Skip to content

Report: Seymour close to reporting to Raiders

As it turns out, that “five-day letter” might have provided defensive lineman Richard Seymour with the splash of cold water that allowed him to process the anger and disappointment that arose after he was traded to the Raiders.

According to Adam Schefter of ESPN, the Raiders and Seymour are “in the final stages” of planning his arrival in Oakland.

He is expected to fly to California as early as Saturday, and he could play in Monday night’s game against the Chargers.

It leaves little time for Seymour, a career 3-4 defensive lineman, to become comfortable in his role within Oakland’s 4-3 front.

But the move will preserve Seymour’s ability to earn $3.685 million in base salary this season, and his shot at becoming an unrestricted free agent in what likely will be the uncapped year of 2010.

If the Raiders don’t apply the franchise tag to Seymour.

Permalink 27 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: New England Patriots, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
27 Responses to “Report: Seymour close to reporting to Raiders”
  1. Denniscoy420 says: Sep 12, 2009 12:57 AM

    Glad to see u leave the AFC east
    lets go buffalo

  2. Dan Mateus says: Sep 12, 2009 1:10 AM

    Richard Seymour will do his time in Oakland for one year and be out of there as soon as their last game in week 17 is over.
    Dumb ass Al gave New England a future number 1 draft pick for one year of going through the motions from that crybaby punk Seymour.
    That future number 1 pick the Patriots will get will probalbly be a 10 year player.
    Good job helping the Pats again Al.
    The NFL really needs to step in and save that franchise from a senile mad man.
    Suck on that Raider nation!

  3. rcaron336 says: Sep 12, 2009 1:15 AM

    Mike Riess reports that the union is filing a grievance on behalf of Seymour
    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2009/09/12/union_files_grievance_for_seymour/

  4. blancanieve says: Sep 12, 2009 1:17 AM

    Thats the right thing to do play and you will get your money.

  5. DMACGETLOOSE says: Sep 12, 2009 1:18 AM

    thank God

  6. Kiss Bills Rings says: Sep 12, 2009 1:27 AM

    Raiders finally pushed the right button….Seymour is all about the MONEY…..I hope he plays against the Chargers for them!!!

  7. BP says: Sep 12, 2009 1:28 AM

    Like I said, no way Richie Rich is going to pass up money. He just likes being a pain in the ass.

  8. alexc says: Sep 12, 2009 1:39 AM

    If a guy is all about the money, why on earth would he go through the motions in a contract year.
    Dumb comment Dan.
    Also, since when are 1st rounders automatically great? Most anyone would trade Heyward-Bey, Crabtree, Michael Huff, Matt Leinart, Vernon Gholston, Vernon Davis, Roy Williams, AJ Hawk, and a plethora of other high to mid 1st rounders…straight up for a 29-year old Seymour.
    The Raiders need linemen, they have young talent to win some games in a weak AFC West right now. Once in a while, when a talent fits a need, you take the certainty over the future draft pick.
    Might cost about the same too.

  9. AutumnWind999 says: Sep 12, 2009 1:57 AM

    The silence from the haters should be deafening.
    Will it? Doubtful. They’ll probably try the lame, lame, lame argument that the Raiders paid too much for an “aging” (he’s 29) defensive lineman.
    Rubbish.
    Fact #1: 2008 NFL DE sack leaders (with age in parenthesis)
    1. John Abraham (31) ATL 16.5
    2. Jared Allen (27) MIN 14.5
    Julius Peppers (29) CAR 14.5
    4. Mario Williams (24) HOU 12.0
    Justin Tuck (26) NYG 12.0
    6. Robert Mathis (28) IND 11.5
    7. Dwight Freeney (29) IND 10.5
    8. Darren Howard (32) PHI 10.0
    9. Trent Cole (26) PHI 9.0
    10. Mathias Kiwanuka (26) NYG 8.5
    12. RICHARD SEYMOUR (29) OAK 8.0
    GREG ELLIS (34) OAK 8.0
    Shaun Ellis (32) NYJ 8.0
    15. Jacob Ford (26) TEN 7.0
    Justin Smith (29) SF 7.0
    FACT #2: Two of the top 3 DE sack leaders from 2008 are the same age or older than Seymour.
    FACT #3: Seymour plays the run as well as or better than any DE on this list
    FACT #4: Sacks are exponentially harder to come by for 3-4 DEs than 4-3 DEs. Why do you suppose every single DE on the list above Seymour plays in a 4-3?
    FACT #5: Sorry. The Raiders got the better end of this trade. Not a bad move by the Pats since they won’t be able to sign all their d-lineman who have new contracts coming up after the season, but the Raiders clearly, clearly got the better value.
    Consider this: A draft pick pushed back a year is basically valued as being worth a round lower than one offered in the current year. So the Raiders’ 2011 1st round pick carries a 2010 2nd-round value. This value has been established by numerous trades in recent history.
    So the Raiders dealt (adjusted for the diminished value of the 2011 pick for a more accurate comparison):
    — Derrick Burgess (31, 3 sacks in 2008 as a 4-3 DE, injury prone) and a 2nd-round pick
    for
    — Richard Seymour (29, team-leading 8 sacks in 2008 as a 3-4 DE), 3rd and 5th round picks.
    Are you kidding me. The people saying the Raiders botch these trades with the Pats are making fools of themselves.

