Deion Branch

[hines86rules 0]

Why is no one discussing Deion Branch missing mandatory camp yesterday? Did I just miss the thread? This could be a big development. While I doubt he will miss any real time, this could be a huge distraction for the Pats.

 

And has anyone been more annoying since he retired then Jerry Rice has been. Go away!!!

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patr...nch_ripped.html

[Savior57 0]

I agree with Rice. If you can't do the time, don't sign on the dotted line.

[hines86rules 0]

I agree with Rice also, but mind your own business. What is it to Rice what Branch does with regards to his contract and such.

[Boston 0]

BB has confirmed that Branch is an unexcused absence. This is really no surprise. Branch is looking for a new deal and saw this strategy payoff for Seymour. It's always about precedent and when the Pats gave a new deal to Seymour every other player on the team took note of that. Now the difference is Seymour (along with Brady) is a totally different story than any other player on the team.

 

The interesting question is how far apart are the two sides. Branch is a difficult guy to slot. He's their definite #1 but he's not a TO, Marvin Harrison type of #1. He'll definetly be looking to make more than Givens did but if he's asking for a lot more than things could get sticky.

 

In the end my guess is there will be the usual media glare on this. The Pats won't comment and hopefully Branch won't either. After that a deal probably gets done and all will be forgotten. Whether you like this stuff as a fan or not this is part of the business and it's not going away.

 

By the way this will not be a "huge distraction." The Pats are very good handling adversity. It's a strongpoint of the organization. They don't get into pissing contests with players. All three Super Bowls were won with situations (Bledsoe being benched, Milloy being released, Law going ballastic about his contract) about 1,000 times more dicey than this. I'm not saying this isn't a story worth watching but unless something really unforeseen happens it will be something that will probably be long forgotten come opening day...and this is why no one's really talking about it.

[devildog 0]

I agree with Rice also, but mind your own business. What is it to Rice what Branch does with regards to his contract and such.

 

That's what he's paid to do now, give his opinion.

[TD Ryan2 316]

Branch is a good guy and he's playing well above what his 5-year rookie contract will pay him in '06 (1.2mil).

 

But he has no leverage here with NE. If Branch decides he's gonna' sit out, he'll lose that 1.2mil (listed as "failed to report" and they don't have to pay him). Branch hasn't made enough money in his career yet to just walk away from 1.2 mil... he's made about 2.5 mil total over his career so far.

 

It looks like Branch's agent is trying to pull a trick from Richard Seymour's negotiation playbook... and it won't work for Branch for the TWO reasons:

1. Branch was a second round pick and hasn't made the money that first rounder Seymour has made... those dollars (even a "measley" 1.2 mil) are tougher for Branch to pass up on than Seymour.

 

2. NE's success/failure doesn't depend on Branch, it does depend on Seymour (Seymour and Brady to be specific).

 

 

As far as fantasy goes, Deion Branch is a #3WR. Sure, he's a #1WR in real football in NE, but his best season was last year (78, 998yds, 5tds) and those numbers are marginal at best.

 

As a Pats fan, I'm not worried that Branch will sit out or miss this upcoming season. He really has no choice but to play.

 

I'd like to see NE handle Branch in the same way they handled Seyomour; give Branch a "bump" in pay for this season (enough to hold him over) and then get his new deal done for next year.

 

But make no mistake; Branch has no leverage here. He needs to get paid and he needs to play in NE for that check to come in.

[devildog 0]

Branch is a good guy and he's playing well above what his 5-year rookie contract will pay him in '06 (1.2mil).

 

But he has no leverage here with NE. If Branch decides he's gonna' sit out, he'll lose that 1.2mil (listed as "failed to report" and they don't have to pay him). Branch hasn't made enough money in his career yet to just walk away from 1.2 mil... he's made about 2.5 mil total over his career so far.

 

It looks like Branch's agent is trying to pull a trick from Richard Seymour's negotiation playbook... and it won't work for Branch for the TWO reasons:

1. Branch was a second round pick and hasn't made the money that first rounder Seymour has made... those dollars (even a "measley" 1.2 mil) are tougher for Branch to pass up on than Seymour.

