Rumor: Seymour Trade Not A Done Deal?

[Deus Irae]

Void the CURRENT deal, they could rework a deal where its conditional or a lower round for the rights. BTW, I dont think it comes to that, I think he taking time to sort things out and will eventually go to Oakland.

1.) Why would New England take a lower pick when everyone here is talking about the great deal that they got by not taking the lesser picks?

2.) Why would Davis accept the trade without the physical if Seymour decides to tell the Raiders to stuff it?

3.) If you were Seymour, would you really show up in Oakland without either a promise not to franchise or a ridiculous new contract that broke all records for a defensive end (not tackle, end) knowing that you've got Davis on the hook?

 

[mgteich]

I agree with you. I'll read the relies in the morning.

1.) Why would New England take a lower pick when everyone here is talking about the great deal that they got by not taking the lesser picks?

2.) Why would Davis accept the trade without the physical if Seymour decides to tell the Raiders to stuff it?

3.) If you were Seymour, would you really show up in Oakland without either a promise not to franchise or a ridiculous new contract that broke all records for a defensive end (not tackle, end) knowing that you've got Davis on the hook?

 

[Deus Irae]

I agree with you. I'll read the relies in the morning.

I've been taking a beating on this stuff all day. I doubt it will stop as we sleep.

Have yourself a good night's rest.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The funny thing is, if Seymour refuses to report to the Raiders, at least in part on the grounds that the franchise is a joke, will crow be eaten by all the posters that were laughing about how he would be the sort of player who would go to Oakland to get his money?

You guys seem to think that he had a choice in the matter. He does have a choice in whether or not to report, and it's not looking quite so certain that he will...

 

[cmasspatsfan]

1.) Why would New England take a lower pick when everyone here is talking about the great deal that they got by not taking the lesser picks?

2.) Why would Davis accept the trade without the physical if Seymour decides to tell the Raiders to stuff it?

3.) If you were Seymour, would you really show up in Oakland without either a promise not to franchise or a ridiculous new contract that broke all records for a defensive end (not tackle, end) knowing that you've got Davis on the hook?

1) If Seymour absolutely doesnt report and Oakland voids the deal, the options are to give him the 5 day letter, renegotiate with Oakland, or trade him somehwere else

2) he probably wouldnt but hes a senile old man, who knows what he thinks

3)Depends what Seymours wants for the future, maybe the old man's willing to give him a boatload of money and Seymour will take it and stay in Oak.

 

[Deus Irae]

The funny thing is, if Seymour refuses to report to the Raiders, at least in part on the grounds that the franchise is a joke, will crow be eaten by all the posters that were laughing about how he would be the sort of player who would go to Oakland to get his money?

You guys seem to think that he had a choice in the matter. He does have a choice in whether or not to report, and it's not looking quite so certain that he will...

If he doesn't report, the same people will bag on him for defying the rules, etc...

 

[klinefan]

If he doesn't report, the same people will bag on him for defying the rules, etc...

If he doesn't report, NE should give him the 5 day letter, put him on the AWOL list if he doesn't then report and void his year for him. Then he'll be in the same situation the next year.

Basically they can force him to retire. That's the only leverage he has...he can retire.

Why would he do that if he really wants to hae a huge payday?

 

[mgteich]

If Seymour doesn't report AND oakland voids the contract, then the patriots can threaten him to report or else be suspended.

Seymour could then report, TO FOXBORO. After all the deal would have been VOIDED. Oakland would be out of the picture.

If he doesn't report, NE should give him the 5 day letter, put him on the AWOL list if he doesn't then report and void his year for him. Then he'll be in the same situation the next year.

Basically they can force him to retire. That's the only leverage he has...he can retire.

Why would he do that if he really wants to hae a huge payday?

 

[mgteich]

Personally, I think that Seymour will report AND Oakland will give him the no-franchise clause. Oakland has enough arrogance to believe that they can outbid other teams for Seymour's services, especially if all Seymour wants is the most money possible.

 

[klinefan]

We will need to agree to disagree. Obviously, you have analysis that I ahve not seen.

I believe, as stated in the Oakland Tribune, that if Seymour doesn't report, Oakland will opt to void the contract.

AT THAT POINT, Seymour would then be a patriot, and would be expected to report to camp that day or the next.

The only way that Oakland can put Seymour on the reserves is if they do NOT void the trade and retain his rights.

If the patriots have his rights after the trade is voided, the patriots would send Seymour formal notice of the voiding of the contract and of his contracual responsibility to report for practice or be subject to being put on the reserves. Seymour would then report or not.

Well then Seymour has all the cards, then. Don't report to the Raiders and you'll have to report to the Patriots. Which is what he'd prefer.

So he has veto over the trade. Why has this not been mentioned elsewhere?

 

[mgteich]

Almost.

The raiders could be willing to give up a 2011 draft choice for Seymour's 2010 services. Why not? Then the raiders would not void the deal, would send him the letter threatending him to show up or be suspended and then play in 2010. Seymour owes one year of service under his current contract. Oakland could wait a year or even two to collect.

