Why did Davis not include conditions?

[JR4]

Why didn't the Seymour trade have conditions to insure
Raiders get a Seymour reporting or their pick back?

Been reading a lot and it seems the NFL approved the deal.
It is a done deal. It is one way. No way back. Why?

Suppose there were conditions.
Then Seymour refuses to go. Raiders would get their pick back and
PATs would get Seymour back.

So here's a thought. Maybe Al and Bill saw this and decided
on this one way deal. Either Seymour reports or he goes
without money this year and maybe next getting older every year.

Maybe A.Davis thinks if Seymour sits he gets suspended and he still has
rights to him next year and he can still deal him to get a number one
or better.

If Seymour wants his pay day then his only option is to play for the Raiders.
There is really no doubt the 5 time pro-bowler Seymour WANTS and feels
he DESERVES and another big pay day. To see it start slipping away is
something he won't allow.
My bet is he reports.

 

[DarrylS]

Think after the shock wears off and reality sets in a cool head will prevail and Seymour will report.. he really has no choice.

Why Davis did not include conditions, because he is loosing his mind, and should not be an owner...

 

[borg]

"Just Gin Baby"

 

[BTTA]

Why Davis did not include conditions, because he is loosing his mind, and should not be an owner...

Perhaps because it never crossed his mind that a player wouldn't want to play for his Raiders.

 

[Pawn512]

Do we know for a fact that the deal was not conditioned on Sey reporting? Very hard to tell what the truth is but it strikes me that just because the deal showed up on the NFL transactions report doesn't mean that it doesn't have any conditions.

 

[xmarkd400x]

I can't imagine BB allowing that kind of clause.

"Well, if Sey doesn't want to come to our Raiders, you have to take him back and give us back our pick."

Meanwhile, Seymour will be pissed off either way. I'd rather not have a pissed off Seymour; either trade him or don't.

 

[IndianPat]

Who cares and who knows. As far as I am concerned, the Pats have washed their hands off Richard Seymour. If he doesnt report and sits out or retires, we loose our trade compensation. Pats have again become the bad boys of NFL and that makes me very happy.

 

[reflexblue]

Why did Davis not include conditions? Because hes a senile old man thats why.....

 

[italia44]

Mike Lombardi,on 98.5,says Seymour is on the Raiders cap for 2009.The patriots are totally out of this.Oaland can also go after his signing bonus,if he doesn't report.

Report or retire........Lombardi,also said,the league will and must enforce this trade or there will be chaos.

 

[Pujo]

I'm not sure, but some of the earlier articles on the fiasco said that it's standard for a trade to be rescinded if the player doesn't pass a physical, and that until Seymour did that it would be the Pats who would have to send a 5-day letter, not the Raiders. Maybe the Raiders are holding out hope that he shows up, else they might have recourse to void the trade.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

The Patriots and Raiders are both safe. Seymour is the one who has virtually no options. There is no no-trade clause in his contract (are there any of those in the NFL?) There are thousands of trades every year in professional sports. The player must take on this risk when he decides to play.

Seymour can either play, or sit out the entire season, in which case his contract rolls over through 2010 and he's back in the same position, one year older and much less marketable. My guess is he'll do the logical thing and play out his contract year, then hit a huge payday with the Redskins or Jets, for about $75M, and then tank it for the rest of his career.

In terms of conditions, there are probably implied conditions in every trade, which are industry standards.

 

[Frezo]

I'm not sure, but some of the earlier articles on the fiasco said that it's standard for a trade to be rescinded if the player doesn't pass a physical, and that until Seymour did that it would be the Pats who would have to send a 5-day letter, not the Raiders. Maybe the Raiders are holding out hope that he shows up, else they might have recourse to void the trade.

Keep in mind that trades aren't technically made for flesh and blood. The Raiders traded for Seymour's contract. They now own that contract. Per that contract Seymour is bound to the Raiders to fulfill that contract as are the Raiders to Seymour. The Pats are out of it.

Now if Seymour does not report, (would be stupid), the two franchises can reach a deal. BB could offer Davis one of next year's #2s, take Seymour back and then trade him to KC for a 2nd and a 5th. If Davis refuses, the Raiders are still responsible for Seymour's contract.

I'm not sure what this means, but someone needs to say at a Holiday Inn Express tonight and FIO.