The Raiders claim that defensive lineman Richard Seymour hasn't reported for duty yet because he's working out issues with the Patriots.
The Patriots claim they're aware of no lingering issues between themselves and the man they traded for a 2011 first-round pick.
On the surface, common sense favors the latter explanation. Seymour has been traded. As of Sunday, the Raiders are the franchise with which he would have financial issues, because the Raiders are the team that has acquired the responsibility to pay his salary.
What other financial issues could there be? Did Seymour loan money to coach Bill Belichick? Is Seymour trying to cancel the order he placed for a new line of Patriots hoodies?
That said, the Boston Herald (insert simultaneous eye roll from all Pats fans) reports in vague and general terms that "the hangup appears to be a financial one with the Patriots."
Sorry, but without some detail as to what it might be, we're not prepared to buy it.
Apart from the fact that it makes no sense, it would be unprecedented. When a player is traded by a team, the team is done with him. There's nothing more to discuss. It's over. Move on, move out.
The only possible explanation that would make this bizarre situation even remotely comprehensible is that Seymour and agent Eugene Parker realize that the Patriots got the better of the deal with the Raiders, and that Seymour and Parker are trying to engineer a money-for-nothing severance package in exchange for Seymour's agreement to not throw a huge wrench into the gears by refusing to show up for work with the Raiders.
Though Seymour would have no right to try to squeeze more money out of the Pats, he definitely has leverage. If he decides to dig in his heels, the trade would fall apart -- and the Patriots would have a very unwanted distraction on their hands.
Herald report vaguely cites financial issues between Seymour and Patriots
Posted by Mike Florio on September 8, 2009 7:37 AM ET
Permalink
53 Comments
Latest stories in: Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives - Rumors, New England Patriots, Oakland Raiders, Top Stories, Trades
The trade would fall apart? The trade is doen and has cleared the NFL offices? He has no leverage. The NFL does not have a no-trade clause for players...
Eugene Parker....the new Rosenhaus
I will laugh my ass off if this deal falls apart.
I'm tired of the Raiders making deals with the Patsys that are one-sided and seem to help New England more than it does Oakland.
First the Moss deal, now this one. Enough already...
"...Seymour and Parker are trying to engineer a money-for-nothing severance package in exchange for Seymour's agreement to not throw a huge wrench into the gears by refusing to show up for work with the Raiders...."
Extortion? Nah, a NE player would never do anything that was morally questionable.
He is just pissed because he went from the best Div in the AFC to the AFC worst
Oakland is where former good players go to die
Its the Sr Center of the NFL
Seymour would have to report or the raiders can place him on a non football list that would basically end his season and he would not become a free agent. So why would he not report? He has no leverage.
The trade can fall apart...
He can somehow "fail" his physical...
@ledtear
The trade is done, save for the all important physical examination. If Seymour never takes that physical, then the door is left open for potential shenanigans.
It should all blow over in a day or two. But, if Seymour is serious about not coming, this could be really entertaining.
If he is a "no show" to the raiders, and the trade falls through, can the Pats then suspend him for conduct detremental to the team? Costing the team a first round pick seems detremental to me.
Mike, what you FAILED to leave out in your article that WAS printed in the Herald article was…
According to a LEAGUE source
Unless the Herald is lying… they called the league and was told that there is indeed a hang up.
How about you trying the same?
It’s called investigative journalism.
Can goodell suspend agents? Or maybe revoke their license? I think the NFL minus Eugene Parker would be a much better place. Rosenhaus f*cks sh*t up sometimes but at least the guys he chooses to do it with are usually top tier caliber players. Not saying Seymour isn't really good but he is a 3-4 d end, those aren't the most difficult guys to find out there.
It's not done until he shows up to the Raiders HQ and reports for and passes his physical. Until then, he's in limbo and the deal can still be cancelled. Standard trade contract kiddo.
--------
ledtear says:
September 8, 2009 7:55 AM
The trade would fall apart? The trade is doen and has cleared the NFL offices? He has no leverage. The NFL does not have a no-trade clause for players...
