Ice Cold Bruschi Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Here is the fact, the trade is done, the patriots have the pick all thats left to occur is for seymour to pass his physical which he will, right now its the oakland raiders problem that he hasn't reported to take his physical yet. Now if seymour doesn't report thats not the patriots problem and the trade cannot be voided for that, like I said, the only thing that voids the trade is a failed physical, him not taking it yet means nothing so he's essentially just holding out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Here is the fact, the trade is done, the patriots have the pick all thats left to occur is for seymour to pass his physical which he will, right now its the oakland raiders problem that he hasn't reported to take his physical yet. Now if seymour doesn't report thats not the patriots problem and the trade cannot be voided for that, like I said, the only thing that voids the trade is a failed physical, him not taking it yet means nothing so he's essentially just holding out. Maybe. But I'll take the word of the McLatchy News Services... wait, what the hell? Oh well, I still think you're wrong. And a jerk. http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/seaha...ory/871309.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyBillsFan Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 If you want to beat the Buffalo Bills, then just show up and play. Its a easy win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 What do you mean the Pats* wouldn't stand for it? I know there's a lot of paranoia on these boards, but Goodell is the one in charge, not Kraft. And you go along with whatever the rules are right now. I suspect that if this is the first time it has come up, they might not have planned for it, and in that case, Davis has a case. You'd expect that in the future, contracts would be written more carefully to deal with what happens if the player doesn't show, and the NFL will put a rule in place. The first thing I wondered when I heard about this is that surely the Raiders must have insisted on "unless he doesn't show up" language in the contract. The writer hasn't thought about it? Come on. I don't think the Patsies* planned something with all this. That being said don't reference Goodell in some positive way. He is a total hack as was proved by he becoming the defense attorney for the Patsies with the Belicheat* scandal. Goodell is Mr. tough guy with people like M. Lynch who get in some minor trouble with the law and play for teams without clout like the Bills. With the Patsies* he is a Mr. get down on your knees and kiss every one of Kraft*'s toes kind of commish. Name me one ruling where Goodell has ever done one tough thing to the Patsies* with all the shenanagins they are always up to. Did he suspend Wilfork for elbow jabbing sorry JP's knee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Name me one ruling where Goodell has ever done one tough thing to the Patsies* with all the shenanagins they are always up to. Did he suspend Wilfork for elbow jabbing sorry JP's knee? Did he suspend the dude who took out Brady's knee last year? (I'm actually asking a legitimate question here, I don't know the answer.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Interesting attempt at "logic" here. The league would not be denying the Patriots the use of Seymour during the first game. They traded him. They voluntarily gave up rights to him and should have no expectation of receiving services from him ever again. It does not matter if the trade gets voided by the league today, Tuesday, or in Week 16, the Patriots are not being "disadvantaged" by the league. The Pats expect consideration for the trading of Seymour and if they don't get that consideration then the they most certainly would expect to have him back in their service else feel disadvantaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I don't know if this idea has been kicked around or not but I think it is very plausible. Is it possible that New England and Belicheat have had this plan all along? Did they plan on trying to steal a pick from the Raiders and get Seymore back? I think the plan was to make sure the Bills didn't game plan for him throwing a wrench into things for them on MNF. They are hoping because the paper work was filed by the Raiders before the physical ever happened that the trade is a done deal and somehow they steal a pick from the Raiders. (I know it's not legal and the Raiders would then own his rights but you now how the Pats* get away with stuff and the NFL may rule in their favor in some ridiculous way) Is this jackass just at it again trying to screw the system and make sure the Bills are ill prepared Monday night with their rookie O-line and Bell at LT? What is everyone elses thought because I feel like they are up to something and they knew Seyemore to the Raiders was never really going to happen. It's hard to imagine there are functional adults out there who think like this. Anyway, I was lead to believe the BB was too busy reviewing AVP's "game calling films" from NFL "Europa". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 The Pats expect consideration for the trading of Seymour and if they don't get that consideration then the they most certainly would expect to have him back in their service else feel disadvantaged. If he doesn't report to the Raiders, then he certainly will be back at the service of the team who traded him. I don't think anyone is arguing against that. If nobody has his services for a week, then it sucks for the two teams that were involved in the trade, but I wouldn't expect the NFL to get involved and lay blame, or dish out reparations. I think this poster was just pointing out to the original poster that it's absurd to think that the Patriots would get both the draft pick and Seymour. It's going to be one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Here is the fact, the trade is done, the patriots have the pick all thats left to occur is for seymour to pass his physical which he will, right now its the oakland raiders problem that he hasn't reported to take his physical yet. Now if seymour doesn't report thats not the patriots problem and the trade cannot be voided for that, like I said, the only thing that voids the trade is a failed physical, him not taking it yet means nothing so he's essentially just holding out. Seymour doesn't show up for the physical=failed physical. Accept it. You see, there's a reason why teams trade players to places they want to go, because otherwise THIS is what happens. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Seymour doesn't show up for the physical=failed physical. Accept it. You see, there's a reason why teams trade players to places they want to go, because otherwise THIS is what happens. Sorry. Negative. Once the Raiders exercise the 5 day letter then Seymour will have to show up for his physical else he's placed on the did not report list which will end his season before it starts. Not only will Seymour forgo his salary for the season if this shoudl happen but he'll also not get credited for an accrued season meaning the Raiders will still hold his rights next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Negative. Once the Raiders exercise the 5 day letter then Seymour will have to show up for his physical else he's placed on the did not report list which will end his season before it starts. Not only will Seymour forgo his salary for the season if this shoudl happen but he'll also not get credited for an accrued season meaning the Raiders will still hold his rights next season. What makes you think the Raiders will exercise the 5-day letter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 What makes you think the Raiders will exercise the 5-day letter? If they don't the league will determine that they have acted in poor faith (else why make the trade in the first place) and award the Pats compensation. I suppose it's still possible that Seymour could fail the physical once he arrives to take it. But he aint failing it for not showing up as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 What makes you think the Raiders will exercise the 5-day letter? What am I saying? They probably will. These are the Raiders, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 What am I saying? They probably will. These are the Raiders, after all. Of course they will. The traded for him and want him on their team. Otherwise, why bother making the trade in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 They don't have the money to re-sign both Seymour and Wilfork. That's why they traded Seymour. They drafted Ron Brace who is strictly a space eater to eventually replace Wilfork (if they can't re-sign him). They now have more leverage and money to sign Wilfork but it's not a done deal. I am shocked this thread is still going...I mean this is one of the most rediculous conspiracies I have seen on here...how can anyone even take it seriously? Bill video tapes a few things he is not supposed to (as have other teams) and you make him out like he is the greatest mastermind to ever walk the earth... Come back to reality, the weather is nice down here... The thread is still going not because of the conspiracy theory aspect but because of the discussion/debate/predictions about what the outcome of the trade will be. Here is the fact, the trade is done, the patriots have the pick all thats left to occur is for seymour to pass his physical which he will, right now its the oakland raiders problem that he hasn't reported to take his physical yet. Now if seymour doesn't report thats not the patriots problem and the trade cannot be voided for that, like I said, the only thing that voids the trade is a failed physical, him not taking it yet means nothing so he's essentially just holding out. How much do you want to bet that if it comes to an impasse that the NFL gets involved? Did he suspend the dude who took out Brady's knee last year? (I'm actually asking a legitimate question here, I don't know the answer.) Interestingly, the player in question, Bernard Pollard, was not fined or suspended. The league viewed the video evidence and ruled that he was blocked into Brady by Sammy Morris. Even more interestingly, Vince Wilfork was quoted as being quite upset that the league didn't fine/suspend Pollard. Yet even more interestingly, Pollard was cut the other day. He was a 2nd round draft pick in 2006 who had started the last 32 games for the Chiefs. Many are theorizing that the cut is retribution for the Brady hit by the new KC GM, Scott Pioli, who was with New England since 2000. I doubt this last bit but others in the media have put it out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Beware of things behind the grassy knoll. Bellicheat may have stolen a candy from and baby but in the grand scheme this wasn't done to just beat Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Of course they will. The traded for him and want him on their team. Otherwise, why bother making the trade in the first place. Well, when a guy doesn't report and you have to send a letter to him to force him TO report... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 hahahahahaha...this is the craziest conspiracy theory I have heard in a while...Geezus, all BB ever did was video tape some things he wasnt supposed (something MANY teams have done) and now all of a sudden he is as clever as Oceans 11 team... Stop smoking the "Jenkem" kid... Bill's the only one who got caught...TWICE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Bill's the only one who got caught...TWICE. Are there still people who claim other teams cheated, with no proof of it? They must be the same people who claim that aliens abducted them and probed them anally. Or Patriots fans. And is there really much difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Well, apparently Seymour got his letter from the Raiders on Thursday. He has 5 days from receipt of letter to report and take his physical or else he risks being placed on the did not report list which will find him suspended, without pay, for the year. Seymour gets letter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts