Seymour to Report on Saturday...Ready for Monday's game????

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Because, the only way he'll be near the team is if he buys a ticket to Gillette in a few years to watch our 1st round pick from Oakland star for the Patriots.

There is still a possibility this trade can be voided. A small possibility, but a possibility none the less.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

So, in other words, screw the future.. Win now..

Definitely not the way BB has run things.. He's always had a short term and long term plan. Over the next 2 years, the Pats have 23 players who will be free agents.. And that includes Brady, Moss, Mankins, Gostkowski and others.. So, being able to repeatedly add top end talent repeatedly over a length of time is a good thing.. And itshould help keep this team in contention every year.

Also, what is to say that, with Seymour, the Pats would win the SB... Can you honestly say that they are more likely to win with him than without him? I can't say either way.. So how can you??? Especially since Seymour tends to get hurt (not injured) a lot.

Let's break it down AGAIN

Without the trade:

12 draft picks this year....

4 second round picks.

7 draft picks next year....

1 first round pick and 3 second round picks

9 draft picks in 2011

1 first round pick and 1 second round pick.

That's 28 draft picks in a 3 year span, including 10 picks in the first 2 rounds. The 'average' is 21 draft picks and 6 picks in the first 2 rounds.


Claiming that a preference to keep Seymour for at least another year to strengthen the team this season for a playoff run is somehow saying "Screw the future" when the future has already been amply provided for is just about the most idiotic thing I've read throughout the course of this situation.

 

[aeg]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

The NFLPA (or any players' association for that matter) is pretty much just like a lawyer. They are legally obligated to represent their clients, even when their clients are 100% in the wrong.

I think it's important for the league and NFLPA to iron out procedures if/when this situation occurs again.

I second that. Personally, I think it is ridiculous that the raiders had to send him a letter ... the next CBA should specify that traded players have 5 days to report without the need for a letter.

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

If he "fails" his physical, the doctor who certifies that risks "failing" his license.

But keep yer hopes up.

I don't understand why people believe that if the Raiders' doctors fail Seymour there will be some kind of sanction against them. It has never happened, why do you think it will happen if the Raiders fail Seymour? (btw, and again, the only way this happens is if the Raiders change their mind about the trade, something i don't think will happen).

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Enjoy your theater. I'm looking forward to the Buffalo game and that top-5 1st rounder in 2011.

Plus, the knowledge that BB intends to remain here another decade or so! All the little Borges' and Felchers out there can rage themselves into the ground.

Losing Seymour weakens the Patriots this year, imo.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Seymour on his way to Oakland, speaks to Borges

LINK

He plans to play Monday night. Says he grew up a Raiders fan.

Something tells me he is going to get a fat contract from Oakland.

Excellent!!!!

Sorry, Deus! Trade stands!!!!

In the meantime, from the beginning, this was what I said was probably the issue. The man has a family and children starting school this week - - I didn't further know about the cousin, but as I wrote immediately - - these are human beings, he needs a modicum of time to get his life in order before making this switch - - 24-48 hours is too unrealistic.

Big Sey should have a big year in Oakland. I'll be rooting for him (and rooting for Oakland to STINK in 2010!!!!).

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Wow really?
You wouldn't trade 1 year of gimped Sey for potentially 7+ prime years of a top pick?

Funny, you say he's gimpy but a lot of people here seem to think that he is pristinely healthy and any doctor that would fail him his physical would be committing a felony.

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

I can't believe what a baby seymour is being! Talk about being scared to man up and do his job. It's stuff like this that make people sick of these prima donnas!!!!

The union should not win this, but you never know how someone is going to rule. People do stupid stuff all the time! The Patriots traded his rights to oakland and obviously oakland is within thier rights to issue him the five day letter. Seymour is within his rights to do his job and make his millions or sit out and start this whole process over next year. But please, stop being a big baby about it! I know some people love it and cheer when players act like brats, but most of us just want them to act thier age and do thier job, or decide its not for them and find something that suits them better. But the childish games have gotten really old.

If (for whatever reason) an arbitrator says the raiders can't give him the letter, I guess the Patriots will give him a letter to show up in oakland and take the physical. Unless an arbitrator rules that when you trade someone they can become a free agent or something if they don't like the trade. It's getting foolish now.

Great post!

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Now, now. There's no reason to go into a tantrum (except the obvious reason that this is a message board and people go into tantrums all the time).

The situation is being dealt with just fine. The union is allowed to file ridiculous appeals and will continue to do so; that's what unions do. Occasionally they even win a ridiculous appeal (much to the shock of us who think that the right answer should be obvious).

At any rate, the conclusion is coming quickly and those who are willing to show a little patience will look back and declare this to be a tempest in a teapot because a player was unhappy about a trade. There's no need to get the Commissioner involved or choose any other silly overreation.