The Pats have been cheating the salary cap for years and paying additional money to players. He wants one more huge payment or he will spill the beans.
"Sorry, but without some detail as to what it might be, we're not prepared to buy it."
That sounds really strange coming from you, Golem.
We seeing a new a new player tactic here perhaps? Are the players trying a blackmail approach in an effort to squeeze more money from the teams? Pay me a severance package or I won't go, and I will kill your trade (and my future, any money I am due to make)? Could be, though it would be rather stupid. However he has the agent to do it. This guy has been advising his clients to do some pretty stupid things. He is going to cost Crabtree a LOT of money, and now maybe the big Sey as well.
Uphold your contracts guys! You get paid millions. You can't just take the good and ignore the bad aspects of that contract, especially when you are compensated so well. Part of that is the possibility of being traded across the country to a team that sucks.
Then again, this might just be a dispute about a workout bonus, or a training camp bonus the Pats haven't paid yet, and he wants to make sure he has the money before he leaves, but given who his agent is, it smells like something a lot worse.
(write a comment, then you have to log out, then log in, then redo the comment so it will go through, PLEASE get this fixed!)
Wrong: Seymour only has leverage in his dreams . If he fails to report, he risks going unpaid for the year, throwing away $3-plus mil. and perhaps much more in the future -- teams are no longer as inclined to throw millions after disgruntled players on the wrong side of 30, Favre excepted. Or, he can accept a ludicrously generous multi-year deal that Davis always extends to good and bad players alike. Wake up and smell the (Oakland) coffee, Richard.
Perhaps it could be a combination of LTBE and NLTBE contract incentives that were non-transferable to a new team.
Or perhaps Seymour is shatting his pants thinking about the hell he is about to endure and trying everything he possibly can to get out of it.
FWIW, don't expect the Patriots to go out of their way to honor any contractual obligations, because Seymour never went out of his way to honor his end. (see "I will not play under the final year of my rookie contract") So long, Big Sey 93.
Ledtear,
The trade would fall apart. The player has to report to the team he's traded to in order to make it official. Seymour hasn't even had his physical yet. If he doesn't report, the Raiders take their pick back and the Pats take Seymour back.
Florio,
Seymour and Parker realize the Patriots got the better of the deal with the Patriots ... really? Based on what. Sorry, I'll take a 5-time Pro Bowl DE who's only 29 (apparently that's old-man status now that the Raiders got him?) and fills my team's absolute biggest need for a draft pick 2 years from now that likely won't do much for the next 3 or 4 seasons if ever.
Why can't the deal be equally good for both teams? The Raiders needed a run-stuffing DE. Got it. A guy who can help them for the next 4-5 years, at least, if they get an extension done. They're already loaded with young talent on offense -- McFadden, Bush, Miller, JaMarcus, Schilens, JLH, DHB, Murphy, Henderson and more -- and didn't have to give up a pick in next year's draft anyway. Then there's the Pats who apparently have tremendous depth on the d-line, won't be able to sign all their star players whose contracts run out at the end of 2009, and need to get younger in the coming years. Seems like a win-win to me.
There's no clause but if he refuses to show up to the Raiders, I'm sure they are going to throw a fit or just make up something like "he failed a physical" and rescind the deal.
Actually the trade isn't official until he passes a physical with the Raiders I believe. That would give him leverage. It would also make him a cry baby.
Florio.. Why do you critize the Herald report?
At least they don't make stuff up like you...!
Fine. Let him dig in his heels. He won't play this year. For the Pats or anyone.
And he'll go into an uncapped year with what his salary currently is as opposed to going in as an UFA.
Idiot!
Sorry, but if Seymour doesn't want to move his family, wouldn't that have given the Pats more leverage for the contract talks?
What is being said about this makes little-to-no sense.
Declaring Belichick the winner because he always seems to be ending up the winner? I like him, but I don't think so. The time to win was this season, and the Defense looks like crap.
All trades are contingent on the players showing up. He balks then the trade is void.
New England isn't allowed to negotiate anything with Seymour at this point, right? That would probably be Tampering since he is no longer their player.
Al Davis is nuts for trading a first rounder for someone under a one year contract.
Florio, Seymour and Parker may have leverage not to show up, but both of them are all about getting paid. So why would they jeopardize the following?
- He doesn't show up he won't get his $3.7m this year
- His contract then moves forward so he won't be a FA next year in an uncapped year and if he does play next year he "only" gets $3.7M and misses that (potential) golden goose payday.
- Seymour (and Parker) are determined to get to Free agency. Look at Seymour's past actions and recent comments - it's all about about getting paid. Look at Parker's handling of the Crabtree fiasco.
- Al spends irrationally and I'm sure they know that - did you ever think that Seymour and Parker are actually applying subtle pressure on Al so he gets his money now? That call from Al that goes something like "Richie baby, Al here, how about showing up and we lock you down at 5 years and $50M with half that guaranteed?"
The trade is done. The only leverage Seymour has is to sit out (and he screws himself as noted above), or to retire. He has no other leverage. When Seymour shows up today or tomorrow please post a PFT rumor headline titled "Never Mind"
@ledtear
Trades are only completed once the traded player passes his physical. If he refuses to take a physical the trade will be voided.
# ledtear says: September 8, 2009 7:55 AM
The trade would fall apart? The trade is doen and has cleared the NFL offices? He has no leverage. The NFL does not have a no-trade clause for players...
I am sure this has been said already...but..no the trade isnt done until the player actually reports to the team he was traded to. If he doesnt report, he goes back to the Pats and the Raiders get their pick back eventually.
"Florio.. Why do you critize the Herald report?
At least they don't make stuff up like you...!"
Yeah, except for the whole fabricated, unconfirmed source story they broke the day of the Super Bowl a couple of years ago. Nooooo...they don't make up stuff at all.
Wouldn't a salary advance have to be settled before the trade is completed? If I remember the CBA correctly, if the Pats don't recover advanced money before he goes to Oakland, it's treated as a signing bonus and hits their cap as such.
Buschman says:
"The Pats have been cheating the salary cap for years and paying additional money to players. He wants one more huge payment or he will spill the beans."
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do you have some evidence that you would care to cite?
Because it sounds like you are just another monkey throwing feces against a wall hoping it sticks. Its really pathetic.
If he is a "no show" to the raiders, and the trade falls through, can the Pats then suspend him for conduct detremental to the team?....
If he refuses to report to the Raiders then the Pats can place Seymour on the 'Reserve/Did Not Report' list. If Seymour is placed on that list, then Seymour would not get paid for this season and would not be a UFA after this season (instead, he could return to the Pats at the same salary next season).
The Pats have been cheating the salary cap for years and paying additional money to players....
Usually the Pats are accused of being cheap with their veterans, at least the above is a change in the Pats envying gibberish that is normally posted on this site.
Eli: “Unless the Herald is lying… they called the league and was told that there is indeed a hang up”
dunkingonuts” : Florio.. Why do you critize the Herald report? At least they don't make stuff up like you...!
Do either of you morons READ this website? The Boston Herald is the one paper where you read the obituaries for your own name and can’t trust that you’re not already dead.
The Herald doesn't lie??? Does the name John Tomase ring any bells to you idiots?
Do you two clowns recall a little fabricated tale about Super Bowl taping that turned out to be total fabrication by this fat pig, donut loving, pimple faced “wanna-be a sports reporter but couldn’t climb the rope in gym class” a-hole by that name?
Patriots fans wouldn’t trust the Herald to tell them the sun was shining if they were in the middle of getting a first degree sunburn.
