Skip to content

Raiders send Seymour letter

According to Greg Papa, the voice of the Raiders, Oakland’s position on the muddled Richard Seymour matter is crystal clear: they want him.

To help get him, Papa reports that the Raiders have sent Seymour a letter “saying he had five days upon receipt to report to the Raiders and take a physical.”

It’s unclear when the Raiders sent the letter or what will happen if Seymour continues to fail to show up in Oakland.  If the five days elapse, Oakland would have the right to place him on the roster/suspended. 

In that scenario, the Raiders would retain his rights in 2010 at his 2009 salary, but he would miss the entire season.

Absolutely no one wants that to happen, so the nuclear option seems unlikely.  Then again, there don’t seem to be any “compromise” alternatives.  Seymour either has to show up or the Raiders won’t have much choice.

The letter does indicate, though, that Oakland is not interested in trying to get their first-round pick back.  They want Seymour, even though the conditions of the trade require Seymour to report.

Perhaps that’s why the Patriots are so confident that the issue “is between [Seymour] and Oakland.”

The clock is ticking.  Your move, Richard.

Permalink 59 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: New England Patriots, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
59 Responses to “Raiders send Seymour letter”
  1. Milhouse says: Sep 10, 2009 8:03 PM

    Who thinks he is smarter, Brad Childress or Eugene Parker?

  2. JSpicoli says: Sep 10, 2009 8:03 PM

    Time for a major sport athlete who thinks he is in charge to get a glimpse of who holds the orb.

  3. gumbo says: Sep 10, 2009 8:05 PM

    lol @ the raiders

  4. 8man says: Sep 10, 2009 8:05 PM

    He’s a Dick! I don’t see the problem. The Pats obviously don’t want him. At all. And the Raiders obviusly do. Apparently, a lot. He needs to go and play in Oakland.
    Good for the Raiders! You own him for now and for as long as you want to franchise him. He plays or he retires.

  5. Aso21 says: Sep 10, 2009 8:06 PM

    it really doesn’t matter if the language is there or not, if he doesn’t show there’s no physical, no physical is the same as a failed physical in which case the Raiders can still decide to void the trade

  6. RaiderMight says: Sep 10, 2009 8:09 PM

    Finally! It’s time to force a resolution.

  7. Clark says: Sep 10, 2009 8:11 PM

    If the Raiders knew what they where doing, they would have sent the letter by Tuesday 9-8-09. This wouldn’t be such a huge distraction by gameday(Monday Night.) I think Big Sey could still show up and hold the point without much problem. If he is smart, he’ll play his ass off. All eyes will be watching Richard. You can come out of this with a MEGA Payday if you get your house in order.

  8. Alpheratz says: Sep 10, 2009 8:12 PM

    Now Richard is not only unhappy, he also looks like a complete ass.
    If it quacks like a duck………….

  9. radrntn says: Sep 10, 2009 8:12 PM

    so now it comes down to one of two scenarios..
    Seymour Butts point of view…Pay me 75 million for a 5 year deal, and I’ll show
    or the raiders , which is we gave up a first round pick, we pay you the 3.7 for this year, then franchise you next year and you get 17 million+, and we franchise you again for a second time.
    The only way you get a happy player is to pay him 75 million, which with the current cap situation could be impossible for the raiders to do.
    So Seymour will show, and Raiders will need to work on a long term deal.

  10. Facts Domino says: Sep 10, 2009 8:14 PM

    Based on the wording “saying he had five days upon receipt to report to the Raiders and take a physical.”
    I’d let the postman keep it for awhile.

  11. stanjam says: Sep 10, 2009 8:20 PM

    This is just as I stated in the earlier Seymour post, in which it was said, and where most people agreed, that if Seymour doesn’t report, that he would be the Patriots problem, and that the Raiders would get their pick back.
    Like I said earlier, the Pats traded the contract to the Raiders. The Patriots have no more to do with it, it is all on the Raiders now, UNLESS they put specific language in the contract that stated otherwise. That would have been the smart thing to do. However, with the Raiders pushing this deal from the get go I didn’t think it would be in there. The Raiders approached the Patriots twice about this trade, so I am sure the Pats put the language THEY wanted in the trade. If he doesn’t show, the Raiders will have to deal with it, and since the league already ratified the deal, the only thing the Patriots have to deal with is making two first round picks in the 2011 draft!
    If Seymour is smart he will report. The last thing he wants is to be stuck with the Raiders next year fulfilling the last year of his contract. The only other option is to retire.

  12. Aso21 says: Sep 10, 2009 8:21 PM

    not over yet, the Raiders have brought back William Joseph who was cut to make room for Seymour

  13. Darth Jay says: Sep 10, 2009 8:22 PM

    Que the Raiders cry babies.

  14. hayward giablommi says: Sep 10, 2009 8:25 PM

    Patriots 1
    Richard Seymour 0
    Raiders tbd

  15. Diomedes says: Sep 10, 2009 8:26 PM

    Yay lawyers.

  16. phott says: Sep 10, 2009 8:27 PM

    Well, now we know. Richard Seymour is an Oakland Raider, whether he likes it or not. Do your time and go play for the Jets in 2011. Thanks for the three rings though. Love BB

  17. seng225 says: Sep 10, 2009 8:29 PM

    A sternly written letter? Yea, that should do it.

  18. njraiderfan27 says: Sep 10, 2009 8:31 PM

    Dick, Al is the wrong guy to get into a pissing match with. He will make your life miserable just to prove a point. Ask Marcus Allen.

  19. JustDieBaby says: Sep 10, 2009 8:31 PM

    I want our 1st round pick back for dhBUST. Brain dead Al still thinks everyone wants to be a Raider. Is it any wonder our team is a joke.

  20. mnoise says: Sep 10, 2009 8:43 PM

    Seymour better wake up and smell the coffee. His agent is chumping him up and making him look bad. He thought he had a new deal coming with the Pats? Who fed him that b*llsh*t?! His agent that’s who. It is obvious to everyone in and around the NFL the Pats had no discussions with anybody about extending Seymour no matter what his agent led him to believe. Seymour should fire that guy, what’s his name…Parker? Then report to the Raiders. Then after a couple of weeks hire a new agent and try to work out an extension with Mr. Davis who actually really wants Seymour badly. Why did the Pats draft Ron Brace in the 2nd round? To be Seymour’s replacement either this year or next.
    It’s not like it’s the end of the world going to the Raiders, Seymour was drafted to a 5-11 team who had a coach most media in Boston wanted to get rid of. Seymour was part of the solution and turnaround then and probably will be in Oakland. But for heaven’s sake Seymour show up and work it out with Mr. Davis who has taken care of everyone else who is a core member of that team. And get a new agent because all this guy is doing is grandstanding to save face from the lies he’s been telling you!

  21. PDXNinerfan says: Sep 10, 2009 8:49 PM

    Reminds of Team America when Hans Blix threatened Kim Jong Il with a letter…didn’t end well.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0hk9vaqWUg

  22. AutumnWind999 says: Sep 10, 2009 8:51 PM

    Chillax Raider haters,
    Ever hear of negotiations? Leverage?
    Fact: Seymour’s leverage for an extension is to play it like he may not show at all and drive up the price on the Raiders who would be tremendously helped by his presence on the d-line.
    Fact: The two sides have been in negotations on an extension.
    Fact: If Seymour is demanding more than the Raiders are willing to pay, the Raiders’ only leverage to get him in and/or reduce his asking price is the “5-day letter.”
    It’s all part of the negotiations.

  23. sevenirongator says: Sep 10, 2009 8:55 PM

    Did ayone with the Raiders call Seymour agent to gauge his intrest in playing in oakland before they made the trade?

  24. EskinSux says: Sep 10, 2009 8:58 PM

    Dear Richard,
    Greetings from ALlapalooza. It has come to my attention during my recent diaper change that you haven’t reported for duty to the black hole. Now, i realize, football wise, the trip from NE to Oakland is akin to a trip to mars from earth. But, I’m perplexed as to your non arrival. Are you walking here?. If so, i may be able to offers some assistance,. I can give Usuain Bolt 24 million, guaranteed for his shoes to get you here in a timely fashion. Remember, I traded a 1st round draft pick for your services, and we all know how well our 1st round drafts picks excel, i don’t treat 1st round picks lightly. We have costumes here, signs of the glory days, and I once drafted Howie Long. Hows that for incentive? Now, don’t make me get my mixed martial arts expert of a head coach come looking for you, cause if I tell him too….He will. In closing, let me say, I don’t remember trading for you, but i’m glad I did….
    Sincerely,
    (whats my name again?)
    Oh yeah, AL

  25. skinny pigeon says: Sep 10, 2009 9:01 PM

    I’d be wary of doing any deals in the future with the Patriots. Kraft takes another black eye.

