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

[GullyFoyle]

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

Our D wont be hurt at all, Big Seyby was a slacker. There wont be any slacking on this years team, cause my boy BB got em all scared. He basically sent this message..."You see that five time pro-bowler who was living off his laurels? Well now his gold bricking @$$ is wandering the slums of Oaktown now! So unless you wanna be straight out to compton you are gonna bust your @$$!

 

[JSn]

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

Our D wont be hurt at all, Big Seyby was a slacker. There wont be any slacking on this years team, cause my boy BB got em all scared. He basically sent this message..."You see that five time pro-bowler who was living off his laurels? Well now his gold bricking @$$ is wandering the slums of Oaktown now! So unless you wanna be straight out to compton you are gonna bust your @$$!

I dunno about all that, but I imagine it helps everyone remember where they COULD be playing.

 

[spacecrime]

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

So liking a guy who made 5 pro bowls for the Patriots and was one of their most important players for 3 SBs means that you're not a Pats fan? That has to be some the most ass-backwards logic I've heard of.

Does that apply to Willie McGinest too? Because if that's the case, then I haven't been a fan since 2005,

Yep, applies to WMG 2005 also. You can like him all you want, but it isn't illogical to let a player go a year early rather than a year late. And I loved WMG but do think his $8 salary was better used elsewhere.

There is nothing wrong with liking players after their time. I still like Hannah, Cappilletti, Grogan, Nelson, Tippett, etc etc etc. I just don't want to sign them for $10 mil each to play this year.

I'd much rather have 6 years of a first round pick than one year of Seymour.

 

[Wolfpack]

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

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.

Well, Tom Brady didn't help win a Super Bowl any of those years either so let's just get rid of him too.

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.

That's a bad analogy because with Milloy, the status quo was not going to work. The team was not going to keep Milloy at his current contract so when Milloy refused to renegotiate, they cut him loose.

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

7 days ago, I bet 99% of this forum would have said Seymour is in the top-5 in the NFL at his position (if not higher). Now that he's gone, those same people are acting like it's no big deal.

I still think the Patriots are the best team in the NFL and I still think they are going to win the Super Bowl this year. But fact is the 2009 Patriots are not as strong today as they were 7 days ago. And I still hold out hope that Belichick has something up his sleeve, so I withhold final judgement until seeing if that is the case.

 

[GullyFoyle]

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

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

Not me I love or hate players based solely on their actions

Hate Vinatieri,Branch- because of how they left
Hate Seymour for his holdouts and slacking
Hate Pass and Hobbs because of their mouths and their bad play
Hate Slater,Maroney,and Watson solely on their screwy play

 

[mayoclinic]

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

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.

Wonderful post, Andy. Nicely said.

We don't know the full story of the Seymour trade. The fact that they were willing to trade Seymour suggests that one or more of the following may have been factors:

1. Seymour could have been having a negative impact on the team and organization which outweighed his usefulness on the field.

2. BB and the FO had confidence that trading Seymour would not affect the Pats' ability to be a SB contender in 2009 in a major way.

3. BB and the FO believe that the Pats can remain a SB contender beyond a relatively short window (e.g., 2 years or so) and think that they can reload to keep the team competitive for a long time.

4. BB plants to hang around (and run a SB contender) beyond the current 2013 limit of his contract.

None of these are guaranteed to have happened or to have been correct judgments if they did happen. But, if true, then this trade is a very good thing for the Pats.

As Tedy Bruschi recently said, the 2001-2004 Pats may not have had the "big 3" of the 1991-1995 Cowboys, but they had the "big 53". No one is bigger than the team. The Pats have undoubtledly lost individual talent in the Seymour trade for the next 2 years. Only time will tell whether the "big 53" is hurt by the trade, and how much. I personally think that the team won't be hurt as much as MgT, Deus and some others think, and could actually benefit over the course of the season, but no one knows for sure at this juncture.

 

[shmessy]

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

Well, Tom Brady didn't help win a Super Bowl any of those years either so let's just get rid of him too.

Once again, do you want to compare the depth chart of the DL to that of the QB?

Until you do, you are dealing in a meaningless non-sequitur.

 

[shmessy]

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

That's a bad analogy because with Milloy, the status quo was not going to work. The team was not going to keep Milloy at his current contract so when Milloy refused to renegotiate, they cut him loose.

You're right. This is far better. This time, the Patriots got SOMETHING in return (one helluva something thanks to the Alzheimer's patient they were dealing with on the West Coast).

 

[GullyFoyle]

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

7 days ago, I bet 99% of this forum would have said Seymour is in the top-5 in the NFL at his position (if not higher). QUOTE]

I think your 99% is about 50% too high. I think the majority of posters here realize Big Seyby wasnt one of the very best anymore. He had definitly slackened off after his last contract. There has long been a faction on here that thinks Big Seyby has been phoning it in.