Another great post.

 

[pao]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Considering he was playing during the pre-season, if he were to FAIL, it would have to be noted WHY he failed. And the Patriots could contest it..

I have never seen this happen. I have seen a team that traded a player and was forced to take the player back when he failed a physical. And the trading team said the dude was fine according to their physical. Not contest, no note WHY he failed.

And it would also be detrimental to Seymour..

Its in his best interest to PASS that physcial.. otherwise, he can be put on the NFI list and not get paid...

If he fails his physical he won't be put on the NFI list because he failed the physical.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

I agree. However, we have been among the very best in this period, and we were one of the best teams ever to play in the NFL before this period. So, yes, to go from 1993 and 1994 to 1995 and 1996, one felt a drought. And to lose at the end in 2007 also felt the same. And last year, it took an injury to Brady.

But yes, we are spoiled. We had one of the best ever (3 in 4 years), and we wanted it to continue.

And there are those who think with a tweak here and there, we might have had another SB ot two.

And yes, some of us felt like it was 1994 all over again or 1997 with a better defense. We were ready to go through the season, favorites all the way, and then win at the end.

So, how should we feel when we are brought to the reality of losing one of our best players and now being one of 3 or 4 being talked about to win the Super Bowl?

You sound as if we had the Lombardi to lose until a week ago now we have to work for it and thats a disaster.
Mg, youve been here a long, long time, and I know this move really has upset you. But we arent out to be media favorites, we are out to win SBs. Keep your perspective. If Bill Beichick felt Seymour was the difference between winning and not winning a SB, he would have given away his own 2011 1 to keep him.
A team is not a collection of talent. A team is a combination of players and each of the 53 add positive and negative influences in ability, reliability, attitude, presence, etc, etc. Seymour is a great player. You do have to recognize that in our scheme it is a defense that plays as a team, and each player truly only is 1/11th of the defense.
We have good players to put in his place.
I cant begin to guess whether there we negatives that Seymour brought in to the organization, but the word is that his mind and conversation was on telling teammates 'I wont be here in the future, they don't want to pay me'. Hard to tell if it was becoming devisive. I do know that if that were the case (pure specualtion) I have always worked in organizations that have believed if you are negative toward the 'team' it doesnt matter how good you are, you bring down the team. In this analogy a salesman on a team of 11 with a terrible attitude can be your top salesman, but his attitude could bring down the other 10 (you know the guy, the guy who always complains about the company and the boss and how he knows other people who get paid better, etc, etc) to have an overall negative impact. Now Im not saying any of these things are part of the reason, but I dont know that they are not. Part of In BB we Trust is that (at least for me) the decisions that he makes that I dont understand usually end up to be better than I expected because of what I did not know, resulting in the belief that he is a good decision maker, and when his decisions look bad there are likely facts I dont know about.
Ive rambled on so long Ive gotten away from the point.
If I believed BB said screw 2009 so I can get an extra pick in 2011, Id be up in arms, depressed and angry just as you appear to be, but I won't go there because I can't imagine that BB would make such a decision without knowledge and information that conflicts with the idea that he wishes to pass on winning a SB this year.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Let's break it down AGAIN

Without the trade:

12 draft picks this year....

4 second round picks.

7 draft picks next year....

1 first round pick and 3 second round picks

9 draft picks in 2011

1 first round pick and 1 second round pick.

That's 28 draft picks in a 3 year span, including 10 picks in the first 2 rounds. The 'average' is 21 draft picks and 6 picks in the first 2 rounds.


Claiming that a preference to keep Seymour for at least another year to strengthen the team this season for a playoff run is somehow saying "Screw the future" when the future has already been amply provided for is just about the most idiotic thing I've read throughout the course of this situation.

Serious, honest question.

Your commentary suggests that:
1) We severely hurt our chances to win this year
2) We did so knowingly in order to have a better draft in 2011
3) That conclusion is moronic

I would imagine that you do not feel BB is a moron.
Do you think those are the facts and he made a terrible decision, or do you think there are facts we are not privy to that guided this decision.
There really isnt a right or wrong, because we wouldn't know. I'm just interested in your perception.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

So, how should we feel when we are brought to the reality of losing one of our best players and now being one of 3 or 4 being talked about to win the Super Bowl?

.....like we did at the beginning of the 2004 playoffs??????

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Serious, honest question.

Your commentary suggests that:
1) We severely hurt our chances to win this year
2) We did so knowingly in order to have a better draft in 2011
3) That conclusion is moronic

I would imagine that you do not feel BB is a moron.
Do you think those are the facts and he made a terrible decision, or do you think there are facts we are not privy to that guided this decision.
There really isnt a right or wrong, because we wouldn't know. I'm just interested in your perception.

Brady is 32 years old and only has a limited amount of great years left in him. The team has already lost two Super Bowls it should have won during his tenure (No, I'm not blaming BB for the Indy loss, just pointing it out). The decision to weaken an already suspect defense after the way the team came up short in Indy due to a lack of bodies, and against the Giants because the team didn't have the O-line or TE depth it needed, seems to be about as idiotic as it gets. Given the recent history, I don't buy into the argument that a first round pick two years down the road is somehow superior to having Richard Seymour for another season and then moving/losing him after that and getting a pick for him in that same 2011 season.

I don't think Belichick is a moron, but even smart people make bad decisions.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Losing Seymour weakens the Patriots this year, imo.

Just like contributing to your 401(k) hurts your current monthly budget.

If you have other money in RESERVE however, you can take advantage of the long-term benefits while still thriving in the present. It's called WISE PLANNING.

I have no problem plugging in a platoon of Green/Brace/ Pryor at the DE spot vacated by Seymour. IIRC Green did a helluva job in the 2004 playoffs in Seymour's absence against some of the best teams of the decade - - and that was replacing the 2004 Seymour (a better version than the more battle-scarred 2009 Seymour).

Our cash reserve is the excellent depth at the DE position.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Brady is 32 years old and only has a limited amount of great years left in him. The team has already lost two Super Bowls it should have won during his tenure (No, I'm not blaming BB for the Indy loss, just pointing it out). The decision to weaken an already suspect defense after the way the team came up short in Indy due to a lack of bodies, and against the Giants because the team didn't have the O-line or TE depth it needed, seems to be about as idiotic as it gets. Given the recent history, I don't buy into the argument that a first round pick two years down the road is somehow superior to having Richard Seymour for another season and then moving/losing him after that and getting a pick for him in that same 2011 season.

I don't think Belichick is a moron, but even smart people make bad decisions.

Do you consider the possibility that the decision is based upon more than you are aware of? And if so, do you believe that is less likely than that he just made a bad decision?

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Do you consider the possibility that the decision is based upon more than you are aware of? And if so, do you believe that is less likely than that he just made a bad decision?

Unless Seymour was standing up during meetings and peeing on coaches, or something to that effect, I don't know what possibilities you could possibly be talking about. Is it your insinuation that Seymour talking about his contract status would have undermined BB's authority and ruined the team chemistry? Was Seymour such a huge presence that this was a real possibility?

Unless there was 'something' that made keeping Seymour completely impossible, and that 'something' came up in the few days leading up to the trade talks and agreement, no, I don't believe any such thing. If the situation was so untenable, it would have been dealt with a lot earlier than it was.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Unless Seymour was standing up during meetings and peeing on coaches, or something to that effect

In the lockerroom, only Dean Pees.

In the meantime, I'm still having nightmares about how Peyton Manning shredded the Pats when Green subbed for Seymour in the 2004 AFC Divisional Playoffs.

Giving up 3 points, that was eggregious!

 

[Wolfpack]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Brady is 32 years old and only has a limited amount of great years left in him. The team has already lost two Super Bowls it should have won during his tenure (No, I'm not blaming BB for the Indy loss, just pointing it out). The decision to weaken an already suspect defense after the way the team came up short in Indy due to a lack of bodies, and against the Giants because the team didn't have the O-line or TE depth it needed, seems to be about as idiotic as it gets. Given the recent history, I don't buy into the argument that a first round pick two years down the road is somehow superior to having Richard Seymour for another season and then moving/losing him after that and getting a pick for him in that same 2011 season.

I don't think Belichick is a moron, but even smart people make bad decisions.

+1.

Bill Belichick is a human being and, as such, is capable of making mistakes. To this day, I believe that if we had Deion Branch in Indianapolis in January of 2007, then there would be 4 Lombardis in the trophy case instead of 3.

I don't like the argument that "Belichick knows more about football than you do so he's right and you're wrong." Yes he knows more about football than any of us and yes, he knows more about this specific situation than any of us, but that pretty much describes every single coach and GM in the NFL. Are they all above criticism?

 

[spacecrime]

Re: Seymour to Report on Saturday.. Ready for Monday's game????

Finally, for the pick, I'd rather have Seymour helping win a Super Bowl this year.

Like he helped win a superbowl last year? Or the year before? Or the year before that? Or the year before that? The last time we won a superbowl was the year Seymour was hurt and Jarvis Green filled in for him.

Not that Green is a better player, just that Seymour is not a requirement to win just because he is gone.

What you are saying is what you (Or your then equivalent) said at this time of the year in 2003: I'd rather pay Milloy and win a superbowl this year.

There are people who like to trash players after they leave, but there are even more who lionize players after they leave.