Well then Seymour has all the cards, then. Don't report to the Raiders and you'll have to report to the Patriots. Which is what he'd prefer.

So he has veto over the trade. Why has this not been mentioned elsewhere?

 

[klinefan]

Of course, the patriots and oakland can work out a new deal with different terms for less compensation.

I think that Oakland needs to deal with the reality of waiving the right to franchise in 2010. If they will do that, Seymour will likely report. If Oakland refuses to gve up the right to franchise, Oakland will void. The choice is Oakland's, presuming that Seymour is willing to play for a year and then be a free agent.

If Oakland doesn't waive their right and Seymour doesn't report, then Seymour remains with the patriots and is in the same situation next year with 1 year left on his contract at 3.5M or whatever.

 

[Frezo]

Is there an advantage for Seymour if he takes the physical, becomes Raider's property, and then holds out for his big contract which is what he did to the Pats? Are the Raiders under contractual obligation to give him a physical if he shows up?

 

[klinefan]

Almost.

The raiders could be willing to give up a 2011 draft choice for Seymour's 2010 services. Why not? Then the raiders would not void the deal, would send him the letter threatending him to show up or be suspended and then play in 2010. Seymour owes one year of service under his current contract. Oakland could wait a year or even two to collect.

Why would Oakland give up a high pick to a guy who could just threaten to retire?

According to the league office, the Pats send the letter, not Oakland.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Is there an advantage for Seymour if he takes the physical, becomes Raider's property, and then holds out for his big contract which is what he did to the Pats? Are the Raiders under contractual obligation to give him a physical if he shows up?

I'm not quite sure on the first question but I think I heard a rumor that Samuel was going to sit out ten games so the Pats couldn't franchise him the following year. They worked out an agreement and he reported.

The second question, it's protocol for every team to undergo a physical for every player that is traded for. Once Seymour steps foot anywhere onto Raiders property, he officially screws himself and the Pats are free and clear.

Why would Oakland give up a high pick to a guy who could just threaten to retire?

According to the league office, the Pats send the letter, not Oakland.

That's a risk the Raiders were willing to take. If he does retire, Oakland and New England will rework the trade because Oakland didn't trade a 1st round pick for a retired player. It could end up like the Plummer situation a few years ago. On the other hand, the Raiders can back out and void this completely because Seymour refuses to report. In fact, if I'm the Raiders and Seymour refuses to play or plans a holdout, I wouldn't waste any time and void the trade. If New England "sends the 5 day letter", the trade voids and he becomes property of the Pats again.

 

[shmessy]

Why would Oakland give up a high pick to a guy who could just threaten to retire?

Because their owner is in the middle stages of Alzheimer's-based dementia?

 

[Deus Irae]

Is there an advantage for Seymour if he takes the physical, becomes Raider's property, and then holds out for his big contract which is what he did to the Pats? Are the Raiders under contractual obligation to give him a physical if he shows up?

The problem with Seymour doing that is that he'll have boxed Davis into a corner. That's rarely a good thing to do. By not showing up for the physical, he leaves Davis with an escape route.

 

[Spiral]

If Seymour refuses to report to Oakland and therefore cannot pass their physical, Oakland would exercise their right to void the trade. At that point, Seymour will be in violation of his NE contract, which expressly gives NE the right to assign his contract to another team. He probably gets put on the reserve/suspended list, which could cost him his 2009 salary and year of service. My guess is that the Krafts' lawyers would then go after his signing bonus (or at least a pro-rata share of it), since he violated his contract. So not only would he not get paid for 2009, he might have to cough up several million in unamortized bonus payments. I'd further guess that Kraft's lawyers are laying this all out for Eugene Parker right about now.

 

[mgteich]

Why wouldn't the raiders give him a physical? Yes, the raiders would be in violation of the trade agreement if they failed to give Seymour a physical.

I believe that if Seymour reported and took the physical, then he'd be in the same situation as Branch or Samuel. He could threaten to sit out for a few games.

Is there an advantage for Seymour if he takes the physical, becomes Raider's property, and then holds out for his big contract which is what he did to the Pats? Are the Raiders under contractual obligation to give him a physical if he shows up?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If Seymour refuses to report to Oakland and therefore cannot pass their physical, Oakland would exercise their right to void the trade. At that point, Seymour will be in violation of his NE contract, which expressly gives NE the right to assign his contract to another team. He probably gets put on the reserve/suspended list, which could cost him his 2009 salary and year of service. My guess is that the Krafts' lawyers would then go after his signing bonus (or at least a pro-rata share of it), since he violated his contract. So not only would he not get paid for 2009, he might have to cough up several million in unamortized bonus payments. I'd further guess that Kraft's lawyers are laying this all out for Eugene Parker right about now.

His signing bonus was miniscule (comparatively speaking - $5M or so). His big bonus was an option bonus and that is not recoverable.