Seymour to Raiders....feel bad for him

[body88]

i think brace is the future at that NT position

is he a true 4-3 dt? i dont see it.

He's good at both.  After watching him play inside with Pryor aside Warren and Wilfork, I think Brace will not only be able to spell Wilfork at times when they are in the 3/4, but play as a DT inside when the pats are in the 4/3.

The pats have A LOT of depth on the defensive line. Yes, Seymour will be missed, but you might be surprised how well guys step in.  When Sey was out for months, Greene stepped in and got 8 sacks that year.

The pats will not be better this year because of this move, however they might be just as good and much better in the future.

[regmac]

It's a business but you know that Seymour hates going to the Raiders

Thanks for the news   I kept getting little of that news ...well if he wants to play in the 3-4  I'll take him.

[UPINTHEMGUTS]

The Raiders are a really bad team.  They looked terrible against the Saints. 

I watched that game on the NFL network replay and the Raiders' starters looked shitty. Releasing Jeff Garcia was a huge mistake if the Raiders are looking to win at least 6 games this year.The Raiders are an awful organization. Al Davis is not in tune with today's NFL and what it takes to win. Jarmarcus Russell is going to be a huge bust, if not already. They draft horribly.  But Mcfadden looks like he has loads of potential but he'll be gone as free agent in a few years, I'm sure.

Heyward-Bey has to be the biggest reach of a top ten pick in years. Speed is important in the NFL, but you have to have the total package and Bey is as raw as they come.

[regmac]

He's a 3-4 end  and the Raiders are 4-3 which may make him play in the middle.  Which is an insult to ends. 

[Dos Equis]

Cutthroat business. 

Report: Seymour had issues to settle
ESPN.com news services

Richard Seymour said he was "blindsided" by his trade to the Oakland Raiders from the New England Patriots, the Boston Herald reported Saturday on its Web site.

Seymour, who was traded Sunday for a first-round draft pick in 2011, but had yet to join the Raiders, was due to board a flight to Oakland on Saturday, according to the report.

When Seymour did not show nearly a week after the trade, the Raiders on Friday sent him a five-day letter, stipulating that he report within five days or be suspended for the entire season and forfeit his $3.685 million salary.

AFC West blog
ESPN.com's Bill Williamson writes about all things AFC West in his division blog.

• Blog network: NFL Nation

Seymour said he made no contract demands as a condition of his joining the Raiders, but needed time to settle personal issues first, including where his family would live during the season, according to the report. He said he has been in contact with Raiders owner Al Davis and coach Tom Cable since the trade.

"I didn't demand anything to go there," he said, according to the report. "I'm happy to go there, and I told them that. But me and my family have never been separated. This was a difficult transition."

According to the report, Seymour, 30, learned he had been traded via a phone call from Patriots coach Bill Belichick.

"First of all, I was blindsided by this whole event," Seymour said, according to the Herald. "When you get blindsided, you should take a moment to gather your thoughts. I have a lot of personal issues more pressing than football."

Those issues, according to the report, were arranging for his wife and four children to move back to his home state of South Carolina, while he plans to live alone in Oakland during the season. Seymour is also the legal guardian of a 15-year-old cousin who was starting high school in Massachusetts.

Seymour plans to play in the Raiders' season opener on "Monday Night Football" against the San Diego Chargers. "I'll be the guy on top of the quarterback," he said, according to the report.

Seymour has been a stalwart in New England since being drafted sixth overall in 2001. He played on three Super Bowl winners with the Patriots, recording 39 career sacks and being selected to the Pro Bowl for five straight seasons beginning in 2002.

The Raiders were looking to upgrade a run defense that was the worst in the league during the exhibition season and has been the worst over the past six seasons. Since going to the Super Bowl following the 2002 season, Oakland has had the worst run defense in the NFL, allowing 141.7 yards per game on the ground and 122 touchdowns rushing.

