Raiders officially tag DE Seymour
Widely expected, the Oakland Raiders have today officially placed the franchise tag on defensive end Richard Seymour.
Email
PrintComments
God help us all
We will need it once the bill of this move comes down the pipe. Its just way too much money that can be spent elsewhere and more wisely.
I do hope this is not a sign of the coming season.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 24, 2010 12:03 PM PST reply actions
I knew this was only a matter of time. Lyle, the flipside would've meant us forking out twice that
for a guy who never played a second in the NFL. Al will work some miracles by cutting some huge salaries elsewhere.
I had no doubt in my mind whatsoever that Richard would find himself where he does this very second; it’s true it’s a big pay hit, and you could make a strong argument against his deserving all that jack, but the only guy who could consistently draw double teams on this defense, and a necessary lift in the locker room by a guy who owns rings is a guy you want to lock in however you have to.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
This move was inevitable
I do hope something is worked out though so either he gets traded for multiple draft picks or signs a reasonable extension. Otherwise the overall investment won’t be worth it.
No more raining on Bruins Nation's rainy parade, they took their ball and went home.
That I agree with
A one time (OMG) hit of $12 mill for one year is far too great of a price. He may be good BUT he is not great, he is not a game changer and he does not have that much of an impact on the field. I cannot agree with this move and what other huge salary can we slice off the roster? I can think of 2 really (Kelly and Langston Walker) maybe a 3rd but most of the guys on the roster we can cut without a hit to the cap (listen up JaFatass) are performers and deserve their pay. Then even if we cut these guys who do we sign to fill the role? More of the same bullshit this year I fear.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 24, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
to make this worth it
If Al had to cut some of the dead weight contracts that are bogging down the Raiders. I think it is time for these busts to hit the road. It is time to send Walker out, he may be a good player but he doesnt see the field and Cable refused to play him. There are a lot of contracts like that on the team. i for one am strongly in favor of cutting Russel. He does not have what it takes to be a QB in this league.
Im about even when it comes to Seymore. I think that if they sign him it s a good thing and if they could franchise him and trade him it could be a good thing.
I am really hoping that this is a good offseason for the Raiders.
I spent the last year in Iraq and the only good thing that happened for me is my roomie was a Rams fan, at least the Raiders weren’t as bad as they were. Well that and my superior was a Steelers fan, I tell you what, it was worth every last pushup to celebrate that victory! though it is hard to chant steelers suck while doing pushups, but still worth it.
+1
“it is hard to chant steelers suck while doing pushups, but still worth it.”
Awesome!
No more raining on Bruins Nation's rainy parade, they took their ball and went home.
I'll fight for that any day.
My freedom to speak about how bad your team sucks, even if it means going to Iraq.
Thank you for your service, Scrivley
We are deeply indebted to you and your comrades, for those freedoms, and do not take it for granted for a second.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Had to be done
hopefully the Raiders and Seymour can work out an extension.
If they hadn’t made sure Seymour was returning next season the trade for him would have been a disaster as you can’t give up a 1st round pick for 1 season of play.
Let’s just hope with a full off-season and training camp that Seymour adjusts fully to the Raiders system and has a better year in 2010.
Not sure yet
I wanna see BIG numbers from him this year. Julius Peppers didnt even get this kind of money and that guy may be the best defensive player in the NFL
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
Exactly
But NOOOOOOOOOOO people want to keep keep him even if it costs us nearly 10% of our cap space. This is such a silly argument. He cannot justify this kind of pay out. Now he knows he has us over the barrel and can squeeze us for crazy money even in an extension.
AND YES WE CAN LET HIM GO AFTER ONE SEASON FOR A 1ST ROUNDER SIRBED. Why not? because? just because? If it didnt workout and he didnt perform then it was just a bad trade and now we commit some crazy money to him? He doesnt want to be here I am certain of that, just look at how he sandbagged coming here in the trade.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 24, 2010 2:03 PM PST up reply actions
He's said many times that he'd like to stay
and since there isn’t going to be a cap this year how does his salary this season hurt the team?
Did he have a great year last season? No he didn’t but he’s had some great seasons in the past and at age 31 he should still have 3-4 more good seasons.
Ok
So why dont we just open the bank for “good players” and pay them all 10% above the league top paid player at that position.
Futile argument. Good should not get you that kind of cash.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 24, 2010 2:20 PM PST up reply actions
Tell me
Who here honestly thinks that Dick is worth $12 mill this year? So what if he drew double teams and that kept his numbers down. How many double teams do the rest of the star DEs in the league take every game? What are their numbers? If you tell me he is worth more money that Albert HAynesworth then you are crazy or just saying it to be spiteful. There are no numbers this guy has that anyone can dream up to compare with any of the top 3-4 DEs in the league that justify this. Drop him. So what if we gave a first rounder up this year or next whatever. We make mistakes, does that mean because I have AIG stock I should keep it because I put money there last year before the meltdown and should just wait for the miraculous rebound that will never come to pay me out?
You just dont hold onto a guy because we gave up something good it works that way sometimes and you cut your losses.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 24, 2010 2:13 PM PST reply actions
Well I'm crazy and spiteful....
I’m not sure I’d use Haynesworth as an example as his numbers were very similar to Seymours last season.
Oh by the way I’m curious what does your screen name mean? Is it a particular Alzado punch or just the fact he liked to punch people?
I think the Jared Allen's, and guys like that who drew double teams and still made plays
had supporting casts, a guy named Haloti Ngata anchoring the middle, and a highly productive defense in all phases. Who else can you compare Dick to? He had arguable two supporting guys.