 

[shmessy]

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

I still think the Patriots are the best team in the NFL and I still think they are going to win the Super Bowl this year. But fact is the 2009 Patriots are not as strong today as they were 7 days ago. And I still hold out hope that Belichick has something up his sleeve, so I withhold final judgement until seeing if that is the case.

WHOOOAAAA!!!!!

You think they are still going to win the SB this year???????

REALLY?????

So, if that, why not do it with a HIGH 1st rounder in 2011, than without???

That's just a head scratcher - - what's your point then?

 

[Wolfpack]

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

Once again, do you want to compare the depth chart of the DL to that of the QB?

Until you do, you are dealing in a meaningless non-sequitur.

That's only because I responding to a meaningless non-sequitur. There's just no logic in the post I responded to, which essentially was trying to establish that Seymour hasn't helped us win any of the past 4 Super Bowls, therefore he has no value in trying to help us win one this year.

 

[pao]

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

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.

I didn't say it was a bad idea. I just said, imo, it weakens the Patriots this year, which helps my Chargers...this year. The trade also helps the Chargers in '11 and beyond because it weakens a division rival.

 

[Wolfpack]

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

You're right. This is far better. This time, the Patriots got SOMETHING (one helluva something thanks to the Alzheimer's patient they were dealing with on the West Coast).

They also got something for Deion Branch, but I'd rather have the 4th Lombardi Trophy instead.

 

[shmessy]

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

I didn't say it was a bad idea. I just said, imo, it weakens the Patriots this year, which helps my Chargers...this year. The trade also helps the Chargers in '11 and beyond because it weakens a division rival.

Sorry, Pao - - the glass is half-full AND half-empty for you.

You rejoice that it makes the Pats weaker this year (yeah, but who got stronger from the trade this year????? - - the same team you claim gets weaker in 2011!!!).

So, let's rephrase it for you:

This hurts the Chargers, since the Raiders get stronger in 2009 and the Patriots get stronger in 2011.

 

[shmessy]

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

They also got something for Deion Branch, but I'd rather have the 4th Lombardi Trophy instead.

53 man roster. I suggest you read James Lavin's or David Halberstam's books.

One man doesn't make a team's yearly destiny (except a QB). It was more than just missing Branch that year.

 

[Wolfpack]

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

WHOOOAAAA!!!!!

You think they are still going to win the SB this year???????

REALLY?????

So, if that, why not do it with a HIGH 1st rounder in 2011, than without???

That's just a head scratcher - - what's your point then?

Did I say or do something to deserve such a sarcastic, disdainful response? Can we disagree without being disagreeable?

I still believe they are the best team in the NFL but there's no doubt their margin of error and depth on defense just got a lot smaller. Everyone's talking about how great the replacements and rest of the line is... and if all those guys stay healthy, then that's great. But can you honestly say that this team's d-line is as deep today as it was 7 days ago?

 

[Wolfpack]

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

53 man roster. I suggest you read James Lavin's or David Halberstam's books.

One man doesn't make a team's yearly destiny (except a QB).

We're just going to have to agree to disagree there, because I believe that they win in Indy in January 2007 with Deion Branch. And they sure as heck weren't going to lose to Chicago.

 

[Wolfpack]

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

I didn't say it was a bad idea. I just said, imo, it weakens the Patriots this year, which helps my Chargers...this year. The trade also helps the Chargers in '11 and beyond because it weakens a division rival.

Don't be ridiculous. According to some people, the Patriots just lost one of the best d-lineman in football, but it won't weaken them one bit.

Now I know what it means to be "drinking the kool-aid."

 

[RayClay]

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

That's only because I responding to a meaningless non-sequitur. There's just no logic in the post I responded to, which essentially was trying to establish that Seymour hasn't helped us win any of the past 4 Super Bowls, therefore he has no value in trying to help us win one this year.

Besides the fact that
1. Branch was under contract,
2. tried to hold the team hostage for a contract history shows would have been a disaster,
3. didn't play linebacker or safety, hence couldn't have helped stop the Colts scoring 32 points in the second half of a game our offense put us well ahead in....

...the pick we received got Brandon Meriweather who could possibly have more positive effect on our defense this year than Seymour.

 

[shmessy]

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

Don't be ridiculous. According to some people, the Patriots just lost one of the best d-lineman in football, but it won't weaken them one bit.

Now I know what it means to be "drinking the kool-aid."

That's strange, wasn't it YOU who stated: "I still think the Patriots are the best team in the NFL and I still think they are going to win the Super Bowl this year."???

Does the trade weaken them in the immediate term? You bet. Seymour is an excellent player.

But whether they win the SB with a 13-6 record versus a 15-4 record matters not a lick, does it? You say you believe they still win it. What's your point, then?