Got_Wood Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not that I care about Richard Seymour or the Raiders, but this is just insanity. How can a guy continue to just holdout players to get his way, without any communication with teams... and in the end the teams have no choice but to pay. They have to, or they lose their player. This guy has a laundry list of teams he has literally held hostage. If I met Parker in public, I'd have a hard time holding back from destroying this guy UFC style. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...s-by-the-balls/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 i heard on espn this morning that Seymour has personal issues to work out...the main one being that his kid(s) are/were scheduled to start school yesterday...he needs to decide if he wants to move his family across country...it doesn't sound like it is an agent issue, just getting his personal things in order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Teams are seriously going to consider not taking a chance on any player represented by Parker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got_Wood Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 I think Parker's strategy every time he wants to get a deal done is to give their offer, and not answer the phone from his secretary unless they accept the offer. There never seem to be any negotiations going on. He has his little scam figured out, and until teams get tough and kick this guys ass out the door, he'll keep doing it. I hope that some how, some way, this guy gets hit by the bad karma he has built up for himself in the form of a semi truck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I would be wary of players in the future that use Eugene Parker as their agent, to me it tells me that they are more interested in squeezing every last dollar out that they can get as opposed to helping their team out as much as they possibly could. Screw that Mother !@#$er!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I would be wary of players in the future that use Eugene Parker as their agent, to me it tells me that they are more interested in squeezing every last dollar out that they can get as opposed to helping their team out as much as they possibly could. Screw that Mother !@#$er!!! Playing devils advocate, that is exactly why players hire him...to to the best he can for the player. IF, and thats a big if, he has Seymour holding out, i can totally get it. Dude is staring down the face of a franchise tag going into an uncapped year...on a team more dysfunctional than out friends at OBD. I would hold out to for some large guaranteed money as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Playing devils advocate, that is exactly why players hire him...to to the best he can for the player. IF, and thats a big if, he has Seymour holding out, i can totally get it. Dude is staring down the face of a franchise tag going into an uncapped year...on a team more dysfunctional than out friends at OBD. I would hold out to for some large guaranteed money as well. That is it and that to me is represents a caution flag moving forward with that individual. It's not as if that the other agents wouldn't be able to get him a good fair pay. The difference is that some players would rather make $52 Million over a 5 year period and have a hold out that would hurt their team than making $50 Million over the same time period and not hurting the team. In an example like this, I'd rather make a little less and do everything I could possibly do in my power to help the team. No one says that money shouldn't be an issue, it is the measures they take to make just a little bit more (relatively speaking) to squeeze out every last dollar they can with little regard to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got_Wood Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 Playing devils advocate, that is exactly why players hire him...to to the best he can for the player. IF, and thats a big if, he has Seymour holding out, i can totally get it. Dude is staring down the face of a franchise tag going into an uncapped year...on a team more dysfunctional than out friends at OBD. I would hold out to for some large guaranteed money as well. I get that. The thing is, my biggest problem is with players not playing out their contracts (and rookies who haven't earned big contracts). Like Peters, who had a couple years left to play for the Bills and wasn't happy about the contract he had just renegotiated. Greed my friends. This will bring the game we love smashing to the ground. Teams need to step up and take a stand against agents like this, and players who think they are bigger than the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not that I care about Richard Seymour or the Raiders, but this is just insanity. How can a guy continue to just holdout players to get his way, without any communication with teams... and in the end the teams have no choice but to pay. They have to, or they lose their player. This guy has a laundry list of teams he has literally held hostage. If I met Parker in public, I'd have a hard time holding back from destroying this guy UFC style. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...s-by-the-balls/ The guy appears to be an effective negotiator. Whether he can sustain the tactics remains to be seen. Think about it - he got Peters exactly what he was looking for - a fat contract and a new team. From Peter's perspective it is hard to argue that Parker did anything other than an excellent job. Of the two current holdouts Crabtree is the more interesting. The kid has no money yet. There is a well established slotting process associated with rookie contracts. He will be taking a huge chance that some team will draft him with a high pick next year - if he holds out the entire season. I think he comes out on the losing end of the battle here. If I was a SF fan I would be pissed. Even if the thing gets resolved the guy is not likely to see much playing time this year and you have a disgruntled WR on your hands (sounds kinda like Peters). Seymour has made his money - he could just