"There are a lot of different emotions," Seymour said, according to the Herald. "Football was not my main concern at that point. I have had discussions with the Raiders. ... I'm excited and happy with the way they're looking at me."

Cable is expected to address Seymour's pending arrival after practice Saturday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4467177

[body88]

I wonder if the Pats felt "blindsided" in 2006 when he held out of camp for his contract extension and held up the pats pre-season plans.  I don't feel bad for him at all.  He makes millions to play a game.  There are plenty of military people who make 40 grand year and they move their families all over the world.  Shut up and move.  

[Dos Equis]

I view this a little differently.  If the man has a family and has been one of the best players on the team, and in the NFL, at least show him some loyalty and professional courtesy.  He just became guardian of a 15-year-old cousin.  He has other kids.  His entire family has to move, right after school started.  That's a huge change.  They should have let him know something earlier in the summer so he could make plans for his family.  They were likely shopping him for a while before the trade. 

[body88]

I view this a little differently.  If the man has a family and has been one of the best players on the team, and in the NFL, at least show him some loyalty and professional courtesy.  He just became guardian of a 15-year-old cousin.  He has other kids.  His entire family has to move, right after school started.  That's a huge change.  They should have let him know something earlier in the summer so he could make plans for his family.  They were likely shopping him for a while before the trade.  

The pats were not shopping him. Have you read about how the trade went down?  Oakland called NE and they offered the pick the day it happened.  Oakland offered a second round pick for him when the Burgess trade went down, but the pats declined.  Also, I take it you don't know much about how Seymour has acted over the years when it came to contracts and money. Read up on it a tad (2006 in particular) and see if your opinion changes at all.  He's always been "all about the business".  "It's a business" was basically his mantra in 2006 when he was holding out.

You're beef is with the NFL's trade policy (and the CBA's trade rules that THEY agreed to), not the Patriots.   Shit, what are the Pats supposed to do if a team calls them and offers up a first round draft choice for a guy that they cant resign? A thirty year old DE who is on the decline.  Say no thanks because they'd have to break it to Sey at least a month in advance.  It's not realistic.  The pats are as good as they are because they always do whats best for the team.  They don't hang on to guys to long. It's a business with players until the balls not in their court, then they all want loyalty.

I understand where you are coming form, but after hearing Richard tell Pats fan's that all his demands over the years were "nothing personal" and it was "just business", I don't really feel sorry for him and his millions that he will make this year.

[Dos Equis]

The pats were not shopping him. Have you read about how the trade went down?  Oakland called NE and they offered the pick the day it happened.  Oakland offered a second round pick for him when the Burgess trade went down, but the pats declined.  Also, I take it you don't know much about how Seymour has acted over the years when it came to contracts and money. Read up on it a tad (2006 in particular) and see if your opinion changes at all.  He's always been "all about the business".  "It's a business" was basically his mantra in 2006 when he was holding out.

You're beef is with the NFL's trade policy (and the CBA's trade rules that THEY agreed to), not the Patriots.   Shit, what are the Pats supposed to do if a team calls them and offers up a first round draft choice for a guy that they cant resign? A thirty year old DE who is on the decline.  Say no thanks because they'd have to break it to Sey at least a month in advance.  It's not realistic.  The pats are as good as they are because they always do whats best for the team.  They don't hang on to guys to long. It's a business with players until the balls not in their court, then they all want loyalty.

I understand where you are coming form, but after hearing Richard tell Pats fan's that all his demands over the years were "nothing personal" and it was "just business", I don't really feel sorry for him and his millions that he will make this year.

I read an article and it sure doesn't sound like it was "just business":

Dissatisfied with his contract last spring, Seymour skipped much of the Patriots' early offseason workouts. The two sides subsequently worked out their differences, with the Patriots enhancing the 2005 portion of his existing contract and essentially promising to pursue a long-term extension.

"I always thought that good things come to those who wait anyway," Seymour said during a conference call.