Okay, so he’s not worth the jack. What else do you do? We arguable benefitted tremendously from his presence last year, and now we’re paying the piper for it. What is the alternative? It’s a waste of breath talking about it. It’s crying over spilled milk, and I for one, knew it would happen a long time ago.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Ok
Explain to me how we “benefitted tremendously from his presence last year”?
That is a load not even capable of argument. If he is/was so good last year why was he not given All-Pro status even on the second team? Why have I not heard about any analysts discussing his “impact” play.
The alternative is to let him go like SOB said in his post and spend that money elsewhere.
So what if we gave a first round draft pick up for him that doesnt mean you hold on to rotten vegetables if you buy them at the grocery store when they sat in your fridge, you throw it in the trash and move on to get something else.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 25, 2010 7:13 AM PST up reply actions
You're telling me, you don't think he provided any leadership to the locker room, otherwise a vacuum of the leadership
left behind and there since the likes of guys like Woodson, Gannon, Brown, and Gruden left. Ellis did the same.
If you’re asking for numbers, look elsewhere; I believe they tell a small, and insignificant part of our story. Since I know he’ll be around next year, why don’t we wait and see how he does when he has guys around him to play their respective positions at at least an above average for a professional football player level, and then we’ll talk stats.
I can’t get over how people think locker room presence isn’t one of the most important parts of the game; look around: it’s why we suck as bad as we do, when we have the talent that we do.
Tim Brown said it. Rich Gannon said it. Rod and Charles Woodson say it still. Who else do you need to hear it from?
The money’s spent, and I’m over listening to the bitching about it. It’s crying over spilled milk, and big Dick is going nowhere.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I dont think he did
I have yet to hear the locker room calibre leadership coming out of Oakland about him. Bitching and whining? HE bitched , whined and pouted about coming to Oakland. OH yeah all the rings he carries and gives 2 fucks about anything but cashing in. Yeah I will be the first to say you know what he fucking killed it on the field and deserved every penny at the end of 2010 if he did it. I doubt you will do the same when he blows, waffles and sandbags the season next year.
I never said dont keep him I said dont keep him at $12 mill a year its a waste of that kind of $$.
If your over it then dont say anything about what I say because obviously you arent over it if you do respond.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 26, 2010 5:03 PM PST up reply actions
Not a single named source ever printed anything saying Richard "bitched, or whined"
about coming here. He showed when he was required, and was admittedly “floored” by New Englands renegging on a promise to renegotiate his contract with them, and the prospect of moving his family from coast to coast.
I will very much be back to sing songs of disappointment, and admit I was wrong about him if he indeed stinks up the field. I will also say, that I never agreed he was worth the kind of scratch we’re paying him, and also that I’ve said from the get go I don’t see him going anywhere else, via trade, counter offer or whatever, especially since his tag is “exclusive” which seemed to elude everyone on this post, hence the longwinded discussion about paying him this much jack. I don’t know how else you keep him when we as a team agreed to pay him the franchise tag amount by putting that tag on him for any other amount than is required by the language of the tagging.
I’ll assume the sole bearer of Super Bowl rings, and guys like Greg Ellis, is a move towards filling the locker room with some veteran leadership that has been absent from the building since 2002, whether I hear it reported or not, and though I could be wrong in making that assumption, I’ll take my chances with at least one proven veteran for now.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
was it clear the tag was exclusive before yesterday?
by Spirals galore on Feb 26, 2010 7:42 PM PST up reply actions
Not publicly, but I saw this coming a long time ago
and you touched on understanding Al’s avoidance of actions that make the statement he was admitting a mistake, or defeat in any way, so I am puzzled why so few didn’t see this coming, clear as day.
Maybe I’m wrong for thinking that, but look at the rest of the roster, and who else would get it? We signed a lot of serious money contracts in the last couple of years with any of the other candidates one might consider tag worthy. I think Al might’ve seen this as the only way of securing Richard here, but then when I try to figure out Al, I end up looking completely stupid usually.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I think Al has a propensity for target fixation
and loses sight of the big picture. If he hadn’t given Seymour the exclusive tag, we could still – theoretically at least – have the 2 draft picks exchange option. Spilled milk, I know.
From what I’ve read (Seymour’s statements about the trade last year), I think he is still capable of great flashes when he wishes, but his main concern is the well-being of his family.
by Spirals galore on Feb 26, 2010 9:02 PM PST up reply actions
I think that's a fair assessment of Al
he does appear a victim of tunnel vision from time to time, does he not?
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Oh yeah, and 'cuz all those other Raiders on the roster have 3 rings
okay, well the guys that have 2….
well, the guy that has….
oh, yeah. those guys are long gone. Yeah. Let’s get rid of the only guy whose been to the top of the mountain not once, but thrice. He sucks, because he doesn’t have the most sacks in the league, on the worst run stopping team in the game, whose safety is cleaning up all the garbage amassing 130 tackles.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Another Al Davis shocker....
NOT! How predictable that senile old fool is getting.
Another over priced vet that will play for us as long as he is way over-paid. The Raiders have sunk so low…….
Raiders are the laughing stock of the nfl.
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 24, 2010 2:43 PM PST reply actions
All this means, at this point, is that someone out their has to match the $12.38 million to take the "great Dick" from us
Will we be Dickless? Will we be happier Dickless than with a Dick? I never thought I would say yes to that common question. Al may still trade him and only wanted to not have Seymour walk away without getting anything out of it. It’s not over yet – someone (Chicago needs DEs) will take this formerly great – now assisted living caliber – player and pay us.
What happens
if someone matches the Raiders offer, does that entitle the Raiders to draft picks to compensate for the loss of Seymore?
