1. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:39 AM EDT

    Are you serious, we are letting Seymour go to Oakland. They have nothing we want. Better be at least a first round pick.
     

  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ihatefishing. Show ihatefishing's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:43 AM EDT

    yeah, what the hell is going on. We better be getting all there draft picks next year and darren mcfadden. At least we are probably going to re sign wilfork now, but still. . .
     

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:46 AM EDT

    I said yesterday once the pats get to the 53 man limit,that we would see the trades,and the crazy moves.what an insult to seymour,sending him to the raiders,i do question this move.
     

  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbeaulieu07. Show mbeaulieu07's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:46 AM EDT

    In Response to Seymour to Raiders:

    Are you serious, we are letting Seymour go to Oakland. They have nothing we want. Better be at least a first round pick.
    Posted by patriots44


    Curious to see what they'll get in return.  He was a free agent after the year, it now appears he wasn't in the long term plans, so this should maximize a return for him.  They'll need to free up money to keep Wilfork/Mankins long term as both are free agents at the end of this year.

     

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:46 AM EDT

    2011 First round pick. That's what I'm hearing. THis is probably not good, but I guess BB knows what he's doing. You'll be missed Seymour.
     

  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:48 AM EDT

    thats two years from now.it dosent help them now.
     

  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from mountainmonkey. Show mountainmonkey's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:49 AM EDT

    source please..only those in this galaxy please....
     

  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from viewer222. Show viewer222's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:49 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Seymour to Raiders : Curious to see what they'll get in return.  He was a free agent after the year, it now appears he wasn't in the long term plans, so this should maximize a return for him.  They'll need to free up money to keep Wilfork/Mankins long term as both are free agents at the end of this year.
    Posted by mbeaulieu07
    The pats traded Seymour for Oakland's 2011 1st round draft pick

     

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:49 AM EDT

    They got the Raiders first pick in 2011-it's a steal for the Pats and frees up cap space to re-sign Wilfork. They weren't going to bring Seymour back anyway, and the Raiders will almost definitely pick in the top 5 in 2011. Great trade in my mind.
     

  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ihatefishing. Show ihatefishing's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:50 AM EDT

    I know. It'll probably be a top ten at least, but still thats awhile off and I thought we all agreed that the top 10 picks were not worth it.
     

  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:50 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    source please..only those in this galaxy please....
    Posted by mountainmonkey



    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss
    _pieces/2009/09/patriots_confir_1.html
     

  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ihatefishing. Show ihatefishing's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:51 AM EDT

    Source is ESPN and WEEI
     

  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:51 AM EDT

    the pats save 3.3 million on there cap from seymour.
     

  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbeaulieu07. Show mbeaulieu07's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:52 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    They got the Raiders first pick in 2011-it's a steal for the Pats and frees up cap space to re-sign Wilfork. They weren't going to bring Seymour back anyway, and the Raiders will almost definitely pick in the top 5 in 2011. Great trade in my mind.
    Posted by rahraw


    I second your opinion. 
     

  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:55 AM EDT

    not if they keep improving there roster,and two years from now they could be putting a winning season together.
     

  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from steve1581. Show steve1581's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:56 AM EDT

    Better Re-sign wilfork ASAP

    Stay calm

    in bill we trust





    dang  Im gonna miss seymour
     

  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from steve1581. Show steve1581's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:57 AM EDT

    wish we got Nmandi instead
     

  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hock8889. Show hock8889's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:58 AM EDT

    yup...not a bad move..he was getting older...now the thing to ask yourself...how many superbowl rings on the team now?  Tom's 3 and Wilfork's 3?  so 6?

    If Seymour is getting on in age...should we be concerned with Brady?
    Would Cassell been a better long term choice at this point? considering knee and age?  now his shoulder is of concern?  It's heresy...but i'm sure it's been considered.
     

  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ihatefishing. Show ihatefishing's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:58 AM EDT

    I don't think we have to worry about the radiers improving that much. look at their first draft pick this year.
     

  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from steve1581. Show steve1581's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:58 AM EDT

    Guess we know why Brace was focusing on learning the 5 technique.....
     

  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from patriots44. Show patriots44's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:59 AM EDT

    What happens to all the Leadership on Defense. Vrabel, Harrison, Bruschi, Now Seymour. That is alot turnover for any team to overcome. Sign Wilfork and Mankins soon. Uncapped year in 2010 looks likely, the reason BB wants the pick in 2011. Pats must really like Brace and Pryor. Tough to handle now,but so was TY Law and Lawyer Milloy when it happened along with Bledsoe. Best of luck to Seymour, he deserves better than Oakland.In Bill We Trust!
     

  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 10:59 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Seymour to Raiders : Curious to see what they'll get in return.  He was a free agent after the year, it now appears he wasn't in the long term plans, so this should maximize a return for him.  They'll need to free up money to keep Wilfork/Mankins long term as both are free agents at the end of this year.
    Posted by mbeaulieu07

    Excellent move by the pats. Sey was overpaid and out of here next year anyhow. Much better to get something for him now. This move was made possible only by the depth of the D-line.
    Maybe the plan is to move this pick right now for a probowl quality OLB. 
     

  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from One-If-By-Sea. Show One-If-By-Sea's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 11:00 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    I know. It'll probably be a top ten at least, but still thats awhile off and I thought we all agreed that the top 10 picks were not worth it.
    Posted by ihatefishing


    If it is a top 5 or top 10 pick, BB will trade down and amass more picks so Seymour could turn into 3 or 4 picks in the first and second round. I am shocked - really shocked. In the Spring of 2011 draft everyone will love this trade, but right now it is a bit shocking.
     

  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from rahraw. Show rahraw's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 11:01 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    I know. It'll probably be a top ten at least, but still thats awhile off and I thought we all agreed that the top 10 picks were not worth it.
    Posted by ihatefishing


    It's a year and a half away, but think about this trade from the Raiders perspective. They are going to stink with or without Seymour and Seymour is a free agent at the end of the year, so they traded what will be a very high pick for one year of a player on the wrong side of 30. Bizarre. With regard to top ten picks, I agree that you have to overpay the players, but we all know that BB will trade back and stockpile more picks, barring a LT type player being available where the Raiders pick.
     

  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Blomie. Show Blomie's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    posted at 9/6/2009 11:01 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    They got the Raiders first pick in 2011-it's a steal for the Pats and frees up cap space to re-sign Wilfork. They weren't going to bring Seymour back anyway, and the Raiders will almost definitely pick in the top 5 in 2011. Great trade in my mind.
    Posted by rahraw


    I thought the conventional wisdome is that BB does not want  to get those top 5 first round draft picks. Too expensive and unproven.