  10. anthony says: Sep 12, 2009 2:17 AM

    @Dan
    U sound like true Raider Hater, don’t be mad the Raiders are on their way to a good season.
    good job Al, we gave his punk ass a letter from hell and it woke his ass up.
    Besides California is way better than Boston any day.
    Go Raiders!

  11. Ryan35 says: Sep 12, 2009 3:38 AM

    Slow down guys you are reading this report from florio’s site. I think we really need to wait and see, I mean really think about the creditability of the source.

  12. Joepup says: Sep 12, 2009 4:30 AM

    Report: Seymour close to reporting to Raiders
    Posted by Mike Florio on September 12, 2009 12:45 AM ET
    As it turns out, that “five-day letter” might have provided defensive lineman Richard Seymour with the splash of cold water that allowed him to process the anger and disappointment that arose after he was traded to the Raiders.
    According to Adam Schefter of ESPN, the Raiders and Seymour are “in the final stages” of planning his arrival in Oakland.
    He is expected to fly to California as early as Saturday, and he could play in Monday night’s game against the Chargers.
    It leaves little time for Seymour, a career 3-4 defensive lineman, to become comfortable in his role within Oakland’s 4-3 front.
    But the move will preserve Seymour’s ability to earn $3.685 million in base salary this season, and his shot at becoming an unrestricted free agent in what likely will be the uncapped year of 2010.
    If the Raiders don’t apply the franchise tag to Seymour.
    Permalink 7 Comments Latest stories in: Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives – Rumors, New England Patriots, Oakland Raiders, Top Stories, Trades
    Previous: Mangini ducks blame for injury report problems in New YorkNext: Our very first network radio show launches Sunday7 Responses to “Report: Seymour close to reporting to Raiders”
    Denniscoy420 says:
    September 12, 2009 12:57 AM
    Glad to see u leave the AFC east
    lets go buffalo
    Dan Mateus says:
    September 12, 2009 1:10 AM
    Richard Seymour will do his time in Oakland for one year and be out of there as soon as their last game in week 17 is over.
    Dumb ass Al gave New England a future number 1 draft pick for one year of going through the motions from that crybaby punk Seymour.
    That future number 1 pick the Patriots will get will probalbly be a 10 year player.
    Good job helping the Pats again Al.
    The NFL really needs to step in and save that franchise from a senile mad man.
    Suck on that Raider nation!
    ————————————————————————————–
    Ever hear of the franchise tag? Learn the rules dummy.
    And yes, its being reported that Seymour has no guarantee of avoiding the franchise tag at the end of the season. So its definitely NOT a 1 year rental.
    Funny how everyone has been raggin on Al Davis, but in the end, he got what he wanted. And anyone that knows football, knows Seymour has plenty left in his tank to last a few years. It was a good deal for both sides.

  13. 19-0 says: Sep 12, 2009 6:22 AM

    Al, Love ya Baby! You might be a nut job, but at least you are trying to do what you think is right for raider nation. I don’t think Seymour is going to be the silver bullet that turns the team around and make you play-off contenders, but you have something to build on. Well at least until you start negotiating a new contract with him. Oh yeah, thanks for Burgess who is younger and has more upside than Seymour in the 4-3, and the 2011 1st rounder. I was not aware the Pats had an AAA affiliate on the left coast, but we do appreciate all your help. Oh, by the way in case you did not notice, Moss is not all that bad either. Love you Al!