By the way, Seymour is looking more and more like the greedy SOB we always knew him to be here in New England. I can imagine how apesheet he went when he heard that it was the Raid-ahs!!!!! Leverage? He doesn’t have any leverage. If he doesn’t report, he loses his 3.8 mil a year. He loves money way too much for that to happen. And no way this guy ever sees the inside of the Patriots locker room again, even if he doesn’t show. He’s gotta be pissed that he’s now on a dead-end train wreck of a franchise that sure as hell could keep him in football purgatory by slapping a franchise tag on his greedy a$$.
Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving person. And Raider-fan is excited about getting this guy???
Somewhere, the Hoodie is smiling to himself.
it's funny because it's the Boston Herald. that's a punchline in itself.
"Oh, the Herald reported it? NEXT."
Why is the Herald not trust worthy???
LAst I checked, Bellicheck was fined $500,000, and the team lost draftpicks for an incident regarding tapes.
Everyone knows that what Goodell really discovered was burned by the league office. The Herald was right all along.
And theyre right again.
Anyway, Profootballcentral.com had this info yesterday. Florio wont give them any credit.
@richm2256
You’re the moron.
If you can’t comprehend a simple little sentence you need to desperately go back to school.
What makes it even more laughable (but not in a ha-ha funny sense) is you even re-wrote what I stated in the first place.
“UNLESS”… dummy.
I never stated it was an absolute truth.
And if that wasn’t clear enough for you, I also invited Mike to call the league by using investigative journalism and finding out for himself.
Hopefully, this time you are able to comprehend what I have written.
Seymour never took a hometown discount, claiming that he's from South Carolina. He's always treated this as a business and has held out in the past. He's doing the same here. He is one tough businessman and this is more of the same from him. He is using every bit of his leverage to better his own situation. Good for him. But he'll get no sympathy in being dealt to the Raiders. That's all business.
Richard Seymour has no leverage here.
The deal is done and filed with the NFL League Office.
Seymour is now property of Oakland Raiders.
Oakland will issue a 5 day warning letter. If
he does not show up he will be placed on the
Reserve/No show list. Once he is on that list
he will not be paid for 2009. He can not play
for another team in 2009. And he will not
be a free agent next year. He still will be
property of the Oakland Raiders, and New
England still get their pick, as of now, he
is the Raiders headache now.
The only way the trade can be recinded is if
he takes and fails his physical or if both team
file recind of trade papers with the league.
If he does not report for the physical he is
still property of the Raiders and my first
point applies. He doesn't get paid, New England
still gets their pick.
Note to the writers and journalists at this page....
I like this page and I often check it for breaking news as I have found this site to be fantastic at getting the story first. But the commentary are just freaking awful. Please..just report the news...who cares what the heck you believe or don't believe. I'm not interested in your opinion on the matter and besides..if there is a financial situation between Seymour and the patriots..how the heck would any of you boneheads know so why comment about it anyway. You guys have a conspiracy theory about everything ..it's sports man...not national politics..just report it and get some expert opinions NOT coming from pencil neck dork general manager wanna be(s) like yourselves
One would think the Herald would stay away from unsubstantiated reports regarding the Patriots, considering their vile history.
But, such is the way of liberal rags.
While they last.
One would think the Herald would stay away from unsubstantiated reports regarding the Patriots, considering their vile history.
But, such is the way of liberal rags....
The Herald is a rag, but hardly liberal. It is the Fox News in Boston in print. And, yes, it is also owned by Rupert Murdoch's media empire.
Unsubstantiated reporting is the Murdoch way...with T.V. "news" and print "news".
Why is the Herald not trust worthy???
Because the day before the Giants/Pats Super Bowl they reported that the Pats had filmed the Rams walkthrough practice prior to the Patriots/Rams Super Bowl. All of the dozens of people interviewed by the NFL regarding that allegation, including the infamous Matt Walsh, stated that allegation was not true. What we do not know is whether or not the reporter (John Tomase) completely fabricated that report, or whether he got the info from someone else who was lying.
killwithme says:
September 8, 2009 7:56 AM
Eugene Parker....the new wannabe Rosenhaus
fixed
?
Your such a GIRL!
