Seymour News:Why hasn't this been posted?

[PATSNUTme]

Can't understand why someone else hasn't posted this.

In the print Boston Globe (yes, I bought the figgn thing today) there was a little blurb about Seymour's contract. According to Cafarto, he cannot sign an extension or new contract until August. That is because his contract was redone last August and they have to wait a year to make any other changes, according to the story.

I don't have a link but maybe someone can find it. Looks like the Patriots will have to reserve a chunk of cap space for later.

This was in this moring Globe and I thought I'd see something on this board about it. I thought that it was and important piece of info. Therefore, it is.

Another reason you are lucky to have me posting on this board.

 

[BelichickFan]

Can't understand why someone else hasn't posted this.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=33477

 

[Miguel]

FYI - There is NOTHING in the CBA that prevents the Pats from agreeing to a contract with Seymour today and releasing him today and signing him to a new contract tomorrow.

 

[PATSNUTme]

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=33477

Kindly disregard my previous post.:cool3:

 

[marty]

Kindly disregard my previous post.:cool3:

IN YOUR DREAMS!!!! THIS WILL GO ON RECORD AND HAUNT YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR POSTING DAYS!!!! :bricks:

 

[marty]

Nut - don't feel bad. Globle=old, mold, news!

 

[sarge]

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=33477

To funny!

When I saw the title of this thread, I already knew what the contents of the first reply would be

 

[BelichickFan]

Bump . . . One thread had moved above this one

 

[primetime]

FYI - There is NOTHING in the CBA that prevents the Pats from agreeing to a contract with Seymour today and releasing him today and signing him to a new contract tomorrow.

The team wouldn't take the standard cap hit for cutting of a player?

 

[Willie55]

Can we get a sticky on this one Ian.

 

[Miguel]

The team wouldn't take the standard cap hit for cutting of a player?

Yes, but so what since Seymour is in the last year of his rookie contract the proration of prior signing bonuses are going to count against the cap anyway and there is no acceleration of future prorations to worry about.

 

[sarge]

Bump . . . One thread had moved above this one

We certainly can't let that happen!

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

FYI - There is NOTHING in the CBA that prevents the Pats from agreeing to a contract with Seymour today and releasing him today and signing him to a new contract tomorrow.

Didn't an NBA team get SCREWED ROYALY doing this very thing? I forget the player I think it was Boozer or something like that, but they (again I forget the team) released him, because they had a new contract already worked out, and the guy goes and signs with another team instead. Imagine if this happened with Seymour? YEEKS! In the wake of Adam not giving the Pats a chance to match the Colts offer, I don't think they should take this chance.

I found the NBA story it wa Carlos Boozer and the Cavs:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/writers/ian_thomsen/07/12/boozer.fallout/

 

[flutie2phelan]

Kindly disregard my previous post.:cool3:

No fault of yours, PNm.
Two posts with the same info is better than NO posts with that info.

It's a shame, though, that card-carrying journalists ... who THIRST for credit themselves ...
don't cite either of their two possible sources (Adam Schefter or Box's report of Schefter here.)

You'd think sauce for the goose ... but mebbe that's just me.

 

[patchick]

It's a shame, though, that card-carrying journalists ... who THIRST for credit themselves ...
don't cite either of their two possible sources (Adam Schefter or Box's report of Schefter here.)

Actually, they did cite Schefter as their source. And no offense to the estimable Box, but those "two" sources are really one. You cite the reporter who broke the story, not where you happened to hear about it. ("Per Tom Curran's report, which I read over the shoulder of a fellow T passenger this morning...")

 

[flutie2phelan]

Actually, they did cite Schefter as their source. And no offense to the estimable Box, but those "two" sources are really one. You cite the reporter who broke the story, not where you happened to hear about it. ("Per Tom Curran's report, which I read over the shoulder of a fellow T passenger this morning...")

Understood.
Didn't want him to cite both expressions of the rule;
either would have satisfied me.

Thus, i am pleased to learn that Cafardo did credit the source.
(For me to have learned that on my own would have required doing what PatsNut manfully did ... buy the paper.
No, no.)

 

[Miguel]

In the print Boston Globe (yes, I bought the figgn thing today) there was a little blurb about Seymour's contract. According to Cafarto, he cannot sign an extension or new contract until August. That is because his contract was redone last August and they have to wait a year to make any other changes, according to the story.find it. Looks like the Patriots will have to reserve a chunk of cap space for later.

I do not understand how Dillon was able to redo his deal but not Seymour. This rule also affects redoing Brady's deal (May, 2005), Vrabel's deal (August, 2005) and Harrison's deal (September, 2005) presuming that the Pats plan to revisit those deals, which they may not do.

 

[facemask]

FYI - There is NOTHING in the CBA that prevents the Pats from agreeing to a contract with Seymour today and releasing him today and signing him to a new contract tomorrow.

So if they released Seymour with the plan on resigning him nobody can claim him of waivers?

 

[Miguel]

So if they released Seymour with the plan on resigning him nobody can claim him of waivers?

The NFL is in the time period where when a veteran with at least 4 years of service is released he does not go through waivers he immediately becomes a free agent.

 

[Pats726]

So they can restructure the contract and or a number of things...ONLY can't be extended until August when a year is up??? WHo is that helping hurting...why the rule???