I would be okay with receiving draft picks in place of Seymore.
I think we would collect the $12.38 million (and the Bears, for example, would take Dick)
someone correct me, please, if this isn’t correct
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 4:06 PM PST up reply actions
Actually, the team that takes Seymour gives us two 1st Round picks
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 4:11 PM PST up reply actions
That would be totally worth it.
Pay one first round pick for him, play him for a season, then get two frist round picks out of him.
If that would happen and the Raiders finish with a better record than the team that picked him up, they would essentially have a better first round round draft pick than the Pats. The Raiders could maybe come out on top in all of this…….
Now we just need to find a -suc- a buyer out there
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 6:55 PM PST up reply actions
it ain't gonna happen.
He’s ours, and we need to be comfortable with it. No one is giving up two first rounders and taking that kind of a salary hit. We’re the only ones.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
exclusive franchise tag
no team can negotiate with him because they gave him the exclusive tag … he will be a raider next year
This is my city Oakland, California just to be exact il tell you where its at. Pick up a globe pick up a map see San Francisco cross the water right there exact....
- Mista F.A.B.
by TheRealRocWill on Feb 25, 2010 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
and his agent can't contact other teams
That’s a really dumb move.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 7:57 PM PST up reply actions
okay! why are we still talking about this!
I can’t wait for him to shut people tfu about him, if and when we get a supporting staff…
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Oh, now Dick's better performance is contingent on "getting a better staff"
I can’t wait for him to shut people tfu about him, if and when we get a supporting staff…
Consider that your last condition undermines your prior assertions of Seymour’s intangible value of a leadership. “We” have fucked-up this time and excuse me if I’m having a difficult time coming to grips.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 9:15 PM PST up reply actions
not at all, straw man... lol! we have been discussing how the safeties have not had stellar stats
for the holes in the front seven all offseason and before. I’m saying he is the start of an influx of leadership, where we have a serious dearth, and that he’ll have stats that’ll appease you who hate on him, if and when he gets some help on the line.
He’s not going anywhere, Sons. I think you should come to terms with this. If you truly do want him to succeed, you’ll see that he is only partially to blame for his inconsistency at his position, and that the “pain” he brings to this franchise from the hefty price tag was not inflicted by him.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Seymour
What kind of numbers does he have to put up enable to get you off his back? Does Oaklands record matter to you in that case? What if Richard has a 10 Sack season but Oakland falls to 6-10? But, What if Oakland goes 8-8 and Dick is recognized as a Team Captain, Spokerperson and Spirt Lifter? I ask alot of questions
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
not sure
if that was directed at me or not, I have no problem with Seymore. I think he is a fairly solid player. i am just tired of losing and to me there is no player that is above the team. So if it would benefit the Raiders more to trade him, by all means do it. If he garners all pro status, and a pro bowl trip and the Raiders still lose, whats the point? The Raiders are still going to be the laughing stock of the NFL.
If he can come out and be solid and they win, i say keep him. If he come come out and be an all pro and a pro bowler and the Raiders win, I might name my next kid Richard.
if he is wearing another teams colors and brings us some rookie who is helping the Raiders to a winning season, Im all for it.
I just ready to be excited on sunday and not sick on sunday night. I want to stop hearing about how futile the Raiders are in primetime games. Im tired of hearing band wagon charger fans talk about how their beloved chargers have three bye weeks each year. It doens matter that the Raiders almost beat them twice this season. Almost doesnt count and it doenst work for me.
I want to see double digit W’s on the schedule for the Raiders.
If
He earns his keep and shows some intensity AND IF he decides to be a locker room presence AND IF his numbers go up then fine I will shut my mouth and admit I was wrong. But I will wadger any amount here with anyone else his numbers wont go over 10 sacks 50 Total tackles and 3 FF.
So any of you guys who constantly want to blow Dick and pump and fluff him take me up on the offer and we will see.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 25, 2010 7:20 AM PST up reply actions
I'll put a C-note on it, that he's top five in sacks this year, if we get an NT
and a true captain MLB that actually makes an impact, and is good enough to move Morrison to Sam. Ricky Brown will be back too.
If a conversion to 3-4 is made; I’ll wager 5 C-notes, Seymour gets ten sacks, provided he plays (not even starts) at least 12 games (injuries).
and I am no fluffer… Never welched on a wager in my life, either. I can’t wait for Richard to don the Silver and Black again next year.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Again, you place conditions on the 12.4 million dollar Dick's better performance
Yes, now that he’s getting 7 figures and has a great DT coming in, like Suh, and “a true captain”, like McClain, and provided that we switch to a 3-4 (and a few other adjustments) then sure, the hair-puller will perform better than last season. Your money is safe under those fantastic conditions.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 9:27 PM PST up reply actions
So. We keep him, and don't address the weaknesses we have?
Gimme a break dude! I’m planning on for what happens when he’s here, which he will be, and looking forward to us addressing other positions I consider weaknesses, as you have too.
Your now attacking my comments as if I’ve changed something I said, or contradicted something I said before. I have not. Will you hate on Tyvon for not getting a bunch of picks, when he was cleaning up after Kelly, or Warren, or Thomas, or Morrison?
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
keep going, you left out Seymour in that list of leaks in the DL b/c he was there for five games - no biases
I’ve been against this possibility and I appreciate that any player in Seymour’s position would want the same deal for themselves. But, it’s a bad decision for the Raiders and I am not going to go to bed tonight without venting – it’s unhealthy.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 9:37 PM PST up reply actions
and no, it's not Amy
although she must have held A’s hand.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 9:44 PM PST up reply actions
A lot of the reasons Dick got double teamed, was because the guys on either side of him
were taking plays off, so the defenders didn’t bother or even consider them real threats, which is unfortunately true for every other guy in the front seven who couldn’t get respect from even one defender.
The ends were the one shining spot, and they were never double teamed. Often, the sacks they earned were when Richard had beaten one guy and was working against one or two others.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Our entire team will struggle more next year, if we don't get better in the trenches
you know this as well as I do. The youth on the squad still stands to gain more from the sole bearer of a ring this team has; and he didn’t decide how much he’d get paid, or agree to pay it. Al did.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Still
You place contingencies on it. IF IF IF IF IF IF IF.
Oh yeah dont respond because you are over it I forgot.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 26, 2010 5:05 PM PST up reply actions
I appreciate you, bro, and your opinions, whether they coincide with mine or not...
what I’ve been over is the money issue, because I haven’t really seen any inkling of the possibility that Richard winds up anywhere else, under the circumstances. Clearly, Richard will never succeed if he continues to be the only guy worthy of drawing two defenders; I’m sorry if I believe that is one measure that makes him better than any other lineman we currently have. Scott tied for the sack lead from a specialty position that found him building a head of steam before he had to attempt to beat or shed a block. If we did something similar for Richard, he’d have at least that many too.
How about this. We agree the D line is upgraded at the tackle position, mutually, after this draft, and I’ll bet the C-note Richard gets 9 sacks. Deal? I want it to be amiable, of course. I don’t believe Richard is worth anywhere near his hefty price tag; but I don’t believe he’s the sack of shit you or Sons would have us believe, either, and rings don’t come on accident. It’s no accident the team he was a part of that won those three missed him sorely last year, either.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
"Sack of shit" is a bit strong, brhynno (never said it about any player, though might have about Cable)
I’ll leave off on this discussion for now and only remind you that your take is in the minority (not that that’s necessarily damning of it). The Nation voiced its opinion over the past 7 days and here’s the verdict on your latest crusade:
Should Al spend $12,400,000 (9.8%) of his spending limit on Seymour?
29% Yes, but make him play both ways – DT & OT 265 votes
70% No, that is more than the combined salaries of 14 of our Starters! 628 votes
893 votes
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 26, 2010 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
I voted it was too much cash, too
but it doesn’t matter, because he was tagged exclusively and is a Raider, and the point is moot. That was really my point all along.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I hope your hopes for him materialize
I am very doubtful, but it will be good for the Raiders if you are right.
If I were him, though, I’d be pissed about the restriction. Al can dump me at any time, and then what? (Amy Trask is there to ensure he does it properly.)
by Spirals galore on Feb 26, 2010 9:06 PM PST up reply actions
Please, I'm all ears - do explain. Because it sounds as though you have detected a loophole
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 26, 2010 9:50 PM PST up reply actions
Why do you keep
insisting that Amy Trask has anything to do with any part of football operations? And since when does Al need someone holding his hand to release people? As if he doesn’t know the NFL rules by now? Show me some hard proof that she has any part of football operations, or stop insinuating it’s a fact that she does.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Excuse me, Mike,
but as a lawyer, she is involved with the contracts.
ALAMEDA, Calif. — The Oakland Raiders signed defensive end Greg Ellis on Monday night, acquiring a veteran presence as they work to upgrade their defense.
bq.The sides completed the deal late Monday when he signed the contract, Raiders CEO Amy Trask said.
"We are proud and excited that he chose the Raiders," Trask said by phone. "We believe he will be a fine contributor at defensive end."
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 5:32 AM PST up reply actions
the second paragraph is also from there, obviously
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 5:33 AM PST up reply actions
That's the first time
you’ve actually ever given anything supporting the fact the she may have anything to do with contracts or football operations.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
it doesn't matter, does it
obviously she is involved.
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 7:30 AM PST up reply actions
Well it wasn't obvious
to anyone but apparently you. So yeah, it mattered because you kept saying it over and over like Sons does about Willie retiring because Cable was being retained. But with nothing backing up (til now) it was an opinion being stated as a fact.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
About trask.
The last report I read about Willie is he didn’t know the disposition of Cable or the other coaches.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Prediction: If Cable is fired Willie returns to coach the DBs
Pendergast’s defection is a portent of sorts
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 27, 2010 7:59 AM PST up reply actions
I doubt it.
Why would he even care? Cable has very little say on defense. Probably the only thing he didn’t touch. So why would it matter?
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
well it was
a continuation of my above comment:
Well it wasn’t obvious
to anyone but apparently you. So yeah, it mattered because you kept saying it over and over like Sons does about Willie retiring because Cable was being retained. But with nothing backing up (til now) it was an opinion being stated as a fact.
I wanted to clarify that until the recent posts about hard evidence that Amy Trask has say, you were quoting opinion as fact. Just like Sons comments that WIllie retired because of Cable as fact with no hard proof.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
check also this article
It explains the role of lawyers in sports and specifically discusses Amy Trask.
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 6:03 AM PST up reply actions
and this, coming from Al's lips
http://raiders.blogs.pressdemocrat.com/10407/surprise-al-davis-speaks/?pa=2&tc=pg
DAVIS ON BILL BELICHICK: "We almost hired him here when we hired Gruden. Amy (Trask) picked him and I picked Gruden. We had three guys in. Belichick, Gruden and I’m trying to think who the third one was."
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 7:23 AM PST up reply actions
from the same interview
DAVIS, AGAIN CITING THE POWER OF TRASK WHEN ASKED IF HE LIKES PLAYING IN A MONDAY-NIGHT OPENER: "No. I don’t. But Amy thinks its great and that’s why it’s done."
