Why would Seymour sign Now?

[R_T26]

He's making over $5 Mill this year and next year he will be a free agent where he knows someone like Snyder can give him a $20 mill signing bonus. If the Pats plan to lock up Seymour they should offer him a legit offer right off the bat or he may just say no thanks. the Bonus needs to start at $15 mill minimun. sadly I get the feeling they will offer something like an $8 mill bonus and begin to burn the bridge with Seymour. Get used to the franchise tag Richard.

 

[broadwayjoe]

He's making over $5 Mill this year and next year he will be a free agent where he knows someone like Snyder can give him a $20 mill signing bonus. If the Pats plan to lock up Seymour they should offer him a legit offer right off the bat or he may just say no thanks. the Bonus needs to start at $15 mill minimun. sadly I get the feeling they will offer something like an $8 mill bonus and begin to burn the bridge with Seymour. Get used to the franchise tag Richard.

You are right if Gerard Warren got what he did what do you think Richard would get from someone like Daniel Synder

 

[hwc]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

 

[patsox23]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

What he said.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

That's a very salient point! Football players today are quite a risk-averse lot, so this scenario is quite plausible.

 

[Alk]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

I think if we have learned anything this offseason, these players for the most part have absolutely no loyalty to this team. They showed their loyalty in the past and got their super bowl rings with the team. Now it seems they're going to try getting theirs financially. It sucks seeing them all leave but on the same hand I guess I can't blame them.

 

[NE39]

If he doesn't sign an extension he is a sure franchise tag candidate so it isn't like he is a year away from FA. With the ever-present injury risk, guaranteed money now is worth a lot.

 

[aabtec]

He's making over $5 Mill this year and next year he will be a free agent where he knows someone like Snyder can give him a $20 mill signing bonus. If the Pats plan to lock up Seymour they should offer him a legit offer right off the bat or he may just say no thanks. the Bonus needs to start at $15 mill minimun. sadly I get the feeling they will offer something like an $8 mill bonus and begin to burn the bridge with Seymour. Get used to the franchise tag Richard.

Because we can franchise him until he is blue in the face...

 

[InBillITrust]

Actually, the Pats can only franchise tag him 2 years. The 3rd year, I believe, he'd have to be paid the average of the top 5 Quarterbacks, which would be a huge jump.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

Based on this logic, what the hell were they thinking giving Tom Brady a long term deal???? Those idiots!!!!!

To put it bluntly, Richard Seymour is the Tom Brady of the Defense.

Going into last off-season I and others might not have felt the same way, thinking Jarvis Green was able to act as an adequate bandaid in the SB XXXIV run. But this season made it clear that Seymour is THE anchor for the entire defense.

You can't use the franchise tag indefinately, nor on everyone. What will it be next year for a DT given today's inflated salaries? $6.5 million maybe more? Bump that by 20% each year and see where the math brings you. Then factor in the new QB franchise salary and we see him getting bumped up to $9 million plus the 20% increase each year.

Unless you agree that signing a guy like Brady is a bad idea, I don't know why you wouldn't sign Seymour - the QB of your Defense - long term sooner rather than later if you actually want to keep him.

But I guess we'll all see what BB thinks of this idea and leave it at that.

 

[mgteich]

The question was why would Seymour sign, not why would we sign Seymour.

Based on this logic, what the hell were they thinking giving Tom Brady a long term deal???? Those idiots!!!!!

To put it bluntly, Richard Seymour is the Tom Brady of the Defense.

Going into last off-season I and others might not have felt the same way, thinking Jarvis Green was able to act as an adequate bandaid in the SB XXXIV run. But this season made it clear that Seymour is THE anchor for the entire defense.

You can't use the franchise tag indefinately, nor on everyone. What will it be next year for a DT given today's inflated salaries? $6.5 million maybe more? Bump that by 20% each year and see where the math brings you. Then factor in the new QB franchise salary and we see him getting bumped up to $9 million plus the 20% increase each year.

