Richard Seymour: ‘I could have helped"

[Nunchucks]

Trading Seymour was a huge mistake, a giant friggin blunder in terms of this years superbowl aspirations.

He would have made this defense much better. I suppose people don't think his height would have been useful in knocking down a few balls, that he would have at leat a few sacks and of course the run defense of the right side of the line would be infinitly better.

Seymour would have made a huge difference in the pass rush and run defense, anybody who doesn't think so, obviously hasn't been paying attention.

Who cares about 2011, who cares whether the Patriots can sign him or not. it is 2009 and Belichick sacrificed this season by trading him.

 

[BelichickFan]

Letting Hobbs go for a 5th was worse.

Hobbs was traded for two 5ths - and he would have blown chunks behind this "pass rush".

Seymour ? Of course he could have helped. Duh. But we likely weren't going to pay him what he wanted so 5-6 years of a #1 pick is still better than 1 year of Seymour.

Trading a #3 and #5 for Burgess is the deal I regret the most.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

BB is not infallible but some people here cannot accept that. This was a big mistake as far as the team was concerned this year.

Seymour was known as a leader, he had one of his best seasons in 2008, we lost Bruschi, Vrabel and Harrison also. Imo its the stupidest decision that has been made by the Patriots in the Belichick era.

The more I think about it, Pioli might have been a bigger loss than Josh, he might have stopped something like this from happening.

Who do you think came up with the 3 year extension concept? Were they sure of Seymour the player being a consistent impact player or the kind of leader they wanted in their locker room, Pioli would have locked him up long term in an an even friendlier 6 year extension. Instead they went with the unusual, incremental deal because it gave them time to assess whether he would remain healthy enough to warrant the committment or play well enough injured to warrant the committment or become the kind of positive force leader who warrants that committment. I said that the time and that time would tell how they viewed him. It did. He was not as bad a performer on the field as his critics claimed nor nearly as impactful on or off it as his proponents continued to insist. Much like Milloy before him he became an inconsistent effort player and somewhat of a negative leadership concern in the locker room.

He never recovered from being stung by the mere concept of behavior consequences, he didn't consistently deliver the kind of performance that his level of compensation demands, he commiserated and eventually bonded with of all people the clown who derided his selection on draft day because of their growing shared resentment for a man they believed snubbed or marginalized them. Whenever he felt threatened by critics he played the talent vs. scheme card. He didn't impact or save the 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007 or 2008 defenses sufficiently to warrant a top 3 deal. This team historically played as well with or without him in the lineup. His own teamates stopped electing him a captain. To claim him as a difference maker after Belichick moved on is wishful thinking heard mostly from those who would brook no criticism of him when he was here. Richard was a gifted athlete for sure. He was also increasingly an inconsistent effort performer who readily embraced the excuse card, subtely in public but not so subtely so in private. Just ask Borges since he fed him vendetta ammo any time his arsenal was running low over the last 5 seasons.

I love the revisionist assumptions made here on Pioli's behalf as well. Scott far moreso that Bill addressed publicly what went into the process of retaining or acquiring a player and how they gauged committment to playing championship football based not only on a players on field performance but his performance in the locker room and at the negotiating table. He may be more of a value and system hardass than his mentor... And while Bill had final say on all football operations matters, and it was Scott's mission to find him players that fit the system both via draft and FA, both frequently acknowledged that their relationship worked on both a personal and professional level because they adopted a policy of never signing or drafting or extending or cutting ties with a player unless they both agreed on the decision. That included the superstars, value addeds and total busts. Scott has been gone 9 months and it hasn't been all hearts and flowers at his new gig, either.

Yeah, Richard could have helped... had he actually been an all in team player and leader. You could say the same thing about any player who isn't here any longer in large part because he wasn't.

