Seymour to Retire!
by Peter Chung on Sep 8, 2009 11:28 PM EDT
26 comments
I heard this from a guy on yahoo Blog headlined "Seymour still no-show", if that is true do we still get the 1st rounder? Anyone else hear anything?
BREAKING NEWS: ALAMEDA, Calif. (Oakland Tribune) 8:15PM PDT— Richard Seymour has announced his retirement. Calls to Oakland Raiders head coach Tom Cable were not answered. More information to follow.
Below is the earlier article from the AP:
Seymour, a five-time Pro Bowl defensive end, was acquired from the Patriots on Sunday in exchange for Oakland’s first-round draft pick in 2011. The move was on the NFL’s official transactions list and Seymour is on the Raiders’ roster on their Web site. “I don’t want to comment about anything of that until we have something that’s done and concrete,” Cable said.
Patriots coach Bill Belichick also refused to talk about Seymour and the trade during his daily meeting with the media.
The views expressed in these FanPosts are not necessarily those of the writers or SBNation.
0 recs |
26 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Probably a lie
I think that guy was full of it! I dont see a guy retiring and giving up millions just because hes not happy with playing with the Raiders. Sorry guys..But that is an interesting question. What if he doesn’t ever play for the Raiders? Is he are problem anymore? Wonder what the trade contract details entailed?
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 9, 2009 12:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
our not are!
Sorry its getting late, im sloppy. (not drunk) I promise I am an educated Pats fan!
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 9, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very unlikely
Even if he absolutely HATES the Raiders, he’s only there for a year. After that, he’s a free agent again. I’m 99% sure he wouldn’t be affected by the collective agreement wrangling (unless there’s a general strike) because he’s been in the league for over 6 years. So it makes absolutely no sense to retire at 29, when he will be a 30 year old free agent next season.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whether the Pats get the pick
If the trade is complete, he retires as a Raider and the Pats get their first-rounder. The problem with this, however, is that I find it almost impossible to believe that the Raiders would create a trade agreement with the Pats without the standard “Seymour must pass a fitness test” clause. If Seymour hasn’t reported to Raiders camp, I find it very, very hard to believe he has done the requisite fitness tests, etc. And if he hasn’t done those, then the trade agreement will not be complete because all the requirements have not been fulfilled. In other words, unless the Raiders organisation is incompetent and didn’t include those basic, standard clauses, the deal isn’t complete and if Seymour retires, no pick for the Pats. Then again, it is the Raiders. They might’ve forgotten. Hah.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 1:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's already been mentioned that he has to show up and pass a fitness test for the trade to be final.
If he doesn’t show, we can, after 5 days, place him on a reserve list where he doesn’t get to play for anyone (or collect money) for 2009. We would then have him under contract through 2010, in 2011 he would be a free agent.
Money-wise, it makes no sense for him to hold out. It has been speculated that he is trying to get guarantees from the Raiders that they won’t franchise him in 2010. And/or a minimum 3 year contract negotiation with the Raiders.
Nobody is talking, so it is all speculation.
If Seymour were to retire, he would have to report to the Raiders, complete the deal, and retire a Raider. If he chose to come out of retirement (ala Favre), he would be a Raider.
If he could convince the Pats to stop the deal, he could retire a Patriot. If he chose to come out of retirement (ala Favre), he would be a Patriot.
He could also be trying to negotiate a home town discount to stay a Patriot, which could get into the whole Wilfork contract negotiation mess. Basically, putting leverage on Wilfork to help keep Seymour a Patriot.
That’s business, it’s ugly, but that’s how it works.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Sep 9, 2009 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Seymour himself said...
he loved Belichick as a coach but hated him as a businessman.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Sep 9, 2009 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's kind of like sausage, you love the taste, but you don't want to know how it's made.
We love the Patriots product, but the behind the scenes grind isn’t very palatable.
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Sep 9, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh
the behind the scenes grind is just fine. We are talking about millionaires here. Whether they have a few million more or less isn’t really a moral question.
Warm up the Duck Boats!!!
by BabeParilli on Sep 9, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just wondering about the effect of retirement
“If Seymour were to retire, he would have to report to the Raiders, complete the deal, and retire a Raider. If he chose to come out of retirement (ala Favre), he would be a Raider.”
