Seymour all done..?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    The Jets might like Seymour next year.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]The Jets might like Seymour next year.
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    Them and every other team in the league.

    Seymour is going to make BANK!



























    But I still like the move from the Pats' fiscal perspective.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from schwank. Show schwank's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    He's still got alot left.  Did you see that double team (Monday) when he wedged his left arm between the blockers and with one hand grabbed the runner and yanked him down like he was a rag doll.  Awesome. 

    First, it was a clear case of buy low sell high.  They got a #1 pick.  Second, the Pats, have 4 young DL's this year....two on the team (Brace and Pryor) and two on the practice squad (Titus Adams and Darryl Richard).  Brace, Pryor and Richard were drafted.  Adams looked good in preseason as a free agent pick up.  There is a belief that keeping a veteran, in this case Seymour, retards the development of the young players.  I'm sure they reasoned that they would lose him (Seymour) to free agency after the season.  So they opted to develop and play the young guys at the expense of Seymour. 

    This makes perfect sense to me.  It's about the the long term.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    Could the pats have won a superbowl with Seymour this year?  Can they without him?  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickDesper. Show RickDesper's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    Was anybody saying he was done?  You don't get a 1st round pick for somebody who is done. 

    I think everybody concedes that trading Seymour made the '09 Patriots a worse team. 

    But it might also be the case that he played with a lot more energy on Monday night because the trade woke him up a little bit.  He had gotten a bit too comfortable on the Pats.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]Six tackles and two sacks in his first game in the 4/3 D...  I'd say no, he still has plenty left in the tank.
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]
    To me this just proves how much he's been dogging it here over the past 2 years. Now that he's playing for a new contract, he's giving 100% effort once again. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Seymour all done..? : To me this just proves how much he's been dogging it here over the past 2 years. Now that he's playing for a new contract, he's giving 100% effort once again. 
    Posted by unclealfie[/QUOTE]

    No Way. We used him as a run stuffer. What you saw against SD was a man who doesn't know the defense and had one job. Rush the QB. In a true 4-3 Seymours #s will be better. Its hard to get great #s on the D-line in the Pats system! #s are not everything, Seymour was one of our best players over the last 8 years!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2.. Show Tcal2.'s posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    I keep looking but I don't see the name $eymuor on our Roster.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    The Seymour deal was never about him not being a solid DL. It wasn't whether or not he could still perform at a high level. It was all about Seymour cryassing the last time he got a contract and the PATS knew they wouldn't be able to afford what he would ask for, knowing that he isn't the type of player to take a pay cut, and still be able to sign Wilfork. The fact is, there are more good DL's than there are NT's, so keeping Wilfork is a higher priority. So what, Seymour turns in a good year and then he goes bye bye.....we get nothing. This way we are almost sure to get a top 15 pick in the 2011 draft.

    This was a very smart move by BB and Company. Too many people make decisions based upon emotions....this is a business peeps....you gotta make business decisions and BB did just that.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]The Seymour deal was never about him not being a solid DL. It wasn't whether or not he could still perform at a high level. It was all about Seymour cryassing the last time he got a contract and the PATS knew they wouldn't be able to afford what he would ask for, knowing that he isn't the type of player to take a pay cut, and still be able to sign Wilfork. The fact is, there are more good DL's than there are NT's, so keeping Wilfork is a higher priority. So what, Seymour turns in a good year and then he goes bye bye.....we get nothing. This way we are almost sure to get a top 15 pick in the 2011 draft. This was a very smart move by BB and Company. Too many people make decisions based upon emotions....this is a business peeps....you gotta make business decisions and BB did just that.
    Posted by 4Adam13[/QUOTE]

    There is absolutely no doubt in Pats fans minds that this was a great trade, but there is no reason to take shots at Seymour a guy who played his rear off for us and was a main part of 3 superbowl teams.I think the point of this post is that Seymour is still a dominate force and we will miss him. Even if we draft the next Barry Sanders with our 2011 selection we will miss Seymour a lot this year!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    Winning the Superbowl would have been much more likely with Seymour in a four man line...he had his way with the Chargers using his strength (bullrushing through double teams), smarts (adjusting to plays to pursue runs), and his athleticism;3 tackles, 3 assists, 2 sacks, played about 2/3 of the plays...nobody on the Patriots line can do what he can do.Wilfork had 2 assists no tackles or sacks; Green the same lack of production...now, was it a good long-term decision to trade him? sure, but it hurt the team's chances to capture the last Super Bowl of this decade, which while a short-term goal, is still, I would think, part of the "business" of being in the NFL, no?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]Winning the Superbowl would have been much more likely with Seymour in a four man line...he had his way with the Chargers using his strength (bullrushing through double teams), smarts (adjusting to plays to pursue runs), and his athleticism;3 tackles, 3 assists, 2 sacks, played about 2/3 of the plays...nobody on the Patriots line can do what he can do.Wilfork had 2 assists no tackles or sacks; Green the same lack of production...now, was it a good long-term decision to trade him? sure, but it hurt the team's chances to capture the last Super Bowl of this decade, which while a short-term goal, is still, I would think, part of the "business" of being in the NFL, no?
    Posted by futbal[/QUOTE]