retire. Let's hope so because then the Patsies* are left holding the bag. Hopefully this little episode hurts the Patsies* with future free agents. They screwed the guy and maybe others will see it for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 yeah but Seymour got traded...his contract had him playing for the Pats, now he is being asked to go across the country to Oakland....in most cases I agree with you...but not this one I get that. The thing is, my biggest problem is with players not playing out their contracts (and rookies who haven't earned big contracts). Like Peters, who had a couple years left to play for the Bills and wasn't happy about the contract he had just renegotiated. Greed my friends. This will bring the game we love smashing to the ground. Teams need to step up and take a stand against agents like this, and players who think they are bigger than the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Seymour has exactly 0 leverage, other than to retire. Once the raiders file the "must report" paperwork, Seymour has 5 days to report of he's done for the year, with no paycheck and no accrued season, meaning next season he's in the same boat as this one with 1 year left on his deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Put yourself in Seymour's shoes. You are being traded from a team that you have been loyal too, and is a Super Bowl favorite, not only this year but every year. They send you to a team that is by far (allthough the Bills are trying to catch up) the most disfunctional team in the NFL. If I were him, I would be real excited about going across country too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macaroni Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Of the two current holdouts Crabtree is the more interesting. The kid has no money yet. There is a well established slotting process associated with rookie contracts. He will be taking a huge chance that some team will draft him with a high pick next year - if he holds out the entire season. I think he comes out on the losing end of the battle here. If I was a SF fan I would be pissed. Even if the thing gets resolved the guy is not likely to see much playing time this year and you have a disgruntled WR on your hands (sounds kinda like Peters). I agree about Crabtree ..... let's say because that he's shown that he really is a me first "head case" and S.F. decides he is not worth signing because of the future hassles ..... where does he go next year in the draft ...... is somebody crazy enough to draft him #3 or higher to give him the $$$$ he's asking? What happens to contract negotiations next year if he's drafted lower 1st round high 2nd round??? Does he demand #5 money because that's where he was originally drafted???? Wacky I tell ya just waky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not that I care about Richard Seymour or the Raiders, but this is just insanity. How can a guy continue to just holdout players to get his way, without any communication with teams... and in the end the teams have no choice but to pay. They have to, or they lose their player. This guy has a laundry list of teams he has literally held hostage. If I met Parker in public, I'd have a hard time holding back from destroying this guy UFC style. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...s-by-the-balls/ How do you know it's not a personal issue keeping him from Oak today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 If I were Seymour, the only contract I would accept is a one year contract that waives the teams right to tag me. Either that or I sit out the whole year. I wouldnt play for the Raiders... (I bet this is how players feel about our Bills too) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 worst part of the current CBA, it took all the power away from owners and gave it to the agents not saying the owners should have all the power, but it needs to be a little more fair. the fact that a couple of agents can effectively shape every season, is too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got_Wood Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 How do you know it's not a personal issue keeping him from Oak today? Because he hasn't contacted the Raiders yet. Look, of all the holdouts Parker has been a part of, I understand this one the most. If I were Seymour, I would be very mad. But, you can't get comfortable in the NFL. It's a different game now, and players usually don't stay on one team their entire career. You're fortunate to be making the kind of money you are as a player in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Seymour has exactly 0 leverage, other than to retire. Once the raiders file the "must report" paperwork, Seymour has 5 days to report of he's done for the year, with no paycheck and no accrued season, meaning next season he's in the same boat as this one with 1 year left on his deal. I thought if Seymour doesn't report, and thus does not take his physical, the Raiders can void the deal and get their 1st rounder back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightClub Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 i heard on espn this morning that Seymour has personal issues to work out...the main one being that his kid(s) are/were scheduled to start school yesterday...he needs to decide if he wants to move his family across country...it doesn't sound like it is an agent issue, just getting his personal things in order When you make millions of dollars per year, you have "people" for this. That's just a smokescreen while he fights for higher contract numbers to come to a much worse team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 worst part of the current CBA, it took all the power away from owners and gave it to the agents not saying the owners should have all the power, but it needs to be a little more fair. Pish posh. It was a great CBA. The owners lost power, gave the players a 5% raise, did nothing to address the ridiculous rookie salary problem, and the rich owners had to "subsidize" the poorer ones. What's not to love? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts