physical if he doesnt want to play for the Raiduhs?
3) The Raiduhs would expose themselves to a boatload of problems for failing Seymour with an injury that is less severe than they have allowed players to play with. Think of it. Seymour failed his physical because of his knees. Raiduh X has knee issues, then sustains an even more serious knee injury. Lawyer X subpoenas the Seymour file and sue's the Raiduhs for negligence because they let the player play with a more severe injury than Seymour had when they said Seymour was too injured to play. Big can of worms to open.

In the end the only way for a phony fail on the physical is if Seymour reports to take it and then the Raiduhs decide they dont want him. They would only not want him if he was going to hold out, and if he was going to hold out he wouldn't show up for the physical.

Am I missing an angle?

I would say that the angle you missed was that the health bar for a player you are giving up a first round draft choice for is much higher than a player on your roster. There is no rule that says you can't have a different set of standards for someone you are acquiring and someone you are allowing to continue their career with your team. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

 

[JSn]

Does Seymour's cap hit go away when he is finally gone?

Just seeing the post at Reiss' tonight and wondered if we get clear by the 3.6 mil or the 9.7 mil.

 

[mgteich]

Seymour is not on the patriot's cap, expect for the salary cap. He is also on the roster of the raiders. However, this could change if the deal is voided.

Does Seymour's cap hit go away when he is finally gone?

Just seeing the post at Reiss' tonight and wondered if we get clear by the 3.6 mil or the 9.7 mil.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Does Seymour's cap hit go away when he is finally gone?

Just seeing the post at Reiss' tonight and wondered if we get clear by the 3.6 mil or the 9.7 mil.

$3.6M.

The other $6M+ is signing bonus proration that's not going anywhere.

Get those Peppers dreams out of your head.

 

[JSn]

$3.6M.

The other $6M+ is signing bonus proration that's not going anywhere.

Get those Peppers dreams out of your head.

Ahaha, I'm waaaay past that. Just wondered. If that much space was opening up, it would make the case that something was up.

 

[pao]

No doctor is going to falsify an injury report for the raiders. Seymour is NOT injured. Someone can come up with the language, but of course there is an appeal process when a player fails a physical which has the effect of nullifying a trade.

First, like I said, there is probably enough wear and tear on Seymour that he could fail a legitimate physical. At least legitimate enough to fit the very low threshold posted above. So the doctor would not have to "falsify an injury report". Second, I haven't heard of an appeal process when a player fails a physical nullifying a trade. If you have please give me a link, I am very interested in this. In earlier posts a team traded a player, the other team failed him, the trading team said he wasn't injured but still had to take him back. Why didn't they appeal? I couldn't care less if this trade goes through or not. It will help my Chargers this year if it does.

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

$3.6M.

The other $6M+ is signing bonus proration that's not going anywhere.

Get those Peppers dreams out of your head.

There is an idea. Someone call Al and tell him to ship Seymour and next years 3rd to Carolina, Carolina sends Peppers to us, and we send Al his 2011 1st and throw in a fruit basket for his troubles.

 

[Joker]

send a fruit basket to a fruitcake???

overkill. wouldn't you say?

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

send a fruit basket to a fruitcake???

overkill. wouldn't you say?

You're right. Better make it a 5th of Vodka and a Drew Bledsoe jersey.

 

[pao]

There is an idea. Someone call Al and tell him to ship Seymour and next years 3rd to Carolina, Carolina sends Peppers to us, and we send Al his 2011 1st and throw in a fruit basket for his troubles.

send a fruit basket to a fruitcake???

overkill. wouldn't you say?

If I had been drinking soda while reading these two posts I would have spit it up through my nose. LOL. I'm just happy AD is the owner of the Raiders. It is one team the Chargers don't have to worry about year to year.

 

[Reckedtrek]

You're right. Better make it a 5th of Vodka and a Drew Bledsoe jersey.

How about a 5th round pick (2013) and Bledsoe?

 

[Tunescribe]

First, like I said, there is probably enough wear and tear on Seymour that he could fail a legitimate physical. At least legitimate enough to fit the very low threshold posted above. So the doctor would not have to "falsify an injury report". Second, I haven't heard of an appeal process when a player fails a physical nullifying a trade. If you have please give me a link, I am very interested in this. In earlier posts a team traded a player, the other team failed him, the trading team said he wasn't injured but still had to take him back. Why didn't they appeal? I couldn't care less if this trade goes through or not. It will help my Chargers this year if it does.

Screw your Chargers. Anything bad that happens to your loathsome franchise and punk fans is well deserved. Please go away. And once you do, tell the mini-Merriman brigade of little boys who roam the concourses at Qualcomm looking to pick fights with visiting fans to FOAD.

 

[italia44]

First, like I said, there is probably enough wear and tear on Seymour that he could fail a legitimate physical. At least legitimate enough to fit the very low threshold posted above. So the doctor would not have to "falsify an injury report". Second, I haven't heard of an appeal process when a player fails a physical nullifying a trade. If you have please give me a link, I am very interested in this. In earlier posts a team traded a player, the other team failed him, the trading team said he wasn't injured but still had to take him back. Why didn't they appeal? I couldn't care less if this trade goes through or not. It will help my Chargers this year if it does.

"classy" chargers....."classy" fans....and the beat goes on.

 

[thewaylifeshouldbe]

Well, if Cable can be believed, maybe this thing will resolve soon.

Highlights from Tom Cable’s post-practice press briefing, the latest in Raiders history:

– Cable has no knowledge of a 5-day letter being sent to defensive end Richard Seymour.

– The coach has spoken to Seymour since Monday, but not in the last 24 hours, and said he wants to be a Raider.

Seymour update; McFadden to start - Inside the Oakland Raiders - A look inside the world of the highly classified Oakland Raiders from the writers of Bay Area News Group