 

2. NE's success/failure doesn't depend on Branch, it does depend on Seymour (Seymour and Brady to be specific).

As far as fantasy goes, Deion Branch is a #3WR. Sure, he's a #1WR in real football in NE, but his best season was last year (78, 998yds, 5tds) and those numbers are marginal at best.

 

As a Pats fan, I'm not worried that Branch will sit out or miss this upcoming season. He really has no choice but to play.

 

I'd like to see NE handle Branch in the same way they handled Seyomour; give Branch a "bump" in pay for this season (enough to hold him over) and then get his new deal done for next year.

 

But make no mistake; Branch has no leverage here. He needs to get paid and he needs to play in NE for that check to come in.

 

I disagree with this a bit. I think he has as much leverage as he's ever going to have. If he sits out some other team will pay him big money next year. He'll get his money one way or another. I know the Pats can do more with less as far as targets for Brady, but they need Branch as much as he needs them. Without him, that receiver core goes from adequate to abysmal.

[TD Ryan2 316]

I disagree with this a bit. I think he has as much leverage as he's ever going to have. If he sits out some other team will pay him big money next year. He'll get his money one way or another. I know the Pats can do more with less as far as targets for Brady, but they need Branch as much as he needs them. Without him, that receiver core goes from adequate to abysmal.

 

I completely agree that the NE WR corps needs Branch (especially right now) but I dont' think he's needed as much as that Defense needed Seymour.

 

Sure, Branch can walk away from his biggest pay day ever (1.2 mil) and sit out a year and see what happens next year... he CAN do that but it's lot easier to say than do.

pass up the most money he's ever made to wait around for a year and see what will happen next year? yikes.

 

If you're a guy who's already made a ton over your career, sitting out a year ain't that bad... but for a guy like Branch? I don't think it's an option (well, a smart option).

[Boston 0]

The Branch situation is very important for one big reason. This is the contract that every other Patriot player will be looking at. While the Seymour situation was a little different last year that's Richard Seymour. While other players will try to point to that and use a similar tactic no one outside of Brady has anywhere near the resume/youth/cache that Seymour has. Quite frankly he's an elite superstar and the Patriots can not live without him. No one else besides Brady can realistically say they are on the same level. As for Branch he's definetly a core player who's also young. He's in line for a big bump. Yet, the Pats really need to be careful here because any precedent set here will surely (and rightfully) be used by every other solid young player who has a year left on his original deal. Therefore the Pats will be looking long term with this negotiation because that's far more important than simply getting Branch back on the field.

[Savior57 0]

That's what he's paid to do now, give his opinion.

 

 

Thanks for backin' me up.

 

 

[shovelheadt 71]

The problem I have is with people saying that Branch is a different story because he's not on the level of Seymore and Brady. As if he's somehow not as important to the team. I would actually counter that he may be just as important as Seymore because of the state of the WR corp.

 

Correct, he doesn't have the status of those two as compared to the entire NFL. But...if Branch were not arround for a significant period, I feel this offense suffers big time. Nobody will ever convince me that losing your 1 and 2 WRs in the same year would be no big deal.

[Boston 0]

The problem I have is with people saying that Branch is a different story because he's not on the level of Seymore and Brady. As if he's somehow not as important to the team. I would actually counter that he may be just as important as Seymore because of the state of the WR corp.

 

Correct, he doesn't have the status of those two as compared to the entire NFL. But...if Branch were not arround for a significant period, I feel this offense suffers big time. Nobody will ever convince me that losing your 1 and 2 WRs in the same year would be no big deal.

 

*Losing Branch would be a huge deal. I don't know how anyone could say that. He's their only definite at that position and losing him would put incredible pressure on some unproven and/or aging talent.

 

*Branch does not compare to Seymour. It's not even close. That's not a knock on Branch but it's true. Seymour is the foundation of their defense. It was not a coincidence that when he returned from injury last year the D began to gel. Other aspects of the D fell into place but there is zero doubt that it was Seymour's return that was by far the most important.

 

The bottomline is the Pats have won a Super Bowl without great talent at WR. The 01 team had Troy and Patten and nothing else. Yet, in two of the last five years where the Pats D was not topnotch they did not win a title. At the end of the day there is a tremendous gap between Seymour's value than Branch's value. One player is very good...the other is an elite building block.