"At the end of the day, when I lay my head down I want to be happy," he added. "You can have all the money in the world and not be happy."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2406619

But even if he had considered this "just business," it is bad business pratice to trade a Pro Bowl player with really no on or off-the-field issues with no notice whatsoever, when that player has a family like Seymour. 

I'm sure it's possible the Raiders just called the Pats out of the blue and made this deal happen in one day, but I don't believe it. 

[body88]

I've been watching Seymour since he came into the NFL.  First, the article you posted does not tell the whole story.  Seymour decided that he was unhappy with a contract that he had signed, so he didn't show up for his obligations (camp).  What if the pats decided that they were unhappy with Seymours numbers in 2006, and they held out on the pay that they promised him?  Would the two sides work towards a new deal that would lower Seymours pay? Second, Seymour had a "this is a business" attitude from day one.  Look into 2006 for more info, I'm not going to do it for you : )

The Boston globe and Mike Reiss said the Oakland Raidars offered a deal the pats could not refuse on short notice to the Patriots.  It don't get much More credible than that.  Believe what you want, but thats what happened and what every major new outlet is reporting in Boston.

So the pats decide to trade Seymour and Belichick calls Seymour to tell him the news.  What do you want him to do, refuse a top ten pick for a 30 year old player who's past his prime?  It's not like the pats did it to screw the guy over.  In business sometimes you make tough choices and this was one of them. Had belichick not called Richard and had the NFL's policy not been 5 days to report, you might have had a point.

I read an article and it sure doesn't sound like it was "just business":

Dissatisfied with his contract last spring, Seymour skipped much of the Patriots' early offseason workouts. The two sides subsequently worked out their differences, with the Patriots enhancing the 2005 portion of his existing contract and essentially promising to pursue a long-term extension.

"I always thought that good things come to those who wait anyway," Seymour said during a conference call.

"At the end of the day, when I lay my head down I want to be happy," he added. "You can have all the money in the world and not be happy."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2406619

But even if he had considered this "just business," it is bad business pratice to trade a Pro Bowl player with really no on or off-the-field issues with no notice whatsoever, when that player has a family like Seymour. 

I'm sure it's possible the Raiders just called the Pats out of the blue and made this deal happen in one day, but I don't believe it. 

[Dos Equis]

I've been watching Seymour since he came into the NFL.  First, the article you posted does not tell the whole story.  Seymour decided that he was unhappy with a contract that he had signed, so he didn't show up for his obligations (camp).  What if the pats decided that they were unhappy with Seymours numbers in 2006, and they held out on the pay that they promised him?  Would the two sides work towards a new deal that would lower Seymours pay? Second, Seymour had a "this is a business" attitude from day one.  Look into 2006 for more info, I'm not going to do it for you : )

The Boston globe and Mike Reiss said the Oakland Raidars offered a deal the pats could not refuse on short notice to the Patriots.  It don't get much More credible than that.  Believe what you want, but thats what happened and what every major new outlet is reporting in Boston.

So the pats decide to trade Seymour and Belichick calls Seymour to tell him the news.  What do you want him to do, refuse a top ten pick for a 30 year old player who's past his prime?  It's not like the pats did it to screw the guy over.  In business sometimes you make tough choices and this was one of them. Had belichick not called Richard and had the NFL's policy not been 5 days to report, you might have had a point.

I'm not going to go searching for three-year old articles to prove your point.  If you want me to read a link or two I will, but I've already looked at one (that I found).  It's your contention that he had a "this is just business" attitude, not mine.

But that's really not my point.  It doesn't matter if he viewed this is as just business, that doesn't justify the team using bad business practices. 

I have no factual basis to argue that the trade didn't happen as Reiss et al. are reporting.  I just find it hard to believe that the Raiders called the Pats out of the blue to make an offer on a player who neither the team nor the player indicated (publicly) wanted out, was having problems, etc.  I suspect much of these discussions take place behind closed doors and are often weeks or months in the making.