A retirement isn’t treated the same as a career-ending injury would be? I’d have thought if he doesn’t complete the fitness test, whether through inability or unwillingness, the deal isn’t complete.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he doesn't complete the deal.
He is the Patriots property.
The Patriots could put him on the No Show/Reserve list after five days. If Seymour chose to retire, he’d be a Patriot. If he chose to unretire, he’d be a Patriot finishing out the contract he had. Or not getting paid if he was under the NS/R list and would wait an additional year before free agency.
Teams deal players all the time. If they don’t go, they run the risk of not getting paid for a year. The balance of their contract resumes after that year, when the whole cycle can start again. They can No Show him year after year, until he completes his signed contract (which includes getting traded).
The more you know, the more you know that you don't know.
by SlotMachinePlayer on Sep 9, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, no problem, that's what I thought
I guess I misread the bit I quoted, I thought there was some imperative on Seymour to show up, then retire as a Raider, outside of the terms of the trade fitness test stipulations. That first comma is a killer. Haha. “If Seymour were to retire as a Raider, he’d have to etc etc..”
Excellent, that’s how I thought the arrangement works.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmmm?
Money grubbing Seymour will retire at age 30 and lose millions? Nope.
Warm up the Duck Boats!!!
by BabeParilli on Sep 9, 2009 11:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
HAAHA what a diss, i rather retire at 30 than play for the raiders hahaha
In Kobe we trust!
by robi s on Sep 9, 2009 2:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope we get that pick, but...
If he does decide to take less and stay a Patriot it only helps our team either way. If that is the case, he would have to play even harder this season because athletes whether or not they admit it, seem to have a fire lit up from under when it comes to contract season. Seymour’s past indicates he is this type of player.
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 9, 2009 4:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But then he'll be impossible to deal next year
So they won’t get anything for him. A top-half first round pick would be sweet, if only to replace him outright.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He would help on DEF
Even if it never works out in our favor. He would help on the field IMO.
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 9, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's definitely a great player, or has been in the past
but can you remember which specific games he’s been injured for, in the last couple of years? Can’t remember which? Jarvis Green is an excellent ex-backup, and when he started for the injured Seymour, well, I didn’t really notice.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I feel like people underestimate how good Jarvis has been. Because of him, trading Seymour does not guaruntee the Pats are abadoning the 3-4.
by BigRedDog42 on Sep 9, 2009 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suggested ages ago that putting Brace in at DE
was a shot across the bows to both Seymour and Wilfork. I was more leaning towards Wilfork as contract leverage, with the ability to cover Seymour… but I guess I had put on my prophetic hat that day. Anyone notice if Brace was effective? I didn’t see it.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he good for 2 plays each downing
great for them but not every down
by Patsfan4life on Sep 9, 2009 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, but the Pats have already considered this
At least, that’s what I read from the acquisition of Banta-Cain, Ninkovich and Burgess. Situational pass-rush packages on third-down, or else there wasn’t a point in getting them at all. And Seymour himself was being subbed out for third-downs last year anyway.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 10, 2009 6:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow youre right
QB pressures is about it maybe 2 a game?
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 10, 2009 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
is there still the chance of him being a pat for less
so if he doesnt go then the raiders get their pick back
but what would we give up for this nothing
i dont think the riaders would be happy with that
by Patsfan4life on Sep 9, 2009 6:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Every year he either is on the "left camp" list or on the Pats roster is a year he loses a LOT of trade value
Trading for a 29 year old DE looks a lot better than trading for a 30 year old DE.. That 30 number is very scary to a great deal of personnel managers – just look at the treatment of LT by the Chargers. Granted, he’s in a different position, but 30 is 30.
by Comedic.Sans on Sep 9, 2009 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He'd never come back
Seymour doesn’t strike me as a tail-between-the-legs kind of guy and Belichick has already moved forward.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Sep 9, 2009 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not only that.....
PATS as an organization don’t play that ish! He would be cut or re-traded now that I think about it.
It may be now..it may be later...later aint gonna be no use! Am I right Al? We got alot of angry guys in their black panthers,muslims, young lords, besides you average anti-socials. We gotta go in, am I right, clean their clocks!
by Peter Chung on Sep 10, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Media requests: Please email patspulpit@gmail.com
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