  14. FireJerryJones says: Sep 12, 2009 7:34 AM

    It’s always been about the money.
    He held out twice, and finally signed a four year deal for $30 Million in 2006. Looks like he thought that would work again here.
    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2406619

  15. brasho says: Sep 12, 2009 8:14 AM

    Isn’t Nnamdi the Raiders franchise player or did they sign him to an extension? As good as Seymour is, if NA isn’t signed long-term then my money is on him to be the Raiders franchise player, not a 3-4 DE playing out of position as a 4-3 DT that will be 31 and may really hate being a Raider (which may negatively affect his play).

  16. Richm2256 says: Sep 12, 2009 8:36 AM

    Would love to be a fly on that locker room wall whenDickie comes strolling in! Can’t wait to hear the bullsh–t, er, “spin”, that he tries to put over his new teamates!
    My guess is that he tries to put a “Curt Flood” I did-this-for-all-of-you-guys angle to this.
    Curt Flood was looking to challenge what he considered Major League slavery. Richard Seymour just thought he was better than everyone else and rules don’t apply to him (or, more likely, he thought he could pressure Oakland into a fat contract extension……. no dice!)

  17. pfinfl says: Sep 12, 2009 9:20 AM

    It leaves little time for Seymour, a career 3-4 defensive lineman, to become comfortable in his role within Oakland’s 4-3 front.
    The Pats played a 4-3 in his rookie year and won a SB

  18. bwisnasky says: Sep 12, 2009 9:37 AM

    “Oh yeah, thanks for Burgess who is younger and has more upside than Seymour in the 4-3, and the 2011 1st rounder. ”
    Ummmm that would be a no.. Burgess is 31.. Seymour just turns 30 next month. Burgess hasn’t had a healthy year in 3 years…. Seymour has knee problems, but what DE doesn’t in this league?
    “Isn’t Nnamdi the Raiders franchise player or did they sign him to an extension? As good as Seymour is, if NA isn’t signed long-term then my money is on him to be the Raiders franchise player”
    Ummm.. they did sign him to an extension.. pay attention in the offseason… he and Lechler both decided to come back with their probowl talent to the team that “nobody wants to play for”

  19. jliskiew says: Sep 12, 2009 9:50 AM

    While the loyalty of Raiders fans commenting here is nothing short of commendable, I feel that some of you are a bit blinded by the mystique and historical success of Al Davis.
    Not only is 29 aging for a defensive lineman (as some have tried to argue otherwise), but Seymour has a history of injuries that have plagued him the last 2-3 years.
    And while first round picks are certainly not guaranteed, that is no excuse to just trade one away for a 1-2 year rental past the prime of his career.
    Also, let’s be honest here – While Seymour will certainly improve the Raiders if he can stay healthy, is he “the final piece” of the puzzle? And can he at this point in his career make the transition from 5-technique end who is allowed to take plays off and play gap control, to a 3-technique DT that has the consistent motor and burst to penetrate into the backfield?
    Look at it this way – the 2011 Raiders first round pick is going to be a 2 year player… Would two years be considered a successful career for Darius Heyward-Bey? How about Michael Crabtree, or Brian Orakpo, or even Mark Sanchez?
    I’m all for loyalty, especially seeing I am a lifelong suffering Lions fan. But there are two franchises that as of this point in time, I am relieved are not my own, even with the ridiculous struggles that have happened in Detroit; Cincinnati, and Oakland.
    Anyone who feels they can legitimately stand behind the recent decisions of Al Davis is simply in denial.
    And stop with the whole “Raider Hater” thing, it sounds like something Ahmadinejad would preach to his Iranian followers… While some of you may welcome this idea, there is no such thing or use for a “Raider Jihad.”

  20. YHK says: Sep 12, 2009 10:00 AM

    # brasho says: September 12, 2009 8:14 AM
    Isn’t Nnamdi the Raiders franchise player or did they sign him to an extension? As good as Seymour is, if NA isn’t signed long-term then my money is on him to be the Raiders franchise player, not a 3-4 DE playing out of position as a 4-3 DT that will be 31 and may really hate being a Raider (which may negatively affect his play).
    ——————————————————
    NA is signed to a long term deal. He’s the highest paid cornerback in the NFL.