    You can't compare RS's production to Wilfork's....totally different position and goal. Wilfork is there to take up space in between the tackles to allow the LB's to stuff the run. If Wilfork takes two OL's with him and allows the LB's to make tackles all day long, then he's done his job. Mayo's a very good player, but there are other reasons why the MLB on teams with very good NT's usually lead the team in tackles. He isn't there to make sacks, albeit are good when they come, but that isn't his focus. If he was in at the nose to be a pass rusher, why would you take him out on 3rd downs? The fact is, as good as RS was, you can't always think about the here and the now....you gotta look long term in this business....which is why RS is gone.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    And I agree with an earlier post that RS seemed to be a little complacent with the PATS. He acted like he didn't have much to prove anymore, and in some cases, he doesn't. He's a SB champion at a time when he was one of the best at his position. I loved him in a PATS uniform. But he definately has more to prove now being a Raider and coming into a contract year. He'll be more productive as a Raider than he would have been as a Patriot this year.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    4Adamd13,
    Absolutely agree with your last post, and also the prior one as well. But watching RS allowed to freelance in a four man line, really got to see what a hugely talented football player he still is. You got to admit, better than any of the 11 lining up for the Pats now.  Also, who's failure is it when the veteran gets complacent? Belechek did him a favor.
     
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]  Also, who's failure is it when the veteran gets complacent? Belechek did him a favor.  
    Posted by futbal[/QUOTE]

    Futbal...interesting. I think you could provide arguments to both sides about whose failure it is. Personally, I think it falls on the individual at the PRO level. I think for college and high school, that may be different. At the Pro level, there is very little a great coach can do to get through to a player who simply doesn't want to listen. Take Brandon Marshall, who obviously isn't in the same superstar category as RS is, but would be a #1 receiver on most teams. There isn't anything BB could do if he was coaching Marshall.....look at T.O. No coach has been able to manage him effectively. I think at this level, players are going to do what they want to do. A good coach can make a team more cohesive but the ultimate decision to take part in that is up to the individual. I think you can make an argument the other way however.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    Last season Seymour tied his career high for sacks, had a bunch of tackles and was probably our best defender... how was he complacent again? 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from One-If-By-Sea. Show One-If-By-Sea's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    In Response to Re: Seymour all done..?:
    [QUOTE]Last season Seymour tied his career high for sacks, had a bunch of tackles and was probably our best defender... how was he complacent again? 
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    I agree with Wozzy. How was he complacent? And can you explain to me how you detected and measured his complacency? I guess if a bunch of guys get together on an Internet forum and declare RS was complacent than it must be true?

    People love Wilfork like people love Big Papi, but RS was our best defender last year and would have been again this year.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from chrisakawoody. Show chrisakawoody's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    Seymour was awesome Monday.  I was so rooting for him.  I don't buy that he has been complacent. He has been playing injured ever since they used him on offensive goal line plays. 

    Still, he was oft injured and sat out twice for new contracts.  No arguing that a #1 pick in what is predicted to be a capped year for rookies is huge...if the pick pans out.  So, injuries, hold-outs, last year on contract - they all equal "he will go, so he must go when we can get value".  Love the player, but also love the future planning.

    And I don;t think it is a loss for Oakland.  The price was high, but they needed a winner to come in and set a new tone for the players, and he clearly did just that.  I expect the Raiders to have a decent season, finally.  Which may induce Seymour to sign with them.  Everybody wins.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: Seymour all done..?

    His numbers aren't anywhere near his numbers from his most productive seasons of 2003 and 2004. Ok, so lets throw out his 07 numbers since he missed 7 games. His tackle numbers decreased from 03-04 steadily for a DE, from 56 and 57 respectively, to 39, 46, and 40 from 05 to 08. These are hardly the numbers put up by other impact players during the same time period, such as Julius Peppers.

    Ok, so he had 8.0 sacks last year.....tell me 4 that were game changing? I'm not bashing RS.....I loved him a Patriot, but here are the facts:

    -He showed a propensity to be a bit of cry baby when he wanted his last contract extension
    -He is getting older and 4 of his last 5 years his stats show a production decrease
    -We wouldn't have been able to sign him after the season except for huge money that could be better spent elsewhere......i.e. Vince Wilfork
    -Getting a 2011 first rounder from a horrible team in Oakland pretty good compensation for a guy that wouldn't have been here next season.

    And for the record, I can easily argue that Wilfork or Mayo were our best defenders last season. People look at sacks and think that is the only indicator whether a defender is good or not. Sacks don't mean anything when they come at the end of a game or when your up by 20 points. Take Banta-Cain's sack at the end of the game last Monday....that sack meant something....it is worth a lot more than what the score sheet shows.

    RS is a great player....has been since he came into this league, but he's slowed down a lot and getting a first rounder for him is a great deal. He'll have a better season Oak.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share