Chiefs Weird rumor about the Chiefs getting Seymour - Page 6

JD10367 · 09-07-2009, 01:57 PM

Found this on Patsfans.com, don't know where it came from, but it would be f**king hilarious...

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-...done-deal.html

Post #5:

They're saying that Seymour could end up going to KC for their 2010 #2, without saying more about what is written there it sounds like the Patriots could probably fall back on that if they wanted and the assumption (by me) is it depends if they want to do that or push the Raider deal, presumably with the 5 day letter which would leave Seymour little choice but to report.

**the Talking Can** · 09-07-2009, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acesn8s

And Ed Reed speeds down he sideline yet again while Cassel lays flat on his back while being carted off still clutching the football.

hamas wants his shtick back

Sweet Daddy Hate · 09-07-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Meanwhile, the 60 million dollar man enjoys the world's largest anal gangbang every week off the right side because we can't muster up any resources for that.

The Planet, is BACK!

EyePod · 09-07-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR

Why? He wouldn't play NT. That's what we need is a nose.

Besides, as mediocre as Tank is, we should give him a season at his new position. After we go 1-15, THEN we'll figure stuff out.

Tank looked a lot better last game....

Nightfyre · 09-07-2009, 04:50 PM

I vote we trade that second for Wilfork instead. We would then have probably one of the strongest lines in the NFL then.

**dirk digler** · 09-07-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

What am I missing here?

Is the Seymour trade not final?

And even if it's not, how ****ing stupid would it be to invest ANOTHER high draft pick in a goddamn 5-technique?

I don't know if anyone answered your question but the rumor is that he is not going to show in Oakland so it nullifies the trade. Which is weird that the NFL has a rule that pretty much gives alot of leverage to the player in this situation.

Mr. Krab · 09-07-2009, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

The Planet, is BACK!

Oh good, all the Dirty Sanchez butt buddies are getting back together for a circle jerk session. Maybe they can kill the rest of the traffic around here and turn it into WPI

Sweet Daddy Hate · 09-07-2009, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Krab

"Don't cry for me, Argentiiiiina...

**OnTheWarpath15** · 09-07-2009, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Krab

Oh good, all the Dirty Sanchez butt buddies are getting back together for a circle jerk session. Maybe they can kill the rest of the traffic around here and turn it into WPI

So a handful of realists, that are accused of hating the Chiefs and hoping they fail are going to turn ChiefsPlanet into a board full of mouth-breathing, football illiterate, Chiefs-can-do-no-wrong-and will-win-the-division posters.

Got it.

BradyFTW! · 09-07-2009, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay

What are you talking about? In terms of value 2nd round picks are better, you get a player who will be a starter for a much cheaper price. Would you rather pay a guy whos only slightly better 10 mil guarnteed money or a 2nd round pick whos about as good for much cheaper? Also look at how the Patriots trade there 1st round pick and stockpile picks. They traded there 1st a few years ago to the Niners and the next year drafted the rookie of the year. It's all about value and teams who get the most value are also the ones who are most successful.

That's trading forward in time, not trading down in the draft. Two very different things. In the case that you're citing, he traded a first round pick for... a first round pick, so it really doesn't support your theory at all. And the DROY that you spoke of was drafted in the first round, which doesn't exactly support your premise that second rounders are worth more :P

This year was the first year that Belichick traded a first rounder down in to the second round, and he explicitly stated that it was because of the talent breakdown for this year. He thought that early second round talent was about as good as the late first round talent.

He did not think that, one would assume, when he drafted Richard Seymour, Daniel Graham, Vince Wilfork, Ben Watson, Logan Mankins, Jerod Mayo and Brandon Meriweather all in the first round. The value of a second round pick is higher *because* you can get one much cheaper than you can get a first rounder. If the price is the same, then you take the first rounder (provided that it's outside of the top 5) every time.

R8RFAN · 09-07-2009, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

What am I missing here?

Is the Seymour trade not final?

And even if it's not, how ****ing stupid would it be to invest ANOTHER high draft pick in a goddamn 5-technique?

The deal is not final until he or any player passes a physical in a trade

He will be a Raider, you Chief fans ned to quit dreaming.....Your owner would never shell out the coin needed for a player of this caliber

**The Bad Guy** · 09-07-2009, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R8ers

The deal is not final until he or any player passes a physical in a trade

He will be a Raider, you Chief fans ned to quit dreaming.....Your owner would never shell out the coin needed for a player of this caliber

You're right. Our owner wouldn't shell out a first round pick and all that money for a guy who plays 6 games a year.

I'm sure Seymour is going to be super motivated watching FatMarcus sink any chance that defense has.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 09-07-2009, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

You're right. Our owner wouldn't shell out a first round pick and all that money for a guy who plays 6 games a year.

I'm sure Seymour is going to be super motivated watching FatMarcus sink any chance that defense has.

**chefsos** · 09-07-2009, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R8ers

The deal is not final until he or any player passes a physical in a trade

He will be a Raider, you Chief fans ned to quit dreaming.....Your owner would never shell out the coin needed for a player of this caliber

I think you have to be actually present in order to pass a physical.

R8RFAN · 09-07-2009, 07:41 PM

acesn8s · 09-07-2009, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

The Planet, is BACK!

I've only been gone a few weeks.

09-07-2009, 01:57 PM
JD10367 Cheaterlover* Join Date: May 2009 Location: RI Casino cash: $10010716	Weird rumor about the Chiefs getting Seymour Found this on Patsfans.com, don't know where it came from, but it would be f**king hilarious... http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-...done-deal.html Post #5: They're saying that Seymour could end up going to KC for their 2010 #2, without saying more about what is written there it sounds like the Patriots could probably fall back on that if they wanted and the assumption (by me) is it depends if they want to do that or push the Raider deal, presumably with the 5 day letter which would leave Seymour little choice but to report.
Posts: 12,916

09-07-2009, 04:50 PM	#79
Nightfyre MVP Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Helena, MT Casino cash: $1368849	I vote we trade that second for Wilfork instead. We would then have probably one of the strongest lines in the NFL then.
Posts: 18,647

09-07-2009, 07:41 PM	#89
R8RFAN Molôn Labé Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: North Carolina Casino cash: $8466872
Posts: 23,182