[TD Ryan2 316]

The problem I have is with people saying that Branch is a different story because he's not on the level of Seymore and Brady.

 

 

he's not.

 

this isn't an attempt to be confrontational, it's just the facts.

Branch is not on the level of Brady and Seymour.

 

 

and to reiterate:

1. yes, NE needs Branch to play this year especially with all the question marks at WR.

 

2. I don't believe for one minute that Branch won't be there. As much as NE needs him, he needs NE.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

his best season was last year (78, 998yds, 5tds) and those numbers are marginal at best.

 

An ~80 catch/1,000 yard season is damn good - not marginal at best by a longshot.

[TD Ryan2 316]

An ~80 catch/1,000 yard season is damn good - not marginal at best by a longshot.

 

fair enough.

 

Branch is a very good NFL WR...

top 15? top 20? absolutely.

top 10? top 5? unfortunately, no.

[bigtuna 0]

Branch is making a mistake.

 

The Pats took care of Seymour, because great DT's are crucial to team success.

 

In Bill Belichick's world WR's are not that important. The team does not invest first round picks on them, does not sign big freee agent deals with them. Branch is looking for a Given's type deal, and won't get it IMO. at least not a year early.

 

It would not surprise me to see the Pats deal Branch for a high pick in next years draft and then use a mid round pick to acquire someone like Ashley Lelei or Dennis Northcutt.

[listen2me 23 1,873]

An ~80 catch/1,000 yard season is damn good - not marginal at best by a longshot.

 

damn good? thats under 5 Rec a game and like 62 yds a game......thats not really "damn good"..

[TD Ryan2 316]

damn good? thats under 5 Rec a game and like 62 yds a game......thats not really "damn good"..

 

 

nor is it "marginal at best" as I initially put it.

those numbers are good enough to consider Branch a top 15 WR.

 

 

there's no doubt that Branch is underpaid right now.

 

but Brady and Seymour are arguable #1 in the NFL in their respective positions; Branch isn't even close to that.

[gatorbait7391 0]

this upsets me. I love deion this year and dont want any problems, but maybe this will lead to more grabs by chad jackson!

[Boston 0]

Branch is making a mistake.

 

The Pats took care of Seymour, because great DT's are crucial to team success.

 

In Bill Belichick's world WR's are not that important. The team does not invest first round picks on them, does not sign big freee agent deals with them. Branch is looking for a Given's type deal, and won't get it IMO. at least not a year early.

 

It would not surprise me to see the Pats deal Branch for a high pick in next years draft and then use a mid round pick to acquire someone like Ashley Lelei or Dennis Northcutt.

 

While I agree the Pats will not be held hostage by Branch and have won without stellar WR groups in the past they have invested in WRs. Branch, Bethel and CJax are all second rounders. They offered Mason a big deal which he turned down and also spent decent money on a bust in Donald Hayes. They also gave up a #5 for Andre Davis which was also an ugly move. If Branch is looking to break the bank I have no doubts they will let him walk (as they should) but I do think they are willing to give him very solid money (which I hope he takes).

[ROCKET 0]

I think the Pats are hoping they can get one last year out of Branch and then assess just what he is truly worth. There was some ridiculous $$ thrown at very average wr's like Randal El so no doubt some team next year will pay silly $ for Branch. If that happens he's gone. The Pats are'nt stupid and yes they have alot of cap$$ but they won't pay a borderline top 15-20 wr top 10 $$. They'd be much better off going after a top wr like Boldin or Holt even if it cost more $$. Branch is good, not great. I'm not sure if any of the top 10 wr's are going to be free agents next year or not.

 

After seeing them trade up to grab Chad Jackson I honestly think they hope he can become their #1 next year and let Branch go if he wants to break the bank. Jackson has alot more upside than Branch but potential doesn't mean anything yet. I think best case for the Pats is to string Branch along and hope Jackson is the real deal. Next year they can play the market with all the $$ they have and get the wr's they need even if Jackson flops. Branch isn't worth over-paying for. A guy like Holt, CJ etc. is.