 

[patsfan-1982]

it was a bad trade by the front office i dont care how high of a draft pick it may be it's in 2 years

will randy moss still be playing in 2 years and if so how much will he have left at 35 years old ?

can wes welker take 2 more years of being hit 10 to 15 times a game by LB's and safety and returning punt's and kick's ?

and how will brady hold up when a 3 man front can get to him


and yes i know seymour was a FA next year and he will be 30. so there is no cap next year i don't see why they can't pay him it's not like they don't bring in about 5 guys over 40 ever year who can't play any more


seymour can still play and it's not like they are going to sign wilfork and mankins now that seymour is gone i bet they leve as FA next year two.....



ok i fell better now i had to get that off of my chest

 

[DarrylS]

Trading Seymour was a huge mistake, a giant friggin blunder in terms of this years superbowl aspirations.

He would have made this defense much better. I suppose people don't think his height would have been useful in knocking down a few balls, that he would have at leat a few sacks and of course the run defense of the right side of the line would be infinitly better.

Seymour would have made a huge difference in the pass rush and run defense, anybody who doesn't think so, obviously hasn't been paying attention.

Who cares about 2011, who cares whether the Patriots can sign him or not. it is 2009 and Belichick sacrificed this season by trading him.

Probably none of what you have written here, can be quantified... keep reading Borges and the rest of the naysayers...

Personally really liked #93, but his game has been falling off for a while... someday we will know the whole story of why this took place... he is on the other side of great.

Cannot fall in love with your veteran players... see Lawyer Milloy, Mike Vrabel, Deion Branch, David Givens et al... the grass is always greener..

 

[Nunchucks]

Probably none of what you have written here, can be quantified... keep reading Borges and the rest of the naysayers...

Personally really liked #93, but his game has been falling off for a while... someday we will know the whole story of why this took place... he is on the other side of great.

Cannot fall in love with your veteran players... see Lawyer Milloy, Mike Vrabel, Deion Branch, David Givens et al... the grass is always greener..

I am not a fan of Borges and don't read his crap. However, the loss of Seymour can be quantified.

Patriots pass rush is pure CRAP, the right side of the line cannot stop the run. You put Seymour in there and those problems are lessened by quite a bit.

Anybody who knows football will tell you that.

Seymour would have meant winning the Colts game for sure, he would have meant being having a pass rush in the Saints game and certainly winning the Miami game.

that puts the Pats in line for competing for a 1st round bye.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

and yes i know seymour was a FA next year and he will be 30. so there is no cap next year i don't see why they can't pay him it's not like they don't bring in about 5 guys over 40 ever year who can't play any more


seymour can still play and it's not like they are going to sign wilfork and mankins now that seymour is gone i bet they leve as FA next year two.....

If 2010 is uncapped, Mankins is only a restricted free agent.

And according to NFL.com, no one seriously expects Wilfork to reach unrestricted free agency without the franchise tag.

 

[oldskool138]

Richard,

You could have helped this year...but that 2011 pick will be helping the Pats long after you retire.

 

[satz]

Seymour is greatly missed

1)Sacks as tony dungy said 8 sacks by seymour is equal to 16 in a 4-3.I see green and wright getting blocked by a TE or RB .come on no matter what you say about sey he would toast the QB if you put a RB to block him.

2)Run defence .No one is mentioning that we are 15th is run defence now and teams can run at green and get 4-5 yds .shortage is so easy now as seymour had some major stop by blowing up gaurds.

Green is not seymour .

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I'm one of those who would rather have Seymour around helping this team win a SB this year than having some draft pick that may or may not pan out a couple years down the road. In this respect, I believe BB messed up big time by seriously miscalculating how he was going to replace Seymour's production on the field. But I understand why he did it.

 

[oldskool138]

I'm one of those who would rather have Seymour around helping this team win a SB this year than having some draft pick that may or may not pan out a couple years down the road.

Can Richard Seymour play on the O-line, CB and 3rd WR? This Pats team has a lot of holes.

 

[DarrylS]

I am not a fan of Borges and don't read his crap. However, the loss of Seymour can be quantified.

Patriots pass rush is pure CRAP, the right side of the line cannot stop the run. You put Seymour in there and those problems are lessened by quite a bit.

