- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 20,536
- Reaction score
- 1
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I'll reserve judgment until we see what next weekend brings.
We robbed them. But they have built a very good defensive line themselves and their defense improved a lot.
People who constant want to comment on how having Seymour the last two seasons might have made a difference, especially in the playoffs are forgetting that HE WAS NEVER going to be a Patriot past the 2008 season REGARDLESS.
It's pretty clear that signing Seymour + Brady + Wilfork wasn't a possibility, so ending up with Brady + Wilfork + #17 - one year of Seymour was probably the best case scenario.
That said, the fact that it was a bad move for Oakland doesn't automatically make it a good move for New England. It's perfectly possible for a trade to be "lose-lose."
Seymour was part of the Brady-less 2008 team. He was going to walk after 2009.
Still, point taken.
For my money, it was a Bad Trade.
1 ~ It ripped a gaping hole in our Defense that remains to this very day...An hole that I believe cost us a Super Bowl Championship, last year.
2 ~ It was unnecessary. Had we traded Randy Moss a mere 13 months earlier, there would've been plenty of Cap room for Richard Seymour, Logan Mankins, and Vince Wilfork.