[t.j 35]

And has anyone been more annoying since he retired then Jerry Rice has been. Go away!!!

 

Since Rice retired, you've been far more annoying than he has been. HTH.

 

I agree with Rice also, but mind your own business. What is it to Rice what Branch does with regards to his contract and such.

 

He's part of the media now, that's what the media does: Provide opinions, without the restrictions of unwritten codes about what you can say about fellow players, and crap like that. There's no reason Rice shouldn't be able to criticize Branch for doing something that he felt was a mistake to have done in his own career.

 

2. NE's success/failure doesn't depend on Branch, it does depend on Seymour (Seymour and Brady to be specific).

As far as fantasy goes, Deion Branch is a #3WR. Sure, he's a #1WR in real football in NE, but his best season was last year (78, 998yds, 5tds) and those numbers are marginal at best.

 

I'm not sure I agree with this. In general, I agree with you and Boston that most likely this whole thing will pass quietly and Branch will end up playing out his deal. However, I think the Pats rely on Branch more than you are letting on. Certainly not as much as they rely on Seymour, but that only matters if Branch is asking for Seymour money.

Branch's career highs of 78-998-5 are not amazing, but consider New England's other options for '06. Reche Caldwell, career highs of 28-352-3(different season). 35 year-old Troy Brown, who in the last three years has totalled 96-1122-7. And rookie Chad Jackson. Granted, the Patriots have tight ends coming out of their ass and can get a lot of mileage out of goal line and 2TE-2RB-1WR sets. But even so you have to like them a hell of a lot better with Branch as the 1WR. Last year Givens was the only WR in a lot of their sets, which affected Givens' numbers, but Givens isn't around now. Only BB/Pioli know what they plan to do with what was Givens' role.

 

I'd like to see NE handle Branch in the same way they handled Seyomour; give Branch a "bump" in pay for this season (enough to hold him over) and then get his new deal done for next year.

 

Yeah, I could definitely see that happening. Personally, I think this is playing out exactly as BB/Pioli expected. People said that they let Givens go so that they could afford Branch next year. It may be that they let Givens go so that they could afford Branch this year. The Titans are now paying Givens more than the Pats are paying Branch. If the Patriots had paid Givens, then Branch would have more leverage now than he does. Branch has to know that, like bigtuna said, the Pats just don't invest that heavily in WRs. And Branch has feel confident that he will have a good year, and next year they will pay him what he deserves, unless maybe Chad Jackson lights the world on fire in his rookie year, which is unlikely.

[Boston 0]

The problem with giving Branch a bump this year is that will be two years in a row they will have done that (i.e. precedent will definetly be set). That means the floodgates will open for every quality player that has a year left on their deal. How do you tell them no after you've done it twice and once for a guy without a Pro Bowl appearance (I'm not knocking Branch just stating what every agent will point out). It would definetly be a short term fix but it could cause more long term harm than good.

[t.j 35]

The problem with giving Branch a bump this year is that will be two years in a row they will have done that (i.e. precedent will definetly be set). That means the floodgates will open for every quality player that has a year left on their deal. How do you tell them no after you've done it twice and once for a guy without a Pro Bowl appearance (I'm not knocking Branch just stating what every agent will point out). It would definetly be a short term fix but it could cause more long term harm than good.

 

Do you think it's realistic to try to maintain a precedent where you almost never re-up players with one year left on their contract? The reason I ask is because that seems to be pretty standard practice for above-average starters around the league. I'm sure quality prospective free agents would like to feel that if they sign with the Pats and outplay their contract, they have a chance to profit from it as soon as they would elsewhere. Then again, Branch and Seymour were both situations where they were playing out their rookie deals, and therefore were drafted rather than free agents... so maybe you're right that it would indeed do a lot more harm than good from a precedent standpoint.

[Boston 0]

Do you think it's realistic to try to maintain a precedent where you almost never re-up players with one year left on their contract? The reason I ask is because that seems to be pretty standard practice for above-average starters around the league. I'm sure quality prospective free agents would like to feel that if they sign with the Pats and outplay their contract, they have a chance to profit from it as soon as they would elsewhere. Then again, Branch and Seymour were both situations where they were playing out their rookie deals, and therefore were drafted rather than free agents... so maybe it would indeed do a lot more harm than good from a precedent standpoint.