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 7:25 AM PST up reply actions
So why didn't you mention
this when we were arguing in circles before about how involved she is? That’s all I ask when trying to present a fact. Back it up. Otherwise it’s an opinion or unsubstantiated rumor.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
ditto about your oposing my "opinion"
Mike, when someone on this blog posts an opinion that challenges my own, I go and research myself. You could have done the same.
By the way, here is a link about another lawyer picked by Birren as an intern for the Raiders, who is now his counterpart at the Buccaneers. Lawyers in sports are VERY involved.
by Spirals galore on Feb 27, 2010 8:01 AM PST up reply actions
I did try to research
and didn’t find anything. But I apparently I didn’t go far enough.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
I never said lawyers weren't involved
we were talking about Amy Trask the CEO, not Amy Trask the lawyer, and I couldn’t find any hard proof that she was actually involved until you came up w/ the current links in this conversation.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
In Al's exclusive innermost circle stands Amy Trask steeped in football operations and transactions
Seymour may understand one day that he was a mere pawn in a larger game.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 27, 2010 7:21 AM PST up reply actions
Your twisting my words
I never called him a sack of shit either nor did I portray him in way way as such. I said he is a good player but not worth the scratch like nearly all of us have said.
There are lots of player who get to kling on to a Superbowl winning team. Starters even but I never said Dick was a kling on either. He was a small cog in a very big picture with very good coaching and schemes.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 27, 2010 9:07 AM PST up reply actions
If I have, I apologize. I totally agree it's way too much to pay; I'm irked by the exclusive tag too
I just don’t think he’s a bad player at all, and know how easy it is to point fingers at a certain guy and not see anything spectacular when so many things are wrong with our big picture and coaching and schemes. You have nailed New England’s winning formula there with those three factors; it is my sincere hope that guys like him who were a part of that winning formula may at least come from a position of experience when explaining to younger players, and perhaps even struggling organizations, how that formula worked.
Sack of shit, was perhaps extreme, and it is never my intention to twist anyone’s words, or even misinterpret them for myself, and I am sorry if I have done that.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
ice water in hell before that would happen
no one would pay (both $ and picks) that much for seymore
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 24, 2010 4:27 PM PST reply actions
"only" 2 first-roung picks no cash ... please someone! I'm not worried about the bad stuff I've written about Seymour
because no GM or Al is paying any Fooking attention to it.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 7:04 PM PST up reply actions
Your totally right
Cause every team that doesn’t make the playoffs autmoatically stops paying there players good money. Did you hear how the Giants reduced Eli Mannings pay by 20 Million because they missed the playoffs!? Oh oh, And how about when the Steelers stopped paying Troy Palamaulu because they also missed the playoffs!
If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?
- Vince Lombardi
He thinks Russell is the man
so consider the post before feeding the troll.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
So what do you think about Seymour? You, who have defended are piece of shit coach who near Russell's level
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 7:01 PM PST up reply actions
translation: "You, who have defended Cable who is a piece of shit coach near the level of Russell quality"
I am experiencing some emotion right now.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 7:07 PM PST up reply actions
Excuse me?
I’m pretty sure since the Cleveland game I haven’t defended the guy at all. I was on the fence up til then, and even leaning towards not liking him before then. In fact I’m the one that said only rocks keep his head round. So, um, you fail on that comment.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Oh, Cleveland was our 15rh game of the season and only then were you enlightened
Whereas, I began my open and vociferous declamations against Cable at Denver 1(week 3) and put those laments into print after week 7 (Jets game). It took you 2 more months than me to appreciate the enormity of Cable’s deficiencies – before that, Mike, you did defend him by constantly explaining his crimes with “he’s wearing too many hats” when the fact is he sucks under every possible hat.
Bottom line: you dismiss xville’s credibility to assess Seymour because of his poor assessment of Russell, while you yourself poorly assessed Cable for most of the season.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 6:15 AM PST up reply actions
I did defend him
until that game, because of the team backing him up, but the Cleveland game was what finally toppled me over. When the players were getting ejected, 2 of them actually, then he lost control of the team and the last string that held any defense from me. I wanted to give Cable a chance, and I did give him a chance, until he blew that chance. It is an option that I had and was allowed to have, and I’ve never called you out for not liking a guy. So because I want see Seymour in a proper scheme with proper coaching and because I, as I am allowed as a human being with thought processes, changed my stance on Cable discredits me?
I’m sure glad you’re not God.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
There will be no proper scheme for him for 3 reasons:
1st, no scheme will regenerate him to play as he did in his former way,
2nd, our coaching is incapable of installing a 3-4 Defense because if their constipated collective brain,
3rd, there’s no money for installing the scheme you envision – it’s blown on players like Tom & Dick
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 7:07 AM PST up reply actions
it's not your change of stance on Cable
but your comment implying that xville’s opinion on Seymour is unreliable b/c xville is a Russell lover. It was a cheap shot and a non sequitur in the sequence.
As for changing your stance – everyone in his/her right mind does it as info come in. For instance, I anticipate that very shortly, Blanda’s going to have a change of mind about Al Davis.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 7:07 AM PST up reply actions
Please call me, Sons, we are on a first name basis - unless you prefer 'galore'
If Al has an interested party for Dick, then he hasn’t made a false move yet during post-season. So, I shall remain calm until the facts arrive.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 7:11 AM PST up reply actions
open your eyes blanda, the facts have arrived.
al davis has never made a mistake. releasing dick would be tantamount to admiting that trade w/ the pats was as horrible as dhb w/ the number 8 pick last year. hence the inevitable tag.
