Seymour to Raiders

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    Long term there is not doubt in my mind this is a great long term move.



     . . .  but what about the long term?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheFantasyBaron. Show TheFantasyBaron's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    Hi,

    Seymour is now an injury liability. He makes a lot of money for a guy who needs to have Sampson strength to play his position 100% but rarely does because of injury. We're better with him than without him but lets face it he's not the playmaker he was in the good ole days. We got a first round pick for him?! Randy Moss wasn't a first round pick. He's probably on the free-fall downside of his career and BB knows it and it was time to get rid of a guy who was looking for a huge payday. They've resigned old players in the past but only if they're worth it and apparently he wanted more than he was worth to the Pats. Plain and simple the Pats made an extremely difficult move that opens them up for a ton of criticism. Kudos to them for having the stones to do this.  To all the fans who thought we need him to win a championship I hope you're wrong.  In BB we trust. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : I think everyone knows this is a good long term move. Any trade with a player that is north of 30 that brings a first round pick is a good move. Long term there is not doubt in my mind this is a great long term move. But I wanted to go 19-0 this year. I wanted another ring this year. Randy Moss is not getting younger, Tom Brady is not getting younger. You can talk about a 1st round QB stud, but the 1st round studs are more busts than studs. Maybe I am selfish, maybe I am foolish, maybe I am a troll, but I wanted to go 19-0, beat the Giants in the Super Bowl and cement the Pats in football history forever. No matter what you say about the long term, a Super Bowl this year is now harder. Put any spin you like on the trade, you can like it, love it or hate it, but winning the Super Bowl in 2010 just got harder.
    Posted by One-If-By-Sea


    didn't so much care one way or another if they went undefeated, anther SB ring - regardless of how it's obtained - is more important.  I would agree that the time window is closing - and has been since 2007.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from flasox. Show flasox's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : The ending to that article is correct: "This relates to the Branch example. Sure, it's nice to have a full complement of draft picks. But if you cost yourself championship opportunities now, by trading one of the few impact defensive players you have left, and that opportunity has dwindled by the time you get to use those picks, then what good is that? The Patriots will contend as long as Belichick's there, but they're contending at the highest level now, and there's a chance they won't be then." This is a gamble, short-term vs. long-term. I was happy with gambling on Bledsoe leaving, on Tebucky Jones leaving, but not so much on Deion leaving. I did not like it when Law or Samuel left. I do not like it with Seymour leaving. I understand Seymour was only for 1 more year, so maybe it is OK. But this one is tough to swallow. Great player - he will be missed more than we realize.
    Posted by One-If-By-Sea
    Remains to be seen. He sure wasn't important when we were in the Superbowl against the Giants when he couldn't finish the sack on Manning.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : Seymour was our best defensive player last year while playing in 15 games. He is 29. I completely understand this move as building for the future. BB has maximized value now by landing a 1st rd pick. My problem is that defense has been the reason we dont have 5 superbowls since 2001 and this move in no way shape or form helps our defense this year. Great move for future but Brady's time is now!
    Posted by TrueChamp


    Sorry to disagree, but first Tom Brady is 31, and a young 31 despite last years  injury. Yes this Brady's time is now, but at 31 his time could very well still be 5-6 years from now. Brady has a fire in him to compete, so unless his physical abilities suddenly abandon him, I truly don't see him retiring any time soon, unless injury forces him too.  

    Hetchinspete
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from wwsf4ever. Show wwsf4ever's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    People always complained that the defense was old and slow. Can't say that anymore.
    Posted by ihatefishing


    Well all I have to say is that this is the ERA of CHANGE.. Maybe BB is going Socialist too- he wants to SPREAD THE WEALTH....

    Seriously though... I remember hearing for the last several ears that the reason the Pats def. was able to hold it's own was that Sey took two linemen to handle....  I kept hearing that we do not hear his name called often but if you look he basically would absorb one side of the OL from the opporition pluggin the gaps and was unable to be pushed out of the hole..... 

    Well "IF" that was true then this trade will essentially give the offense of the other team one additional player each play.  I find it hard to believe that Brace/Pryor will take two people on every play.....  Therefore if Sey was actually doing that this could cause a terrible problem for the LB's who will now have guards in their faces more regularly.

    However all that being said- BB has made these veteran moves before... and been successful, I just hope that this season he did not make a few too many....

    ANYONE seen Burgess lately?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from FishTaco64. Show FishTaco64's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : didn't so much care one way or another if they went undefeated, anther SB ring - regardless of how it's obtained - is more important.  I would agree that the time window is closing - and has been since 2007.
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    Why though? They still have the best QB in the game and the best Head coach in the game, that alone makes them contenders year in and year out. Add an explosive offensive supporting cast and a defense that is rapidly getting younger and why would the window be closing?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : didn't so much care one way or another if they went undefeated, anther SB ring - regardless of how it's obtained - is more important.  I would agree that the time window is closing - and has been since 2007.
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    The time window for a team like the Patriots with a top quality front office, and a great coaching staff never closes. Teams to stay competitive over a long period, like the Raiders who were in the playoffs for about twenty consecutive years were always in a rebuilding mode in some form every year just as the Celtics were for the thirteen years Bill Russel played.