 

The issue isn't reupping or extending players before their deal runs out. The Pats do that. Brady, Dillon, Light and Hochstein are recent examples. The issue is giving a raise after a player holds out. Both Seymour and Branch have (or are in Branch's case) held out while a current deal is in place. If the Pats give in to Branch they pretty much have told everyone that this tactic will work and more money will be squeezed out of the organization prior to a deal expiring.

[t.j 35]

The issue isn't reupping or extending players before their deal runs out. The Pats do that. Brady, Dillon, Light and Hochstein are recent examples. The issue is giving a raise after a player holds out. Both Seymour and Branch have (or are in Branch's case) held out while a current deal is in place. If the Pats give in to Branch they pretty much have told everyone that this tactic will work and more money will be squeezed out of the organization prior to a deal expiring.

 

Fair enough. What was the situation with Dillon? New contract after a trade, right? If so I don't think that really applies. Brady quarterbacked multiple Super Bowls before being extended, his contract was a given and doesn't apply to anyone else. Light and Hochstein are examples that would encourage players, I am sure. But overall I don't know that there's significant reason for players to be confident that they can get an extension without holding out in New England. Maybe if Branch had come to camp they'd have worked with him and he'd have been the best example yet. But clearly he didn't think (right or wrong) that's how it was going to play out.

[Boston 0]

Fair enough. What was the situation with Dillon? New contract after a trade, right? Brady quarterbacked multiple Super Bowls before being extended, his contract was a given and doesn't apply to anyone else. Light and Hochstein are examples that would encourage players, I am sure. But overall I don't know that there's significant reason for players to be confident that they can get an extension without holding out in New England. Maybe if Branch had come to camp they'd have worked with him and he'd have been the best example yet. But clearly he didn't think that's how it was going to play out.

 

 

*The Pats have been working with Branch. There have most definetly been negotiations. Now what the Pats are offering and what Branch is asking for are not known. The bottomline is he's under contract for one more year. If a deal isn't done that he walks as a free agent to a big payday elsewhere or the Pats franchise him and he scores a big one year deal. That's how the system works.

 

*I think saying players have no reason to think they can't get an extension without a hold out is a generalization that doesn't hold up. As stated there have been plenty of extensions. I also forgot Rodney Harrison and Mike Vrabel who were extended last year as well as Tedy Bruschi a year or two before that. Even Ty Law was offerd an extension/reworked deal although he felt it was a bad offer (even if it would have ended up being the best deal he received last year). To point to Branch as something negative towards the whole organization just isn't fair. Like every single team in the NFL the Pats have had easy contract situations and difficult contract situations. The bottomline with the Pats is they have a dollar figure in mind and more often than not they don't budge too far from it. If they don't than they are not afraid to let players walk.

 

Fair enough. What was the situation with Dillon? New contract after a trade, right? If so I don't think that really applies.

 

The Pats actually gave Dillon another deal after 2005. The deal after the trade was team-friendly and helped make the trade happen. The deal last year was very good for Dillon and unless he has a rebound could be one the Pats end up taking the pipe on.

[t.j 35]

ok, good points re Dillon, Harrison, etc

 

*I think saying players have no reason to think they can't get an extension without a hold out is a generalization that doesn't hold up.

 

"Can't" isn't necessarily the issue so much as "aren't likely to." That said, if the generalization doesn't hold up, then you tell me why he's holding out. I heard someone say when this holdout was first reported that his goal wasn't to force a new contract now so much as to get the Pats thinking for next year. But if what you say is true that they're already in negotiations, then there's no need for that.

 

To point to Branch as something negative towards the whole organization just isn't fair.

 

I'm not pointing Branch out as negative. I was making two points:

1. if he hadn't held out, and he had gotten a new contract, it would have been a great thing for the Pats' reputation

2. for whatever reason, he felt like it was in his best interests to hold out.

 

So again, I'm not sure what it is that you think is the answer to #2.