  21. Patsfan1776 says: Sep 12, 2009 10:29 AM

    Too little too late

  22. SnakefortheHOF says: Sep 12, 2009 10:33 AM

    A questionable deal at best. Best, mind you, which, for those that don’t understand the concept of inference, simply means this is another of those “the greatness that is the Raiders” plays which his royal highness, wallowing in his senility, inflicts upon the Nation’s faithful legions (a numeric stretch of ever increasing proportions).
    A little background for perspective you defenders of the faith…. Season ticket holder starting in ’75. Their ‘departure’ to LA was harder on me than my first divorce. Got a multi-seat PSL as soon as they became available. Lasted until 2008 when the garbage quality product on-the-field became too much to suffer through again. AGAIN!!…. as in year after year after year after year after year.
    Face it guys, Al was indeed great and it can be accurately stated bordered on genius at one time. As has also been stated for centuries, genius and madness are on opposite sides of a very thin line. Based on recent events, that line appears to have been crossed.

  23. JSpicoli says: Sep 12, 2009 11:26 AM

    “And stop with the whole “Raider Hater” thing, it sounds like something Ahmadinejad would preach to his Iranian followers…”
    Dude, if you don’t think there is a skew to our (Raiders) coverage, you are ignorant and, part of the problem. Get in line to eat some nasty ass crow.

  24. SF Saints Fan says: Sep 12, 2009 1:11 PM

    I see three real possibilities here:
    1) Seymour plays for the Raiders, but is not motivated and does not have a good year. Probable outcome, Raiders apply the franchise tag out of pure spite.
    2) Seymour plays for the Raiders and is a BEAST and has a Pro Bowl year. Probable outcome, Raiders apply the franchise tag because poor Richard wanted too much money.
    3) Seymour plays for the Raiders, but plays hurt or is hurt for most of the year. Probable outcome, Raiders apply the franchise tag in order to see if the real Richard Seymour shows up in 2010.
    So Richard, get used to the Silver and Black, and don’t hold your breath for that big fat payday from the Raiders or anyone else. You will be playing for the Raiders in 2010 under the franchise tag. Cry me a river……….
    The big question Florio, is how much will the franchise tag cost the Raiders next year for Seymour?

  25. ernie cohen says: Sep 12, 2009 2:20 PM

    Goodell should step in and stop this. Nobody cares whether this deal is good for either of these teams. (In theory, it’s a win-win, like every deal is.) The point is that it’s bad for everybody else. What fun is it to root against Al Davis when every loss (next year) means a higher pick for NE?

  26. Mike Loves The UFL says: Sep 12, 2009 3:07 PM

    The death of the Oakland Raiders )9-14-09

  27. Backinthesaddle says: Sep 12, 2009 4:56 PM

    “AutunmWind999″
    What a completely ridiculous diatribe of foolish gymnastics to try and justify a trade on behalf of your homer team.
    The business of diminished round value is true in most cases…..however…..2011 will likely be the first year of the rookie salary cap era. THAT my friend will make the pick exponentially more valuable. And don’t tell me the rookie salary cap won’t happen. Everybody wants it to happen….owners AND players. The key is that the vets see the kids who have never played a down coming in and getting ludicrous money while they still have to fight for far less. They want those rookie dollars. The rookie cap will happen. And considering that the Raiders are likely to still be a poor team, the pick will be top 10 or higher.
    Meanwhile, the Raiders got a great defensive lineman…for 1 year. They can sign him to a long term….very expensive….contract or franchise him next year. Seymour wants unrestricted free agency and he’ll want out of Oakland too. The only way they’ll be able to keep him (without continuously franchising him), is if they give him a massive contract. Seymour won’t sign unless the contract is for ridiculous money.
    Also, Mike Florio posted that:
    It leaves little time for Seymour, a career 3-4 defensive lineman, to become comfortable in his role within Oaklands 4-3 front.”
    He’ll transition seamlessly. The Pats BASE defense was/is 3-4 but they have always and regularly switched up and played different formations. They regularly play various fronts depending on the opponent and the situation. Seymour can play either right tackle or right end in 4 man line. I’m certain he could play on the left side too without much problem.
    I think the greater question of when he’ll become comfortable has more to do with learning his linemates tendencies and talents.
    Oakland got themselves an excellent lineman. He will improve their team….no doubt. The Pats made another very smart business move that’s just another step in a continuously ongoing restocking process.

Leave a Reply

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