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : Well said Tex I distinctly remember 2 pass interference calls 1 on 3rd and long and 1 on 4rth down that were prayer passes which put indy on the 1 yard line. Phill Simms said"thats was face guarding on ellis hobbs" then after the commercial break Simms apoligized saying"face guarding was a rule that was taking out of the league 6 years ago nevermind I don't know what the refs were looking at on that play" Anyway I love Jarvis Green but if he was capable of every down play then he would play every down. Losing Seymour helps us in the future but hurts us this year there is no way around it.
    Posted by TrueChamp


    Yeah!!!  The pats never lose!!!  They only get jobbed!!!  Yeah!!!!  Yell
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    The window isn't closing in any way, shape or form. The Pats are easily the class of their division and, as constructed, can be considered a favorite in the playoffs.

    We've seen players come and go.

    People around here say "In Bill We Trust," but I don't really like that. I think the team concept comes all the way down from the owners . . .  and those of us who cut our teeth on the Sullivans -- may God bless their drunken heads -- have been spoiled by an owner who, although a bit cutthroat in his own right, at least appears to have the fans' interests at least in the same county as his own bank account, and has proven that he knows how to build an organization that is -- hate all you want -- the envy of the rest of the NFL.

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    Ask yourself this quetion was Adalius thomas better with the ravens...? I think he was he was a FS in there nickle package he was allowed to roam all over the field and Suggs would draw all the extra block assignments to help Adalius penetrate the OL. What I am saying is that I preferred a defense that allowed players with strength to exploit the weakest part of the defense so putting derek burgess in the right position to exploit single coverage is smart... Having Sanders and Merriwheather play cover two helps us a lot... Where will we be weak... underneath will be the most vulnerable place on this defense but that is better than last year when we were getting beat deep. I do not think we are going to have trouble with this anyways becasue Guyton and Mayo will make a strong set of LBs in coverage... specially seeing how Guyton runs a 4.3 40 yard dash.

    The last ten years who has had the best defense...?

    Tampa
    Chicago
    Ravens
    Vikings
    Titans

    They all run tampa 2 style 4:3 deffenses..., the only defense stronger in the past 8 years has been the steelers and the Patriots and they were NEVER as good as the Titans of 08 or ther Bears in 05 etc....    

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

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    Man, we're in trouble now...let's see...our D-line is now Warren, Brace,Wilfork, and Burgress with Thomas, Mayo, Guyton, Woods or Banta Cain as LB's....Mike Wright and Pryor rotating in. Burgress' best years were as a three point edge rusher in a 4-3. Hmmm...shoudn't be able to run much against that wall and Thomas, Burgress and Banta Cain can slant and gap rush pretty darn well...throw in an occasional Mayo or Merriweather blitz package....hmmmm...just maybe we ain't the ones in trouble after all...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : Yeah!!!  The pats never lose!!!  They only get jobbed!!!  Yeah!!!! 
    Posted by underdogg


    Underwear, We lost in Denver 2005, We lost in the superbowl against the Giants 2007, We lost against the colts last year (barely) in Indy, but the greatest comeback in AFC championship history was not due to Peyton Manning. It was due to the 2 worst pass interference calls most people have ever seen in there lives. Deep down you know it and you remember it. Its the only big game Peyton manning has ever won in his entire career. Why do you think that is?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : Sorry to disagree, but first Tom Brady is 31, and a young 31 despite last years  injury. Yes this Brady's time is now, but at 31 his time could very well still be 5-6 years from now. Brady has a fire in him to compete, so unless his physical abilities suddenly abandon him, I truly don't see him retiring any time soon, unless injury forces him too.    Hetchinspete
    Posted by Hetchinspete


    The greatest Qb in the league is not 31 he is 32. I agree a young 32 with the best work ethic and smartest play in the league. The fact is even if he plays 8 more years he is not 24. the window is getting smaller to take advantage of in my opinion the best QB to ever play the game. We probably over achieved in 2006 given that Reche (wide eyed) caldwell was our #1 wr. 2007 was a major missed opportunity then the unthinkable happened last year. With all that said we still need a great defense in this league and Seymour was a vital part of the equation this year. Maybe I am wrong and BB has a guy he thinks could be better and I hope so. I just worry that a 1st rd pick 2 years from now does little to help us win in 2009 and probably 2010


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from bchan89. Show bchan89's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders:
    In Response to Re: Seymour to Raiders : Yeah!!!  The pats never lose!!!  They only get jobbed!!!  Yeah!!!! 
    Posted by underdogg



    yeah and the Colts don't play by the rules! they have the competition committee change the rules each year to fit the Colts playing style.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dahook20. Show dahook20's posts

    Re: Seymour to Raiders

    Here is a unique perspective on the trade.
    http://dereksports.blogspot.com/
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share