 

The bottomline with the Pats is they have a dollar figure in mind and more often than not they don't budge too far from it. If they don't than they are not afraid to let players walk.

 

I agree with that. But Branch is certainly making less than what they think he is worth. Isn't he? Brady's lavished praise on him alone would seem to make him worth more than what he is paid now. And the Pats' lack of other options at the position has to come into play at least a little bit.

 

Anyway. I don't want to get sidetracked too much. I think Branch is making a mistake, but I do think he has some leverage. I'm on the fence as to whether the Pats would hurt themselves by doing something similar to what they did with Seymour (obviously with a smaller dollar amount).

[Boston 0]

ok, good points re Dillon, Harrison, etc

"Can't" isn't necessarily the issue so much as "aren't likely to." That said, if the generalization doesn't hold up, then you tell me why he's holding out. I heard someone say when this holdout was first reported that his goal wasn't to force a new contract now so much as to get the Pats thinking for next year. But if what you say is true that they're already in negotiations, then there's no need for that.

I'm not pointing Branch out as negative. I was making two points:

1. if he hadn't held out, and he had gotten a new contract, it would have been a great thing for the Pats' reputation

2. for whatever reason, he felt like it was in his best interests to hold out.

 

So again, I'm not sure what it is that you think is the answer to #2.

I agree with that. But Branch is certainly making less than what they think he is worth. Isn't he? Brady's lavished praise on him alone would seem to make him worth more than what he is paid now. And the Pats' lack of other options at the position has to come into play at least a little bit.

 

Anyway. I don't want to get sidetracked too much. I think Branch is making a mistake, but I do think he has some leverage. I'm on the fence as to whether the Pats would hurt themselves by doing something similar to what they did with Seymour (obviously with a smaller dollar amount).

 

*Branch is holding out for the same reason Seymour did. He feels he has outplayed his current deal and wants an extension. If he can't get that he wants a raise this year while continuing to work on a new deal. His goal is to force the Pats hand now which will translate into more money for him. While I understand he wants to be paid more he is currently under contract. Right now the Pats have hand. One year from now he has hand. That's how the system works. Sometimes it benefits the team and sometimes it benefits the players. Givens just went through the same thing. He did not hold out and in the end cashed in in a big way with the Titans.

 

*The Pats are not going to give Branch more than they feel he is worth because of their current WR state. They cut Milloy and went with an unproven rookie in Wilson. They just let AV walk and will probably give the job to another rookie. While there's no question the Pats WR unit takes a big hit without Branch they won't do something that helps short term but could haunt them long term. If Branch isn't there than for better or worse BB will deal with the hand he has. While he's always trying to win now he won't do it at the expense of tomorrow. The goal of BB and the Kraft family is to have an organization that competes for a title on an annual basis. They don't want to be one of those organizations that has a good run than goes into cap hell and bottoms out. The only way to accomplish that is to make sure you don't overpay and watch every dollar.

[Jay 0]

Way way too early to worry about this situation yet.

[Nichee 0]

And has anyone been more annoying since he retired then Jerry Rice has been. Go away!!!

 

I would say that little gay elf Hines Ward has been more annoying.

[t.j 35]

*Branch is holding out for the same reason Seymour did. He feels he has outplayed his current deal and wants an extension. If he can't get that he wants a raise this year while continuing to work on a new deal. His goal is to force the Pats hand now which will translate into more money for him.

 

Of course, that's why anyone holds out. Let me rephrase the question. Given that the Patriots don't value WRs especially highly and don't want to set the precedent of giving a raise to players who hold out, and given the examples you named of players who got extended without holding out, and given that he has already been negotiating with the team, why do you think Branch still thought it was in his best interests to hold out? I'll give you some possible answers so you understand what I am getting at: A. he is foolish, B. he is upset, C. he isn't convinced that the Patriots will pay him if he doesn't hold out, D. he doesn't want to go to camp, E. other.

 

*The Pats are not going to give Branch more than they feel he is worth because of their current WR state.

 

I have never suggested that the Pats would or should give him more than they feel his worth. The point I keep making, though is that I think Branch is making less than what the Patriots feel he is worth right now. I asked you straight up do you agree that that is the case, and you didn't answer. If you do agree, then I think the fact that the team needs him at the position becomes important, because they can give him a raise and still pay him no more than he is worth.