  26. JohnnyWaddProd. says: Sep 10, 2009 9:03 PM

    I really hate this website, it has completely taken over my life.
    Hey Seymour….no tickee, no laundry.

  27. darknyyt74 says: Sep 10, 2009 9:05 PM

    Aso21 says:
    September 10, 2009 8:06 PM
    it really doesn’t matter if the language is there or not, if he doesn’t show there’s no physical, no physical is the same as a failed physical in which case the Raiders can still decide to void the trade
    ————————————————-
    Yep. Keep telling yourself that. Doesn’t make it true, but if it helps you sleep at night go for it.

  28. Kiss Bills Rings says: Sep 10, 2009 9:06 PM

    Hope they sent the letter certified & not regular mail…..

  29. 808BOLTFAN says: Sep 10, 2009 9:12 PM

    If I were the Raiders, I would piss of the Patriots by asking for there 1st round back and send them a pissed of Seymore. Raider’s are stupid to suspend him for the season, what good does that do? What guarantee’s them he’ll want to play for them next season? He’ll only lose value. I’m a Chargers fan, but I damn, thats messed up. Don’t put him on ur roster, once you do that, you won’t be able to get back your pick. The pick at this point is more valuable. The only reason why I’m backing the Raiders on this one is. I would hate to see the Pats load up, the know how to draft, unlike the Raiders. Send his ass back to the Pats. Belichek really shows his true loyalty to his team..lmaoo..Brady, in about 3-5 years, u might be a Raider…lmaoooo

  30. JohnnyWaddProd. says: Sep 10, 2009 9:17 PM

    see…i’m back seeing if my post made it. Did i say something wrong?

  31. Rudy518 says: Sep 10, 2009 9:17 PM

    He’d probably go if they promise not to FRANCHISE him. He might make more money in the long run if he doesn’t play this year. And they all but garenteed Asomugha he wouldn’t be tagged so that leaves Seymour. And its not that the Pats dont want him, its all about the benjaminz.

  32. maskedman says: Sep 10, 2009 9:31 PM

    # Rudy518 says: September 10, 2009 9:17 PM
    …And they all but garenteed Asomugha he wouldn’t be tagged so that leaves Seymour. ..
    Umm, Aso signed a 3 year deal in the offseason. He will not be franchised this year…

  33. JohnnyWaddProd. says: Sep 10, 2009 9:38 PM

    As a Raider fan…I’m just glad somebody took a first rounder away from the team. I mean really, the Raiders and 1st round picks…umm, not so good.
    Love ‘em anyway!!!!!

  34. GoGaels says: Sep 10, 2009 9:40 PM

    People on both sides should really try to research some things before posting:
    1) Raiders have lost the pick, plain and simple. They will not get it back, whether Seymour shows or not. Dumb move by Al
    2) Seymour will not make more money in the long run if he doesn’t play. His contract will roll over, meaning he will make the same salary next year as this and then still have 2 years of franchise ability left in him. Al likes to screw people who screw him.
    3) The Patriots prove they have no class by trading their defensive stalwart less than a week before the season. Bellichick is nothing without Brady and the surrounding cast and this year it will start to show, especially if Brady goes down again.

  35. encinitasraider says: Sep 10, 2009 9:50 PM

    Same Agent as Craptree? I guess Parker mis-reads a lot of meetings he has with GM’s and his clients needs. Do you realize that there is a 9.4 unemployment rate in the U.S. and these greedy MF’s are upset becaue they have to move and work somewhere they might not like even though they get paid millions a year…216,00 per game for seymour…who the phuck cares if he shows or not. The fans are the ones that make up Raider Nation not any one player!!!
    one player is not bigger than Raider Nation…. Never has been and Never will be.
    Seymour can stay in Boston and suck a **()…

  36. Clark says: Sep 10, 2009 10:06 PM

    GoGaels says:
    “People on both sides should really try to research some things before posting:
    Bellichick is nothing without Brady and the surrounding cast and this year it will start to show, especially if Brady goes down again.”
    How did the Pats do with out Brady last year? 4-12? 6-10? 8-8? Hmmmm… oh yeah 11-5. Jackass.

