Rumor: Seymour Trade Not A Done Deal?

[DefenseRules]

For some reason, this is just FUNNY to me. LOL!

 

[Mack Herron]

Re: Big Sey Is Not On EITHER Roster

It's not a big deal for the Patriots, he's gone from the team regardless and they can still trade him for decent value in the unlikely scenario that the trade doesn't go through.

It is not at all clear what his value would be if returned ot the Patriots. It would almost certainly be less than Oaklands #1.

 

[chillinvillin]

I would of loved to be a fly on the wall to listen to the conversation between richard seymour and derrick burges when RS asked him about being a raider.

 

[carolinatony]

from New England Patriots Examiner Sean Crowe

Reality check time, Seymour. If you refuse to show up in Oakland, here’s how it will go down:

You’ll eventually receive a letter from the New England Patriots serving notice that you have five days to report to Oakland.

Should you choose to ignore the letter, the Patriots can put you on the reserve/left squad list.

If the Patriots put you on the reserve/left squad list, you’re done for the season. You can’t play. You won’t get a paycheck. You can’t be taken off the list until next year. It’ll be like the 2009 season never happened for you. Next year, you’d still be entering the final year of your contract. You’d miss out on becoming a free agent in what may be the only uncapped NFL season ever.

Sure, by showing up you risk getting franchised by the Raiders after the season. But if any team is going to give you a ridiculous contract so large that it boggles even Daniel Snyder’s mind, it’s the Oakland Raiders. So maybe you should take your chances?

Or maybe you should have looked into that whole hometown discount thing?

 

[mgteich]

And this is the way it will go down.

Seymour will take his physical this week and decide how many games to sit out.

from New England Patriots Examiner Sean Crowe

Reality check time, Seymour. If you refuse to show up in Oakland, here’s how it will go down:

You’ll eventually receive a letter from the New England Patriots serving notice that you have five days to report to Oakland.

Should you choose to ignore the letter, the Patriots can put you on the reserve/left squad list.

If the Patriots put you on the reserve/left squad list, you’re done for the season. You can’t play. You won’t get a paycheck. You can’t be taken off the list until next year. It’ll be like the 2009 season never happened for you. Next year, you’d still be entering the final year of your contract. You’d miss out on becoming a free agent in what may be the only uncapped NFL season ever.

Sure, by showing up you risk getting franchised by the Raiders after the season. But if any team is going to give you a ridiculous contract so large that it boggles even Daniel Snyder’s mind, it’s the Oakland Raiders. So maybe you should take your chances?

Or maybe you should have looked into that whole hometown discount thing?

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Wow -- so much contention on this one. I guess it's not surprising.

My view is not that complicated, and I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I think it's basically a wash. Long term, it's an easy decision -- a Raider's first rounder is substantially worth more than a year of Richard Seymour. Short term, it's a rough one. It makes us worse in a year when we're a top 5 team competing for the Super Bowl.

How do you balance the long term benefits against the short term hit? Reasonable people can differ. I can understand where those opposed to the trade are coming from. Losing the super bowl at the end of the 2007 season was brutal. We finally get over it with the promise of a new season, and the season is essentially over in its first 20 minutes. Not fielding the absolute best team we possibly can going into this season is painful. That is what it is. But to suggest that in the long run the Raider's pick isn't worth a one year rental of Seymour is silly, IMHO.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Wow -- so much contention on this one. I guess it's not surprising.

My view is not that complicated, and I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I think it's basically a wash. Long term, it's an easy decision -- a Raider's first rounder is substantially worth more than a year of Richard Seymour. Short term, it's a rough one. It makes us worse in a year when we're a top 5 team competing for the Super Bowl.

How do you balance the long term benefits against the short term hit? Reasonable people can differ. I can understand where those opposed to the trade are coming from. Losing the super bowl at the end of the 2007 season was brutal. We finally get over it with the promise of a new season, and the season is essentially over in its first 20 minutes. Not fielding the absolute best team we possibly can going into this season is painful. That is what it is. But to suggest that in the long run the Raider's pick isn't worth a one year rental of Seymour is silly, IMHO.

Basically this is the Asante Samuel situation all over again. The Pats decided to keep Asante for the Superbowl run in 2007 then lost the final game. Asante walked and the Pats got nothing for him but a 3rd round comp pick.

By dealing Seymour early, the Pats guarantee themselves a fairly high 1st round pick in 2011. Then again the help that pick would provide is 2 years away and meanwhile leaves them a bit worse defensively. I'm assuming that Green is slotted to replace Seymour.

 

[SoCal Pmen]

Basically this is the Asante Samuel situation all over again. The Pats decided to keep Asante for the Superbowl run in 2007 then lost the final game. Asante walked and the Pats got nothing for him but a 3rd round comp pick.

By dealing Seymour early, the Pats guarantee themselves a fairly high 1st round pick in 2011. Then again the help that pick would provide is 2 years away and meanwhile leaves them a bit worse defensively. I'm assuming that Green is slotted to replace Seymour.

Agree. In retrospect AS would have been a good one to keep at a higher dollar value. Don't feel the same about RS.

 

[JSn]

Gonna be mighty interesting to see where this all goes.

I will say that two things come to mind that add a little peace about it:

1) Coach adhere's to the maxim of all solid GM's - better to lose a guy a year too early rather than a year too late. I would guess in this case it's about value, not ability, though.

2) Info has surfaced that other teams were calling Bill about Myron Pryor during the pre-season. That's got to say something of the guys coming up into the gaping hole left by RS.

It's going to be a strange year watching a younger, rawer team, but I think by the second half we'll be pretty excited about the endurance play-making abilities we have out there.

Bill is one of the few head coaches with the balls and job-security to make these moves, and that much, at least, I admire about the trade.