PFT: If Seymour doesn't report, Raiders will want their pick back

[patfanken]

Sounds like Oakland may be having cold feet regarding a seemingly idiotic trade. What's to keep them from simply telling their doctors to fail Seymour?

Its not that easy, especially when everyone knows that he isn't injured. You think that independent 2nd and 3rd opinions wouldn't be involved if the Raiders medical staff suddenly found Richard couldn't pass an NFL physical. Taking that tack, would cost AL a lot more than just a draft pick, it would be medical FRAUD....a felony.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Its not that easy, especially when everyone knows that he isn't injured. You think that independent 2nd and 3rd opinions wouldn't be involved if the Raiders medical staff suddenly found Richard couldn't pass an NFL physical. Taking that tack, would cost AL a lot more than just a draft pick, it would be medical FRAUD....a felony.

Implicit in all contracts and in the NFL's CBA (page one or two) there is not only an implicit but a stated clause that all parties "will act in good faith". If Al does tell his doctor's to fail RS when he is healthy in order solely to back out of a contract, and the Patriots protested, it would be up to the commissioner to act in the best interests of the game.
The doctors would be in deep trouble for perpetrating a fraud ( as noted above) as would Al Davis for authorizing it....

 

[spacecrime]

I believe that the team who wants to get the player can not talk to the prospective player, it is called tampering. Remember back when Bledsoe was being traded. The Pats didn't let him talk to the Bills, and there was much speculation that the Bills gave a lower pick because of it.

they gave a first rounder

 

[godef]

I heard on 98.5 that there will probably be a thin draft pool that year because a lot of Juniors will elect to go pro next year to take advantage of a capless season.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

you highlighted the wrong part, fixed it

Two teams negotiate for the terms of a player’s reassignment, and once terms are “final,” the traded player reports to his new team. Only at that point does the new team conduct a medical examination of the traded player. The team gaining the player then faces a dichotomous choice: either declare the player has “failed” the physical, invalidating the trade, or declare that he has “passed,” such that the terms of the trade become finalized. Notably, the team conducting the physical does not have the option to renegotiate terms of the trade based on troubling, but not necessarily fatal medical discoveries. In addition, the team giving up the player has limited or no right to challenge the medical determination made by the acquiring team.

 

[Patspsycho]

From what I heard, this is the Raiders problem all the way. Florio (PFT) claims hearing insider rumblings that the Raiders did not include a clause in their agreement with the Pats that Seymour is required to show up and pass a physical, or the trade is voided.

 

[pao]

Its not that easy, especially when everyone knows that he isn't injured. You think that independent 2nd and 3rd opinions wouldn't be involved if the Raiders medical staff suddenly found Richard couldn't pass an NFL physical.

Not according to this posted by someone above...

"In addition, the team giving up the player has limited or no right to challenge the medical determination made by the acquiring team."

Seems there is quite a bit of lattitude allowed. Of course it assumes the Raiders WANT to rescind the trade. However stupid a trade it was, they STILL might want to go through with it.

Taking that tack, would cost AL a lot more than just a draft pick, it would be medical FRAUD....a felony.

Oh, no! Fraud, a felony? Yikes, old Al Davis must be quaking in his boots over that one. I think you overstate the ability of the league to do 2nd and 3rd opinions and their desire to do it. From postings above seems like they just don't give a dam. At least that seems to be the way the rules are written. You can stop rolling your eyes now.

 

[pao]

Implicit in all contracts and in the NFL's CBA (page one or two) there is not only an implicit but a stated clause that all parties "will act in good faith". If Al does tell his doctor's to fail RS when he is healthy in order solely to back out of a contract, and the Patriots protested, it would be up to the commissioner to act in the best interests of the game.
The doctors would be in deep trouble for perpetrating a fraud ( as noted above) as would Al Davis for authorizing it....

LOL. You guys REALLY want this trade to go through don't you?

 

[Jackson 2]

LOL. You guys REALLY want this trade to go through don't you?

You can keep wishing all you want, but....

 

[pao]

You can keep wishing all you want, but....

Er, what? As a Charger fan I hope this trade goes through. It weakens the Patriots and won't make enough of a difference to the Raiders to make them a threat to the Chargers this year and it weakens them in '11 and beyond. I was just pointing out that, if the Raiders don't want this deal to go through (a big IF), they have a way out. Fail him his physical. End of trade. Some you here can pull the "it would be a felony" and "the league wouldn't let them get away with it" but the fact is they probably would. There's enough mileage on Seymour's body that it would even seem righteous. We'll see what happens. Like I said, that idiot Al Davis MIGHT actually still want this trade to go through.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I heard on 98.5 that there will probably be a thin draft pool that year because a lot of Juniors will elect to go pro next year to take advantage of a capless season.