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 25, 2010 7:17 AM PST up reply actions
where are the facts?
Your first statement is sarcastically meant, so it isn’t a fact. The rest is an interpretation.
I agree with your sentiments, but the phrasing of your reasoning needs work.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 7:49 AM PST up reply actions
well--that's an instance
of a speculation that I know is wrong.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 8:41 AM PST up reply actions
you would know more than me
but I highly doubt he’ll stop thinking Al Davis is infallible.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
oh yeah?
Just watch him if Al missteps.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 8:49 AM PST up reply actions
Becaus Al hasn't?
He hates Cable so much, but Al is retaining him. Al is the one keeping Russell around. Al is the one paying Walker to sit on the bench. Al is the one that tagged Son’s most hated defense player.
Where didn’t Al misstep?
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Cable has not been officially named HC for '10 so why would Al postpone that?
Keep in mind that Al made overtures during the post-season for a HC – if he were set on Cable, why would he do that? As for keeping Russell around, we all watched JMR play in college – so if his soul stops being depraved there is a chance that he will develop that spark of excellence that his past shows him capable of. Finally, if some team takes Seymour in FA then Al has made the coup of the decade trading a 1st round pick for two and getting Seymour for $3.8 last year to replace K.Edwards (even though Seymour’s contribution was not significantly noticeable).
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 9:19 AM PST up reply actions
Finally, if some team takes Seymour in FA then Al has made the coup of the decade
Breaking news-Seymour got an exclusive franchise tag. I posted the link on the Seymour post.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 4:24 PM PST up reply actions
pardon me
This is the Seymour post — see below.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 4:31 PM PST up reply actions
He'll probably respond himself
so I’ll just comment on my own take on the Al bashing.
Al makes a lot of personnel decisions, and some of them turn out alright, some don’t. He seems to assume that all players, by virtue of playing, already love the game and desire to improve – which is questionable in Russell’s case, for instance, but true in Gradkowski’s. I read somewhere that he believes you can make a football player out of a superb athlete, so he goes after superb athletes, some of whom turn out to be busts. But do all?
I guess what puts me off, personally, is the faulty syllogism: because some players chosen by Al are busts, all Al’s decisions are wrong. Having said that, I don’t like Al and think he is demented.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 9:42 AM PST up reply actions
blanda
interesting how you chastise cable but bend over for al davis every chance you get. no coach will come to the raiders and al davis would never entertain hiring a real coach. so were stuck w/ nobodies or up and comers trying to land a break till al davis is dead and buried.
why waste your breath on cable, his replacement would just be another al davis puppet.
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 25, 2010 6:58 AM PST up reply actions
I suppose Al is annimating the body of Cable and channeling plays through him, etc.
Do you also believe Al is residing in the body of Raider players and influencing them too? Puh! I mock you for laying all blame at Al’s door – a simplistic and lazy vice – when individuals are making bad decisions on their own. But, if you must continue blaming Al for everything that’s wrong with the Raiders then at least give him credit for what is working for them.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 7:03 AM PST up reply actions
what is working for them???
name one thing? the raiders have the talent on paper to compete, yet they are horrible. why?
could it be the relentless man defense al calls for?
could it be the insistence of playing horrible losers like dhb and jr opposed to grads and javon walker?
could it be aliging himself w/ puppets and yes men oppsed to real coaches and men that know post 1980’s football.
al davis is the anchor that has sunked the raiders. why you cant see that is bizarre. if he was a regular employee he would have been run out of town years ago
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 25, 2010 7:10 AM PST up reply actions
in the case of Hanson,
all the talk of Hanson being an Al man comes from Hanson himself. And Hanson’s statements to that effect are full of pathetically megalomanic wannabe contradictions. That said, Al made the decision to keep him in whatever capacity…
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 7:18 AM PST up reply actions
who gives a fuck about hanson
pussy loser
by rat, el rat, mr. rat, the rat on Feb 25, 2010 7:19 AM PST up reply actions
who did you mean then as puppets and yes men?
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 7:42 AM PST up reply actions
It seems that Kiffin
though to the extreme, was the last person to stand up to Davis. Turner didn’t have the personality to stand up for his own cause. Callahan may have, had be not fell apart and called the team stupid. Art Shell was the ultimate yes man even as far as reverting to old schemes and bringing in old OC from times past. Cable wouldn’t be a head coach any where else, but he’s a yes man too not able to make up his own decision and justify it to Al Davis in regards to benching Russell from the get go. That is what he means. We haven’t had a coach since Gruden that had success and ability to make his own decisions. And at the same time, not coincidentally, we had a GM person as well.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
yes, I agree with your interpretation
of his otherwise sweeping statement.
I don’t like Al and think he crapshoots, and if some of the result is good, that’s not Al’s doing.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 8:49 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think he crapshoots
while it may look like that. In Al’s mind it’s a great decision because he thinks it should work with the system. The problem is the system isn’t working. And if he would hire a good coach and let the coach do his job, then I think we’d turn around quite quickly. But we won’t get any decent coach to come here until we get a GM. So you see the conundrum.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
That's why he crapshoots
in the hope that the system will somehow get going by random infusions.
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
I believe this is at the heart of the problem, too, Mike
What once worked, may not be now, and Al’s seemingly made decision to go without a GM to install a philosophy and a system, or his unwillingness to allow a coach to do so, are the root of the cause of our ineptitude.
