Seymour and the uncapped year

[wpdougie2180]

Now I heard alot of the pros and cons of the trade of Seymour but the one thing that's never brought up is the affect he would have had on the uncapped year if it were to take place. First off if I'm not mistaken there will be 2 franchise tags next year so the patriots could have easily franchised 2 of Wilfork, Mankins, and Seymour and tried to sign the other.

Secondly, with the Top 8 rule in effect no team that finishes in the Top 8 is allowed to sign a free agent unless they lose someone of the caliber as the guy they sign unless the free agent is released from his team.

And while Seymour is mad according to Rodney about going to a bottom feeder like Oakland he would have had to go to a team like that if he was going to get paid which if by any indication of him not reporting yet he wouldn't which would bode well for the Patriots.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Seymour is not a top lineman anymore and should not be paid like it

 

[Miguel]

First off if I'm not mistaken there will be 2 franchise tags next year so the patriots could have easily franchised 2 of Wilfork, Mankins, and Seymour and tried to sign the other.

You are mistaken. It is two transition tags OR a franchise and a transition tag.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

You are mistaken. It is two transition tags OR a franchise and a transition tag.

Or, another way of looking at it, the one franchise tag (which can be downgraded to a "transition tag") that every team gets every year, PLUS one additional transition-only tag.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Secondly, with the Top 8 rule in effect no team that finishes in the Top 8 is allowed to sign a free agent unless they lose someone of the caliber as the guy they sign unless the free agent is released from his team.

Actually, that's not quite correct. Strictly speaking, that only applies to the top four teams; the four teams that lose in the divisional round (week two of the playoffs) are given unlimited "mid-level" exemptions, and one "high-level" exemption.

 

[DaBruinz]

Now I heard alot of the pros and cons of the trade of Seymour but the one thing that's never brought up is the affect he would have had on the uncapped year if it were to take place. First off if I'm not mistaken there will be 2 franchise tags next year so the patriots could have easily franchised 2 of Wilfork, Mankins, and Seymour and tried to sign the other.

You are mistaken. Teams get one franchise tag and one transition tag or two transition tags. They don't get two franchise tags..

Secondly, with the Top 8 rule in effect no team that finishes in the Top 8 is allowed to sign a free agent unless they lose someone of the caliber as the guy they sign unless the free agent is released from his team.

Which is, I believe, one of the reasons there are now thirteen 1st and 2nd year players on the roster. There is also one on the PUP and 4 on the IR. Plus the Pats have 8 draft picks (4 in the 1st two rounds) next year.

Now, what does that have to do with Seymour??? I don't see how you tie in the Top 8 Rule with the Seymour trade.

And while Seymour is mad according to Rodney about going to a bottom feeder like Oakland he would have had to go to a team like that if he was going to get paid which if by any indication of him not reporting yet he wouldn't which would bode well for the Patriots.

While Rodney said that Seymour was mad, Seymour's emotional status is moot. He was traded. He has the chance to go to a crappy team and really show how much of a 4-3 DT force he is and prove that he is worth Haynesworth money. I loved Seymour being here. However, the reality is that Haynesworth isn't worth a 7 year/100 million contract. And neither is Seymour.