Anybody who knows football will tell you that.

Seymour would have meant winning the Colts game for sure, he would have meant being having a pass rush in the Saints game and certainly winning the Miami game.

that puts the Pats in line for competing for a 1st round bye.

Once again this is all conjecture, last year this board was filled with people who said he was over the hill, invisible or other such nonsense...

I always have been a huge Seymour apologist, however you do not know anything you have posted... file under speculation...

Seymour was great at his position, however he was on the other side of great... there is more to this story than meets the eye. He shunned leadership and even though I thought he was great, did not make many game changing plays...

You are unequivocally saying that with him there would be at least two more wins, and I am saying there is no way of knowing any of this..

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

Can Richard Seymour play on the O-line, CB and 3rd WR? This Pats team has a lot of holes.

Not sure what your point is! Are you saying that BB traded Seymour because he knew his team had so many holes that they weren't going to win a SB anyhow or anyway?

 

[Nunchucks]

Once again this is all conjecture, last year this board was filled with people who said he was over the hill, invisible or other such nonsense...

I always have been a huge Seymour apologist, however you do not know anything you have posted... file under speculation...

Seymour was great at his position, however he was on the other side of great... there is more to this story than meets the eye. He shunned leadership and even though I thought he was great, did not make many game changing plays...

You are unequivocally saying that with him there would be at least two more wins, and I am saying there is no way of knowing any of this..

I am calling you on your BS. Seymour is a known quanity, calling me speculating that seymour would help this team by 2-3 wins this season is like me speculating that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

Colts, Broncos and Miami....3 losses that most likely would have been wins with Seymour, I can't see how that can be reasonably disputed.

 

[Rob0729]

Seymour could have helped, but he wouldn't have cured all that is wrong with the Pats' right now. Unless those were going to be fixed (including offensive problems and apparent attitude issues), I'd rather have the first round pick since this team won't go anywhere anyway.

 

[Nunchucks]

Seymour could have helped, but he wouldn't have cured all that is wrong with the Pats' right now. Unless those were going to be fixed (including offensive problems and apparent attitude issues), I'd rather have the first round pick since this team won't go anywhere anyway.

Some people like to see the team win superbowls...other people like to play draftnik

 

[oldskool138]

Not sure what your point is! Are you saying that BB traded Seymour because he knew his team had so many holes that they weren't going to win a SB anyhow or anyway?

No, BB traded Seymour because Al Davis made him an offer that he'd be ******ed to pass up.

I am saying that this team has more holes in it than one guy like Richard Seymour can fix.

 

[DarrylS]

I am calling you on your BS. Seymour is a known quanity, calling me speculating that seymour would help this team by 2-3 wins this season is like me speculating that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

Colts, Broncos and Miami....3 losses that most likely would have been wins with Seymour, I can't see how that can be reasonably disputed.

Willl choose to walk away, as this is turning into idle, unsubstantiated banter... no one knows his impact on the Pats this year, pure and simple.

This comes from one of his hugest fans..

 

[Nunchucks]

Willl choose to walk away, as this is turning into idle, unsubstantiated banter... no one knows his impact on the Pats this year, pure and simple.

This comes from one of his hugest fans..

I guess you would also say that we can only speculate that Charles Woodson and Champ Bailey would be the difference in winning a few games or perhaps that James Harrison would help win 3 games.

Afterall, having an all-pro playing at a position where you are consistently bad won't help the team win...cause you know...you are just speculating that they would help win games.

 

[mgteich]

Trading Seymour was just one part of the puzzle. And no, Seymour alone wouldn't have solved all the problems we have.

HOWEVER, we would be a much better team With Seymour instead of Burgess. We would be even better with Seymour, Hobbs, Matthews and Laurinitis instead of Burgess, Arrington, Chung and Brace.

Seymour could have helped, but he wouldn't have cured all that is wrong with the Pats' right now. Unless those were going to be fixed (including offensive problems and apparent attitude issues), I'd rather have the first round pick since this team won't go anywhere anyway.