  37. Silver&BlackInDC says: Sep 10, 2009 10:08 PM

    Despite having lurked for the duration of the Seymour fiasco, I would just like to draw Hater attention to the following:
    If Seymour doesn’t report, he threatens to set an example that will lead to the destruction of parity potential. As has been indicated, when he was drafted by New England, they were a 4-12 team, and he became part of an epic turnaround. The Raiders, the Bengals, the Lions — any or all of them could be on the cusp of doing the same.
    But if skilled veteran players, following his example, are allowed to disrupt trades, then losing teams will perpetually remain losing teams. It would be too easy for every new Seymour to say no to a 5-11 team and wait for his payday with a better team with the same or even deeper pockets — having his cake ($$) and eating it too (post-season appearances.)
    Bad teams need the ability to buy skill as well as draft it; a player being able to essentially cancel a 1st rounder for a team he doesn’t like threatens to unravel a painfully crafted system in which we — as fans — can convince ourselves every new September that we have a chance to turn it around.
    GO RAIDERS

  38. JohnnyWaddProd. says: Sep 10, 2009 10:09 PM

    Hey Gaels….where did you get your info from? I’d love to know how it is you think the Raiders wouldn’t get their pick back if Seymour doesn’t show.

  39. Clark says: Sep 10, 2009 10:10 PM

    sevenirongator says:
    September 10, 2009 8:55 PM
    Did ayone with the Raiders call Seymour agent to gauge his intrest in playing in oakland before they made the trade?
    That would be illeagal tampering.

  40. nepatsfan says: Sep 10, 2009 10:10 PM

    @skinny – How does Kraft take a black eye, the franchise made a good trade – the final results for both teams are tbd. If you knew anything about NE this is not about Kraft.
    This is a mess for the entire league, the teams and the fans. I am glad the Raiders and the Pats have figured it out (if the reports are true). I am sure the league had to get involved… what a mess going into the uncapped year.
    The agents are amazingly able to sink to the bottom in a deep pool.
    Seymour was a great Patriot and I wish him well. He is in a bad positon too (as far as millionaires go)

  41. 6Steel says: Sep 10, 2009 10:17 PM

    It seems to me that no one has suggested that the details of the trade have merit. Since all seem to create situations, if Seymour doesn’t report and the Raiders insisted he do so for a valid trade, then it is obvious, isn’t it?
    My research on Jake Plummer indicates his case was NOT like this. Since Jake was forced to repay TB the bonus of 3.5 mil, it is clear he became a member of their team prior to retirement.

  42. nepatsfan says: Sep 10, 2009 10:17 PM

    gogales – their defensive stalwart??? You had some intelligent commets until the end – this is football and you try to win the game. Your dislike for BB is clouding your view. Tom Brady will not last forever and we wil hav eto find a replacement, but to say they won’t do well if Tom Terrific gets hurt and blame them as an organization for that is like blaming Indy for not doing well if Peyton goes down or any other MVP you care to name. Of course it would hurt a lot to lose Brady, I hope to go 11-5 like last year but I would doubt it. But who knows – no one knows YET who the #2 is, do we? I fyou tink it is who is on the roster now, I would bet you are incorrect. AND I like the new undrafted QB they have, he looks like a great #3

  43. JustDieBaby says: Sep 10, 2009 10:20 PM

    With the 1st pick in the 2010 draft the Oakland Raiders select.
    With the 1st pick in the 2011 draft (by way of Oakland) the NE Pats select.

  44. darknyyt74 says: Sep 10, 2009 10:23 PM

    Raider fans…the Raiders DO NOT get the pick back if Seymour does not show. The pick belongs to New England. Period.
    Seymour’s rights belong to Oakland. He CANNOT go back to New England. Period.
    The tuck rule was a conspiracy to keep the Raiders down. Boo Hoo. Funny how to this day that rule HAS NOT CHANGED.
    Now go put your Darth Vader helmets on and cry.

  45. EskinSux says: Sep 10, 2009 10:25 PM

    Silver&BlackInDC says:
    September 10, 2009 10:08 PM
    Bad teams need the ability to buy skill as well as draft it…..
    ————————————————
    So, it’s Richard Seymour’s, or any veteran’s fault the RaiDUH’s have wasted so many draft picks….They had parity, gift wrapped, they had great draft positions……They just pissed it away……..They lose every year because of bad management decisions, not some guy pissed cause he got traded to them…..Draft good players, and the problem is solved……

  46. Alpheratz says: Sep 10, 2009 10:41 PM

    3) The Patriots prove they have no class by trading their defensive stalwart less than a week before the season. Bellichick is nothing without Brady and the surrounding cast and this year it will start to show, especially if Brady goes down again.
    Fraught with errors.
    The last time Belichick had a big player shake-up, Lawyer Milloy, they won the Super Bowl.
    Also, it’s no less classy than Richard’s two holdouts.
    You may not like Coach Belichick, but his achievements are undeniable. This guy is ususally working years ahead, the Seymour trade is proof of that.

  47. encinitasraider says: Sep 10, 2009 10:42 PM

    reported that the Raiders never sent the letter it was a misunderstanding from a local reporter..

  48. GoGaels says: Sep 10, 2009 10:45 PM

    Clark says:
    How did the Pats do with out Brady last year? 4-12? 6-10? 8-8? Hmmmm… oh yeah 11-5. Jackass.
    Yeah, they did it with Cassel, Vrabel, Bruschi, Seymour, Harrison… Hence the “Brady and supporting cast” comment. They don’t have any of those guys this year.
    Like I said, do some research before posting, jackass.

  49. kayC says: Sep 10, 2009 11:00 PM

    “Seymour’s rights belong to Oakland. He CANNOT go back to New England. ”
    Not true. If Seymour doesn’t take a physical (which equates to failing a physical), that should make the trade void. Failed physicals voiding a trade are certainly not unprecedented.. John McCargo, Lee Suggs, Seth Marler, Charlie Adams..
    Now go put on your ratty, cut-off hoodie and cry.

  50. Sawatzky says: Sep 10, 2009 11:01 PM

    All Seymour has to do is show up and play one year and then go free agent. Who would want to play on that dump anyway?

  51. darknyyt74 says: Sep 10, 2009 11:10 PM

    kayC says:
    September 10, 2009 11:00 PM
    “Seymour’s rights belong to Oakland. He CANNOT go back to New England. ”
    Not true. If Seymour doesn’t take a physical (which equates to failing a physical), that should make the trade void. Failed physicals voiding a trade are certainly not unprecedented.. John McCargo, Lee Suggs, Seth Marler, Charlie Adams..
    Now go put on your ratty, cut-off hoodie and cry.
    ————————————————–
    Not showing for a physical does not = failing a physical. I’m not a doctor but I would have to say in order to fail a physical you actually have to HAVE one. So no, not showing does not = a failed physical.
    But you know all about failing.

  52. darknyyt74 says: Sep 10, 2009 11:12 PM

    kayC says:
    “Now go put on your ratty, cut-off hoodie and cry.”
    ————————————————–
    =FAIL
    I am not a Patriots fan. But your post is uniformed so why would I expect anything different.

  53. darknyyt74 says: Sep 10, 2009 11:15 PM

    kayC says:
    “Now go put on your ratty, cut-off hoodie and cry.”
    ————————————————–
    =FAIL
    I am not a Patriots fan. But your post is uniformed so why would I expect anything different.
    Now go put on your 1970’s Al Davis Raiders liesure suite and ask mommy if you can stay up late Monday night to watch the Raiders play on MNF.

  54. GobiasINC_1 says: Sep 10, 2009 11:40 PM

    Raider fans who still have faith in Al Davis are stupid. Steve Hartman level stupidity.

  55. Kiss Bills Rings says: Sep 11, 2009 1:29 AM

    I’ve seen where this report is false….any more insight???

  56. eaglealan64 says: Sep 11, 2009 6:25 AM

    Lots of uniformed speculation. There are two scenarios:-
    1) The trade was contigent on him reporting and passing a physical.
    2) It wasn’t.
    If it’s 1 then the Raiders can get the pick back, if it’s 2 they can’t.
    Based on the parties actions it sounds like it’s 2 but none of us know for sure.

  57. 19-0 says: Sep 11, 2009 3:14 PM

    The only team that can communicate with a player is a team that owns the rights to that player. Who has been the only team in contact with RS? That’s right baby!

  58. heLL paso says: Sep 11, 2009 3:17 PM

    darknyyt74 says:
    Not showing for a physical does not = failing a physical. I’m not a doctor but I would have to say in order to fail a physical you actually have to HAVE one. So no, not showing does not = a failed physical.
    But you know all about failing.
    ————————————————–
    Get off your high horse. In the NFL, you fail a drug test by:
    1) Taking the drug test and failing
    2) Not taking the drug test (it implies failure)
    I’m going to assume it’s the same type of deal with physical’s.

  59. darknyyt74 says: Sep 11, 2009 9:18 PM

    @ heLL paso
    “I’m going to assume it’s the same type of deal with physical’s.”
    Right, I am on a high horse because you are assuming. Come back when you have something real to say.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!