As I said in another thread, what seems to be lost here is the fact that any trade scenerio is really in Samuel's control. RIght now, he is technically still a FA. As was mentioned in an earlier post, if there are teams that want to play him as much as he demands, show the Pats the deal and let the negotiations begin. HOWEVER there hasn't been a SINGLE reported offer to Samuel or his agents.
BTW- IF he is serious about sitting out a year, it would rank among the most stupid acts by an athlete in history. He would never recover the $8MM he lost, plus he'd lose much of his marketability. Do you really think there is a team out there who would invest 60-80MM in a player who had one great year, hasn't played in close to 2 years...AND has proven that if he isn't happy with you, he'll withhold services???? I DON'T THINK SO.
No, the Pats have all the leverage here. I think this is a desperate shot in the dark by a guy who is using all his bullets. I don't blame him, but it isn't going to change the situation. He is NOT going to get a Clements like deal from the Pats, NOR is going to get it from anyone else. All that is left is a vain attempt to "shoot" his way out of town like Branch did.
Like others have said. As of now the Pats should just treat him like a guy with an injury that might make him available in week 10 or perhaps never, and FORGET ABOUT IT AND MOVE ON and not comment on it again.
The Pats have made him 2 very fair offers in long and short term deals. They may not be the best offers he could have gotten, but they aren't for chump change either. The ball is in HIS court, let him do what he wants.
BTW- a trade for Winfield is an interesting thought. Winfield's contract is in the Dre Bly level, and I think the big issue for him is about Minnesota's changes to win a superbowl. I bet he'd LOVE to come here, however I have no idea about he skill level at this point. It might be worth looking into. Given their respective ages, I might be willing to give them Samuel for Winfield and a #2 next year.