[TD Ryan2 316]

I have never suggested that the Pats would or should give him more than they feel his worth. The point I keep making, though is that I think Branch is making less than what the Patriots feel he is worth right now. I asked you straight up do you agree that that is the case, and you didn't answer. If you do agree, then I think the fact that the team needs him at the position becomes important, because they can give him a raise and still pay him no more than he is worth.

 

 

this is why I support the "Bump" for a year.

Branch is under paid; but he's also under contract.

 

the Bump is a nice middle ground for both sides.

The Pats brass did their job by not overpaying for an underperformer.

Branch did his job by performing.

 

And as far as "setting the precedent" for the future... if NE is constantly running into the trouble that their rookie and FA's are drastically out-performing their contracts, that's a good problem to have.

 

Branch is the #1 WR on the team (and SuperBowl MVP, that matters in contract talks) and though I don't really believe he has a lot of leverage, I do think he deserves a BUMP for the year.

*IF* in the future, NE has more players that overachieve the way Seymour/Branch have, Pats fans will counting additional super bowl rings.

[Boston 0]

Of course, that's why anyone holds out. Let me rephrase the question. Given that the Patriots don't value WRs especially highly and don't want to set the precedent of giving a raise to players who hold out, and given the examples you named of players who got extended without holding out, why do you think Branch still thought it was in his best interests to hold out? I'll give you some possible answers so you understand what I am getting at: A. he is stupid, B. he isn't convinced that the Patriots will pay him if he doesn't hold out, C. he doesn't want to go to camp, D. other

I have never suggested that the Pats would or should give him more than they feel his worth. The point I keep making, though is that I think Branch is making less than what the Patriots feel he is worth right now. I asked you straight up do you agree that that is the case, and you didn't answer. If you do agree, then I think the fact that the team needs him at the position becomes important, because they can give him a raise and still pay him no more than he is worth.

 

*He's holding out because he wants a lot of money and my guess is he and the Pats are far apart and he's not happy about it. Whether he's asking for the world or the Pats are lowballing him I do not know. He's also probably trying to duplicate Seymour because that tactic worked for Seymour as he got a nice raise and eventually signed a huge deal. Right or wrong this is the tact he and his representatives feel he needs to use to get the message across to the Pats that he wants more money ASAP.

 

*I disagree that the Pats don't value WRs. That simply is not true. BB has used three second rounders on WRs in Bethel, Branch and Jackson. He offerd Mason big money last year. He signed Donald Hayes a few years back to decent money (talk about bad signings). They offered Givens solid money (not real close to the Titan offer but it was solid money). He traded a #5 last year for Davis. He's also probably going to sign Branch to good money. Now do I think he values the position like Dline. No. Yet, he also doesn't simply write it off.

 

*I have answered the worth question. Right now he's probably underpaid but I don't think it's unfair because that's how the system works. The Pats made the initial investment in him and it has paid off for them. They have hand. After this year Branch will have the hand and will make big time money. If he gets hurt or underperforms he will keep his bonus. That's how the system works. At the end of the day he is under contract. If they work out an extension than great. Yet, if the Pats don't like the numbers it is their right not to pay him just like it will be his right to sign with another team if he's not happy with what the Pats are offering. In the end it's a very simple business equation.

[t.j 35]

*I disagree that the Pats don't value WRs. That simply is not true. BB has used three second rounders on WRs in Bethel, Branch and Jackson. He offerd Mason big money last year. He signed Donald Hayes a few years back to decent money (talk about bad signings). They offered Givens solid money (not real close to the Titan offer but it was solid money). He traded a #5 last year for Davis. He's also probably going to sign Branch to good money. Now do I think he values the position like Dline. No. Yet, he also doesn't simply write it off.

 

I didn't say they don't value WRs. I didn't say BB writes off the position. I said they don't value WRs especially highly. Sheesh. And the examples you listed are not evidence to the contrary.

 

*I have answered the worth question. Right now he's probably underpaid but I don't think it's unfair because that's how the system works.