Unless you agree that signing a guy like Brady is a bad idea, I don't know why you wouldn't sign Seymour - the QB of your Defense - long term sooner rather than later if you actually want to keep him.

But I guess we'll all see what BB thinks of this idea and leave it at that.

 

[Miguel]

Let's not forget that even if Seymour has to assume the injury risk this year that it does not mean that he will accept a below-market deal this year.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The question was why would Seymour sign, not why would we sign Seymour.

ahhh - I misread the original post.... but indeed these guys do crave the security of long-term money. That's pretty cut and dried common sense.

In the end he and the Pats might disagree over what market value is, but Seymour needs to ask himself if that amount is worth gambling over.

 

[fgssand]

Seymour will sign because he will make more money by doing so this year. If he does not sign now, then he will face playing for this years salary, then franchise next year and most likely the year after that as well. So, that is 3 years at current money & 20% next & 20% third versus a nice long term deal with guaranteed money and risk of injury which could ruin everything for him.

Why would he not sign a nice cap friendly deal = win/win.

 

[hwc]

Miguel:

I don't really see the Pats insulting Seymour with a below market offer. They might not shoot for the moon, but they'll make him a legitimate offer, just like they did with Ty Law, Tom Brady, etc.

Seymour's not going to get the highest possible stratosphere money from the Pats this year. There's value to him in getting a huge signing bonus now and not taking the risk of a career-ending injury this year or next year when he is franchised. That value has to be reflected in the contract. Conversely, if the Pats have to grossly overpay him to get a deal done, then there is no incentive for them to do a deal -- they can have him below market this year and at the market with the franchise tag next year.

A win-win deal is a solid contract somewhere in the range of the top-five highest paid d-linemen with a ton of guaranteed money, probably split between a signing bonus and an option bonus or two -- a mechanism that will allow the Pats to take advantage of next year's six year proration. Basically, a structure similar to Brady's deal.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Based on this logic, what the hell were they thinking giving Tom Brady a long term deal???? Those idiots!!!!!

To put it bluntly, Richard Seymour is the Tom Brady of the Defense.

Going into last off-season I and others might not have felt the same way, thinking Jarvis Green was able to act as an adequate bandaid in the SB XXXIV run. But this season made it clear that Seymour is THE anchor for the entire defense.

You can't use the franchise tag indefinately, nor on everyone. What will it be next year for a DT given today's inflated salaries? $6.5 million maybe more? Bump that by 20% each year and see where the math brings you. Then factor in the new QB franchise salary and we see him getting bumped up to $9 million plus the 20% increase each year.

Unless you agree that signing a guy like Brady is a bad idea, I don't know why you wouldn't sign Seymour - the QB of your Defense - long term sooner rather than later if you actually want to keep him.

But I guess we'll all see what BB thinks of this idea and leave it at that.

Original question aside, I have no problem with Green; I thought Sey's play was spotty to start the year and he was as much a part of the problem as anybody. That said, I would be very glad if they get an extension done so he can beat up AFCE LTs for many more years.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Aside from the fact that he may want to stay with the Pats organzation, signing an extension now protects him from the risk of major injury in 2006. Without an extension, he shoulders all of the injury risk. With an extension, the Pats assume the risk.

See Ty Law for details.

* TY has yet to lose a dime by not taking the Patriots last offer.

 

[hwc]

Yes he has. There was $16 million guaranteed in the Pats offer to Ty Law. He didn't make $9 million with the Jets last year.

 

[shmessy]

* TY has yet to lose a dime by not taking the Patriots last offer.

Actually, he lost 70 million dimes by not taking the Pats offer.

 

[DaBruinz]

The deal that Miguel put up last year would still be a very good deal this year.

I think that a deal in the neighborhood of 7 years and $56 million with a 15-20 million signing bonus would be more than acceptable to Seymour and not totally outrageous.