The league has the right to keep the rookie salary cap in place if it wants to (Art. XVII, Sec. 2 of the CBA), so there's no guarantee that rookies will see the benefits of a capless 2010.

 

[Patspsycho]

Er, what? As a Charger fan I hope this trade goes through. It weakens the Patriots and won't make enough of a difference to the Raiders to make them a threat to the Chargers this year and it weakens them in '11 and beyond. I was just pointing out that, if the Raiders don't want this deal to go through (a big IF), they have a way out. Fail him his physical. End of trade. Some you here can pull the "it would be a felony" and "the league wouldn't let them get away with it" but the fact is they probably would. There's enough mileage on Seymour's body that it would even seem righteous. We'll see what happens. Like I said, that idiot Al Davis MIGHT actually still want this trade to go through.

I think you have enough to worry about what with this Merriman of yours going to bed with two girls and finding time to choke a 4'11 96 pound girl afterwards.

 

[pao]

I think you have enough to worry about what with this Merriman of yours going to bed with two girls and finding time to choke a 4'11 96 pound girl afterwards.

Ooh, that's a good one. Got me there. I guess I should just give up on my life because Merriman and Tila Tequila are idiots. LOL. Right.

 

[Absurdly Metro]

You almost sound like you are rooting against Belichick. Am I misunderstanding?

I never root against BB or the Pats. I'm still looking for a way to get that 1st round draft pick back that the league stole from us two years ago.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The league has the right to keep the rookie salary cap in place if it wants to (Art. XVII, Sec. 2 of the CBA), so there's no guarantee that rookies will see the benefits of a capless 2010.

I believe what he is alluding to is players coming out in 2010 BEFORE the owners get any form of cap on individual rookie deals in 2011...

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Well with the issuance of the 5 day letter, the Raiders have admitted that Seymour is their player (and their problem) so the trade is done as far as the league and the Pats are concerned, take the Raider's 2011 1st rd pick and put it in the bank. The only thing that remains to be seen is how the Raiders handle this and IF Seymour becomes a free agent after this year. Could you imagine if Seymour played this year for the Raiders and then re-signed with the Pats (highly unlikely, I know) and the Raiders still had to give the Pats their #1 pick for a player that is back playing for the Pats!!!!

Face it, this was a horrible trade for Seymour personally, but it is a great move for the Pats as an organization.

 

[Absurdly Metro]

Well with the issuance of the 5 day letter, the Raiders have admitted that Seymour is their player (and their problem) so the trade is done as far as the league and the Pats are concerned, take the Raider's 2011 1st rd pick and put it in the bank. The only thing that remains to be seen is how the Raiders handle this and IF Seymour becomes a free agent after this year. Could you imagine if Seymour played this year for the Raiders and then re-signed with the Pats (highly unlikely, I know) and the Raiders still had to give the Pats their #1 pick for a player that is back playing for the Pats!!!!

Face it, this was a horrible trade for Seymour personally, but it is a great move for the Pats as an organization.

Problem is now Oakland is denying they sent a five day letter.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Problem is now Oakland is denying they sent a five day letter.

Actually they didn't. Cable said/claimed he has no knowledge of it, which is just part of a larger list of items he probably honestly has no knowledge of. He's a hired hand HC, period, and has next to no knowledge of or influence over what the Raiders FO is doing. And in this case he used that for plausible deniability. Shefter is still reporting that multiple league sources report the letter has been sent. How else did they get the roster exemtion? You don't just get them for chucks...

Additionally WEEI is now reporting that per Adam Schefter the letter was sent and received by Seymour yesterday. Clock is ticking.

 

[shmessy]

I heard on 98.5 that there will probably be a thin draft pool that year because a lot of Juniors will elect to go pro next year to take advantage of a capless season.

Which makes it even MORE important for the Pats to be bunched at the top of that draft, instead of spread out.

At the same time, NE takes advantage of the very deep 2010 draft with the 3 picks in the second round!

BB = Checkmate.

 

[patfanken]

Which makes it even MORE important for the Pats to be bunched at the top of that draft, instead of spread out.

At the same time, NE takes advantage of the very deep 2010 draft with the 3 picks in the second round!

BB = Checkmate.

I was just about to make this point, because I think the fact that the Pats have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds of what will be a VERY deep draft, with lots of quality at the top, plus the fact they have a BUMPER CROP of rookies this year, including 2 doing a red shirt year; has a lot to do with the fact the Pats preferred a 2011 first rounder. There is such a thing as TOO much of a turnover. Gradual is better