 

Ok, if you answered it earlier, then I missed it.

I didn't say it's unfair. I know how the system works. I'm a big believer that teams should have the better end of contracts just as often as players do.

I don't need all the generic explanations of how the Patriots handle the salary cap. This is getting really, really tedious. We're all in agreement here as to how the Patriots would like this to play out. I'm just not as convinced as you are that the team has hand over the player in this particular case. Players gain some amount of leverage when the team needs them, and the Patriots do need Branch.

[TD Ryan2 316]

I'm just not as convinced as you are that the team has hand over the player in this particular case. Players gain some amount of leverage when the team needs them, and the Patriots do need Branch.

 

 

1.2 mil is a LOT for Branch to lose at this point in his career.

This is his biggest pay-day yet.

Sitting out the year, forfeiting 1+ mil, and waiting to see what happens next year isn't as easy to do as you guys make it sound.

 

on the flip side, yes, NE needs Branch there.

But if they're forced to start Caldwell, CJackson, Troy Brown, along with Ben Watson seeing some time wide, they'll do it... and I believe they can do that easier than Branch can sit for a year without that million+ dollars.

 

 

 

but like I said... neither side REALLY wants to do that. They'll work something out.

[t.j 35]

1.2 mil is a LOT for Branch to lose at this point in his career.

This is his biggest pay-day yet.

Sitting out the year, forfeiting 1+ mil, and waiting to see what happens next year isn't as easy to do as you guys make it sound.

 

on the flip side, yes, NE needs Branch there.

But if they're forced to start Caldwell, CJackson, Troy Brown, along with Ben Watson seeing some time wide, they'll do it... and I believe they can do that easier than Branch can sit for a year without that million+ dollars.

but like I said... neither side REALLY wants to do that. They'll work something out.

 

Who said he is going to sit out the whole year? You're making it sound like a holdout is an all-or-nothing thing. It isn't. Lots of players hold out... only some of them get paid... but among those who don't get paid, very few end up sitting out the whole year. Maybe Branch's plan is to call the team's bluff until such time as he's going to start losing significant money, and come back then. Maybe his plan is just to call the team's bluff until he feels like his game will suffer by missing more practice time. Although he probably can't afford to miss the whole year, I bet he feels confident that he could end his holdout at any time and still be the starter.

[TD Ryan2 316]

Who said he is going to sit out the whole year?

Maybe Branch's plan is to call the team's bluff until such time as he's going to start losing significant money, and come back then. Maybe his plan is just to call the team's bluff until he feels like his game will suffer by missing more practice time. Although he probably can't afford to miss the whole year, I bet he feels confident that he could end his holdout at any time and still be the starter.

 

Branch can't afford to lose significant money.

The guy has only made 2.5 mil in his career so far.

 

I believe that he is fined $1,000 per day for missing an off season camp.

That fine jumps to $5,000 per day in pre season.

I don't know if/what that number jumps to once the season starts.

 

If he doesn't report by (i believe) week 8, NE puts him on the failed to report list, and doesn't have to pay him at all! losing 1.2 mil PLUS incurring all those fines is NOT something Branch can do.

That's a ZERO chance option for Deion Branch whereas going without him is a doable but BAD option for NE.

[t.j 35]

Branch can't afford to lose significant money.

The guy has only made 2.5 mil in his career so far.

 

I believe that he is fined $1,000 per day for missing an off season camp.

That fine jumps to $5,000 per day in pre season.

I don't know if/what that number jumps to once the season starts.

 

only made $2.5M. LOL. So if he holds out from now until the start of preseason, that's about $50,000. That's pretty much chump change compared to the $2.5M he's made and the $1.15M he would still make this year when he returns. I rest my case, he's in no rush to get back.

[TD Ryan2 316]

So if he holds out from now until the start of preseason, that's about $50,000. That's pretty much chump change compared to the $2.5M he's made and the $1.15M he would still make this year when he returns. I rest my case, he's in no rush to get back.

 

 

which brings us full circle in this argument.

 

this really is a non-issue. Branch, despite being underpaid, will be playing for New England this year because he doesn't have the leverage to hold out for very long.

 

thank you for playing.