@pbergeron
According to NFL spokesman Michael Signora as quoted in this blogs post just yesterday:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/09/07/seymour-could-eventually-get-five-day-letter/
it seems that if Seymour fails to report the Patriots send the letter to him, if he fails to report the trade can be voided and his rights revert to the Patriots. Oakland gets its pick back. He is in Limbo now, the Raiders have the rights to negotiate but until he reports he is still a member of the Patriots.
profootballcentral.com says Seymour will report today.
For what it's worth.
http://www.profootballcentral.com/2009/09/07/seymour-expected-to-arrive-in-oakland-on-tuesday/
whywerule says:
September 8, 2009 10:57 AM
One would think the Herald would stay away from unsubstantiated reports regarding the Patriots, considering their vile history.
But, such is the way of liberal rags....
The Herald is a rag, but hardly liberal. It is the Fox News in Boston in print. And, yes, it is also owned by Rupert Murdoch's media empire.
Unsubstantiated reporting is the Murdoch way...with T.V. "news" and print "news".
Why is the Herald not trust worthy???
Because the day before the Giants/Pats Super Bowl they reported that the Pats had filmed the Rams walkthrough practice prior to the Patriots/Rams Super Bowl. All of the dozens of people interviewed by the NFL regarding that allegation, including the infamous Matt Walsh, stated that allegation was not true. What we do not know is whether or not the reporter (John Tomase) completely fabricated that report, or whether he got the info from someone else who was lying.
-----------------------
Agree with about 90% of your response.
It's funny how conservative nut jobs think everything in the media is lying to fulfill some liberal conspiracy. I guess that's how you have to think when facts show over and over that your side is wrong. You ignore facts by telling yourself they're just lies concocted by the (fictional) monolithic liberal media. Besides, what liberal/conservative has to do with the press reporting on how the Patriots run their team I'll never know.
And I still don't buy with 100% certainty that the Pats never filmed the Rams practices. Think the league wants it out that the biggest sporting event in the World was seriously tainted by the most successful franchise of the decade cheating more than they were already known to? Think Robert Kraft couldn't have written a check to get that assistant to say "Super Bowl practice tape? What Super Bowl practice tape?"
I'm not saying the Pats did it, but the idea that this was surely a false report take it a little far. This could easily have been a cover-up job. The only onese in posession of the evidence probably had enormous incentives to destroy it.
swervinmervin, try knowing what the hell you're talking about before opening your yap.
Bill B was fined $500,000 because the Pats were caught filming the Jets, The Herald reported the day before New England's last Super Bowl that they were taping the Rams at that Super Bowl, then were left with egg on their face when Tomase couldn't produce a credible source. Thus, the story was a total fabrication that was approved by the Herald's Sports Editor.
There were TWO different incidents; one a credible report caught by the league, the other a total lie by the Herald sports staff.
Nice of you to hide behind the word "unless" the Herald is lying, Eli. Anyone New England sports fan with half a brain knows that if it's in the Herald, it's probably a lie.
Maybe Seymour is in possession of the Matt Walsh tape (or a duplicate) and wants Boob Kraft to pay him as much or more money than he paid Walsh for the original.
Now that would be leverage.
Richm2256 writes...
"Anyone New England sports fan with half a brain knows that if it's in the Herald, it's probably a lie."
===========================
Well, perhaps maybe they are lying, because we all know you have half a brain.
Has he reported yet?
JimmySmith says:
"Maybe Seymour is in possession of the Matt Walsh tape (or a duplicate) and wants Boob Kraft to pay him as much or more money than he paid Walsh for the original. "
^^^^^^
Keep living in your dream world. Your paranoid delusions have a medical term, Jimmy. It's called schizophrenia.
Eli: "Well, perhaps maybe they are lying, because we all know you have half a brain."
Ooooooohh, you really stung me there, Eli. A witty retort worthy of George Can't-stand-ya.
Now hurry upstairs, Mom wants you off the computer and at the dinner table.