You can have all the best athletes in the world; if you have no team, you have nothing.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I'm on record for questioning Al's choice of organization people like Cable and Herera
But when an individual is missing a tackle, or blowing a pass block, or calling one bone-headed play after the next, or taking plays off – then I get down on that individual. You prefer to go directly to the top of the organization. Your mentality, the roads in California are bad so off with Schwartenegger’s head, Russell breaks 300lb mark so Al must step down.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 10:26 AM PST up reply actions
It’s the continuous bad choices he makes in coaching staff and draft picks and free agency signings. I can understand a bust here and there, it happens. Or a coach that just doesn’t fit there, but it’s been 8 years now since we had a winning season. Davis is the GM who signs the contracts for the players. He’s the one that hires the coaches, then fires them because he wants an immediate turn around, he’s the one that does the drafting. He’s the one that talked Walker out of retiring so he can get paid big bucks to sit on the bench.
He makes a lot of bad decisions and some good ones. I can’t ever call his legacy into question. He’s done great thing for the Raiders and NFL, no doubt. But it seems he’s losing his touch. But you’re blaming Cable for being a bad coach, and he is, BUT the person keeping him around is Davis. You want to treat symptoms and not the disease.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
well - how do you suggest treating the disease?
Your statement above suggests you think the disease is Al. You said elsewhere Al should hire a GM if a good coach is to come to Oakland; but at the same time say Al is unlikely to do so. Any elucidation?
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
Nope.
Which makes it a terminal disease. But the answer would be talented GM. Until that happens, we’re simply treating symptoms.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
"Our"
Bottom line: you dismiss xville’s credibility to assess Seymour because of his poor assessment of Russell.
Considering that Ochocinco shares my view on Russell, the previous statement should read:
Bottom line: you dismiss xville’s credibility to assess Seymour because of his and Ochocinco’s poor assessment of Russell…
It is not like Chad, to say bad word about any fellow player in the league
Even if they are truly bad, bad players. If you are unable to see through this, then I feel you are naive, at least to a degree.
I can give you 100 other pros who have a very different opinion about Jamarcus, and who unlike Chad, aren’t above voicing it.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I'm naive?
Look at your first sentence.
Ochocinco WAS dissing his fellow players -he was dissing our receivers for starters.
two wrongs don't make a right
anyway, when did ’85’’s opinion gain supremacy?
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
I can see paying big short-term money for a vet to bolster our chances through
the playoffs, but if we’re still rebuilding, it is a waste of money that could be used to rebuild.
In theory - I agree
But the reality is this: Seymour is in decline and taking up space and financial resources that could actually go towards bringing us closer to our singular goal – SB victory – there is no other goal. Unless we find some team to take the has-been off our hands we eat another chunk of shit.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
+1
Absolutely I have got your back on several of these player assessments and its nice to hear (see) a rational position on player personnel rather than the Dick blowing and JaNoHustle backers talk about nonsense. I have yet to hear someone rationally argue and back that Seymour is worth $12 mill. If he is worth $12 mill then Kelly is worth the $10 and I want to go to camp and I am sure I can get $5 mill for a season based on the caliber of play that people seem to give in regards to the pay scale he got (Seymour).
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 25, 2010 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
He's not worth close to 12 mil! no one here said that! Neither am I
what I have said, is it’s fucking spent already dude, so get over it! He’s not nearly as bad as you or sons cut him out to be, and if you weren’t so blinded by your pointing fingers you’d see he was one player who performed above average at his position in the front seven even fairly consistently, and he was getting his ass kicked week after week by two guys!
I can’t wait for him to prove you wrong. He’s not worth the money, but I didn’t decide to take him for that much jack, or to franchise tag him. The decision was made, I knew it would be, and I’m preparing myself to see him wearing a Raiders jersey, and hope he can have a guy or two in the front seven who perform above average for once, and will judge him accordingly then.
I might pay him 3, but I’m not gonna cry over spilled milk. I’m not the guy deciding that.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Unless we have (of find) someone who wants him this is a horrible move
I will continue to want some team to find value in this washed-up has-been. I want Seymour to prove me wrong but believe his better football days are behind him. Damnation and Hell.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 24, 2010 6:59 PM PST up reply actions
You know Blanda
I’m starting to get this feeling you don’t like Richard Seymour. Okay who do you hate more Seymour or Morrison?
Yo are actually asking me who hurts the Raiders more, at least that's how I measure my 'hatred' in the pro-football context
Morrison tries hard and makes many tackles – but he is not a natural MLB (fierce, aggressive,intelligent) or a good reader of offenses which takes him out of position too often or an effective leader – Kirk is paid $2.3 million/year.
Seymour’s play in Oakland is nowhere close to his play in NE and never will – he is in decline and Oakland appears to serve his hospice needs. He makes $12.4 million a year. All things considered, Seymour hurts the team while Morrison doesn’t hurt or help but is about neutral.
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 6:33 AM PST up reply actions
Heh..I knew it.
Sons does have a lot of strong dislike for some players that Al seems to treasure, as of right now. The real question is, what happens if he and others are proven wrong.
As for the franchise, I am not adding any input, because I knew this was going to happen anyway, but IF Seymour has a big year, You’ll see my 2-page long post calling out everybody who thought this was a bad move. If he performs under expectations, then what can I say? A post calling Seymour out for his lack of play.
Right now, It seems like there’s a lot of moaning, whining and such. I’m done with that. What’s done is done, and all people are gonna do is wish that Al passes away and such, like USUAL. Only Thing I can have hate for right now is Russell and the O-Line.
So…stop the complaining..please?
by NFLanalyzerfromhome on Feb 24, 2010 9:45 PM PST reply actions
I expect a big showing from big Dick, IF, we get the MLB, the NT, and another CB
who turn weaknesses into strengths. We’ll see what big Dick is capable of. I’ll still say it was too much jack to give him, but realized when it happened it was a necessary evil, and relegated myself to this day, when paying it would become reality.
I’m miffed about how so many didn’t see this coming. What did they expect us to do otherwise? Who would seriously take him, and give up two first rounders?
I’ll rec your two page post, and go on record as saying I never hated big Richard.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I want to be proven wrong - I only want the Raiders to do well. If I hate a player it's because he is hurting this team's
ability to win. Whether it’s healthy or not, I identify with the Raiders of old and when I see present-day non-Raiderlike performances from players (or their coaches) wearing the S&B it brings scourge to my heart and the bitter bile rises to my lips
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 6:42 AM PST up reply actions
+1
yea it was pretty obvious they were gonna tag him
This is my city Oakland, California just to be exact il tell you where its at. Pick up a globe pick up a map see San Francisco cross the water right there exact....
- Mista F.A.B.
meant to reply to brhynno ... my bad
This is my city Oakland, California just to be exact il tell you where its at. Pick up a globe pick up a map see San Francisco cross the water right there exact....
- Mista F.A.B.
by TheRealRocWill on Feb 25, 2010 2:27 AM PST up reply actions
It's a non-exclusive franchise tag
That means another team doesn’t have to give 2 first-rounders to get him but they have to give up compensation though. It’s like last year when Matt Cassell was franchised by NE & was traded to KC for a 2nd & Matt Vrabel. A team I can see taking him could be Jacksonville or Carolina & signing him to a long-term deal. If we could get a 2nd & 3rd rounder for Seymour I would give Al all the credit since he would deserve it. Much like he gets the lion’s share of the blame but I don’t see him pulling the trigger though.
Jacksonville needs pass-rushing help
They had 14 sacks as a team last year. He could help tremendously considering they drafted a DE in the 1st 2 years ago & Carolina can sign him to a long term deal now that they don’t have to worry about Peppers’ & his ridiculous demands. He would be alot cheaper to them.
Good point
I do hope they grab him for so picks and/or players. I really dont want nearly 10% of our cap going to him.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 25, 2010 9:45 AM PST up reply actions
and '10 will be capless...
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
wait-what are the implications from the exclusive franchise tag?
I know other teams can’t approach Seymour, but can they approach Al, or he also under obligation to Seymour and therefore prohibited from discussing their offer before the exclusive tag expires?
by Spirals galore on Feb 25, 2010 9:58 PM PST up reply actions
Or risk investigation from the league, similar to the debacle with Rex Ryan
last year with a certain receiver and recently with Asomugha. This doesn’t by any means suggest this rule is not broken regularly, but there is a way it is done successfully in the league, therein remaining beneath smoke and mirrors.
You’ve pointed out the more important fact before: that Al will not do anything rash to make his initial decision appear hasty, or at all a mistake. I believe Al had the machinations happening for acquiring Seymour when Richard found himself on the wrong end of a monetary issue that went public with Belichick and the Patriots. Nothing he does makes any sense to us in the moment; it almost always makes sense in retrospect. This pick will be no different, but then, will we be here next year, to post on the subject?
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
I believe, "tampering," is the term for the violation, on Al, or any part of the organization
as if there is any dispute here on who the personnel department is on this team.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Ok
So why not go and spend $300 mill and buy up all the UFAs that may suit our needs. You dont just spend money because you can that is a way to bankruptcy. If it was your money would you spend it as such.
Oh yes I forgot again you over it so dont respond its a rethorical question.
Win at all costs! Winning ugly is still winning! Remember the past and what got us to the top before. Jim Plunkett and winning ugly......enough said!
by TheLyleAlzadoPunch on Feb 26, 2010 5:12 PM PST up reply actions
Eh
Jacksonville is in a pretty good position to grab any defensive end they want in the draft, but it seems like a viable option.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 25, 2010 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
I guess at some level it doesn't matter
because I don’t think anyone was going to pay the price for him anyways. However, I think it’s shortsighted of the team to block-out the possibility of getting more picks or getting a realistic view of his value by letting other team negotiate with him. Another questionable move in a epic novel worth.
No more raining on Bruins Nation's rainy parade, they took their ball and went home.
If Al has a terminal illness and only 12 months to live then a future 1st Round pick wouldn't matter
How could he miss evaluate Seymour so badly unless he’s not well?
by Sons-of-Blanda on Feb 25, 2010 8:43 PM PST up reply actions
While many teams in the league seem very ready and willing to use the tag and tender on players as a means of negotiating
Al has not been one to follow suit. He pays the guys he wants to pay, what he wants to pay them typically (maybe not entirely, but he’s never been shy with the checkbook, so ultimately what he agrees to pay at least). That may explain why Richard of all guys was chosen.
Often, players are chagrined from being tagged or tendered, because it takes away their ability to be shopped for higher money or to leave open the negotiations of contracts. This is definitely not the case with Richard, who will be the benefactor of more cash than New England pays to even it’s best players. Perhaps this is a testament to the players who whine about money before they get it done on the field. Richard, on the other hand, was getting it done for New England, but they refused to pay him.
"If your only ambition in life, is to be a better person; well, that's just the best ambition you can have..." Wayne "Rabbit" Bartholomew
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Silver And Black Pride
Related FanShots on Silver And Black Pride
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- All reports positive after Peyton Manning’s first OTA in Denver
- Ryan Tannehill won’t start right away, according to Dolphins’ owner
- Lions WR Titus Young barred from practice after starting fight with teammate
- Winslow move could be a costly one for Bucs in the short term
- Matthew Stafford spends $15,000 to win auction package, then gives it to a young fan’s family
