Deion Branch news re: Traded to Seattle

[bigtuna 0]

But if they start losing games and the passing game goes nowhere, fans like you and fatboy will start calling the radio stations and writing to the Globe that NE needs to sign Branch.

 

You say that NE has all the cards. Technically, they do. They don't have to give Branch more money. They don't have to trade him. They can just let him sit out the season.

 

But then they don't get anything out of their valuable investment of Branch.

 

 

They have a great record without Branch over the last few years. tOM bRADY is the QB

they will be fine. They still hold the cards...and they will hold them next year too. Its up to Branch to live up to the deal HE signed. They offered a deal to make him a top 10 paid WR...which is fair, especially given he is NOT A FREE AGENT. He is acting like he is a FA.

 

Because the SEahawks and the Jets supposedly are willing to make him a top 3 WR pay-wise...does not make it smart. He is simply NOT THAT GOOD.

 

Let him sit out the year or make a trade, it doesn't matter. The Patriots have set a value for him and will attempt to extract the value for in terms of a contract or a trade of players/picks. When they get what they percieve is good value, Branch will be playing football again.

[Bill E. 666]

This seems to happen almost every year. Neither Branch nor NE can afford to let him sit just out of principal. My guess is he will be somewhere by Sunday and suited up by week 2.

[lb3g4m3rcyl 0]

This seems to happen almost every year. Neither Branch nor NE can afford to let him sit just out of principal. My guess is he will be somewhere by Sunday and suited up by week 2.

 

I doubt it. NE is worth over a billion dollars. You think they give a ###### about a measily million?

[Yippie Skippy 0]

How much did he get paid in 2004 when he sat on the from week 9 => ?

 

I'd say 4 mil guarenteed is great considering he pretty much stole whatever he got in his last contract.

 

Branch, GS:

2002 - 7

2003 - 11

2004 - 9

 

This is where I originally corrected you by reminding you that Branch had some big playoff games and won the Super Bowl MVP that year in 2004. NOW your take is that he did earn his keep that year. Nice flip flop.

 

I told you why you were wrong, and now you agree with me.

 

Go ahead and write another short story blasting me. I'm sure everyone wants to hear more about your job and how it relates to Branch. And just what is it that you think that you are champ of?? Champ know it all?

 

Tell everyone again how many times in your life that you stuffed pads in your girdle, snapped your chinstraps, and actually played football to qualify you as a know it all!

 

 

Here's another tip I'll ante up: guarAntee

[TD Ryan2 314]

Neither Branch nor NE can afford to let him sit just out of principal.

 

this is true ONLY if NE falters without him on the field.

 

Certainly NE is better with Branch on the field, but is it disasterous without him? Can they still contend without him? All this remains to be seen. And it doesn't help Branch's cause any that NE opens against BUF and NYJ.

 

Perhaps more important in all this, Belichick and Pioli don't care about principal, or "showing who's boss", or anything like that... there is ZERO emotion involved in this for them; it's 100% a business decision. They have decided what Branch is worth (to them) in this market/salary structure. They will only pay him what they deem that value to be and *IF* they must lose him, they will press to maximize every ounce of compensation for him.

[Bill E. 666]

I doubt it. NE is worth over a billion dollars. You think they give a ###### about a measily million?

 

I did not mean they could not afford the salary. Here is my thought. With how competitive the league is, teams need to maximize the use of every asset. What if NE lets Branch sit and still go 11-5 or even 12-4. Then they lose in the championship game or the Superbowl. Would the use of Branch have won them one more game and given them another home game in the playoffs? Would the draft pick they would have gotten them help them next year? Even if they win the Superbowl, an extra home game in the playoffs is worth millions. They can not let that fruit sit of the tree because of how much this business costs on a macro level. I am not saying they will cave and overpay him, but they need to maximize that asset even if it means taking less in a trade.

 

The other side of the coin is if they believe that HE will cave and their best use of that asset is to wait until that happens then that is what they will do. I just do not believe that either side can afford to wait very long before someone either cuts their losses of they negotiate to an agreement. Think of how many holdouts there are every year. How many times has a player held out for more than one week into the regular season? Something will give very quickly.

 

 

this is true ONLY if NE falters without him on the field.

 

Certainly NE is better with Branch on the field, but is it disasterous without him? Can they still contend without him?

 

You are correct, it is a business decision, but simply contending is not enough. They have to do everything they can to win every single game. They can not assume BUF or NYJ will be an easy win. If they can not agree to something that they feel benefits them, then they will cut their losses and do what they can to maximize next year's chances with a draft pick. I just do not see this going past week 2.

[Jetdoc 20]

Just saw on ESPNews that the arbitrator has dismissed Branch's complaint.

 

Apparently, it's not over until the 14th for some reason, though...not sure what that means.

[TD Ryan2 314]

Just saw on ESPNews that the arbitrator has dismissed Branch's complaint.

 

Apparently, it's not over until the 14th for some reason, though...not sure what that means.

 

 

it doesn't mean a whole lot yet:

 

 

Boston.com (borges article)

The arbitrator in the Deion Branch case denied the NFL’s motion that the mediator had no jurisdiction in Branch’s dispute with the New England Patriots today and then informed both sides he would not be available to hear the first of Branch’s two claims against the team on Saturday as originally expected.

 

 

The discovery and deposition hearings are set for Monday and Tuesday in the second grievance procedure and will be argued before special master Stephen Burbank of the University of Pennsylvania Law School next Thursday and Friday. This testimony effectively postponed the original grievance hearing on the issue if the Patriots violated an agreement to trade Branch for at least a week.

 

Arbitrator John Feerick of Fordham Law School will likely not hear arguments on that issue until after Burbank rules on Branch’s second claim, a non-injury grievance in which he asserts the Patriots failed to bargain in good faith with him. The NFL has contended filing the two grievances on what they feel is essentially the same issue was an effort on the part of Branch’s legal team to take two bites at the apple.

 

Discovery, in which the two sides must produce any written material or other facts involved in the case, may be the key element because while the CBA prohibits any oral agreement from altering a written player contract faxes, e-mails and even a team press release announcing that Branch was being given a week to try and trade himself -- a right he did not have under the terms of his original contract without tampering penalties against any opposing teams who spoke to him -- could become a stumbling block for the league and the Patriots.

 

However, if such contact makes clear the Patriots’ had established a high asking price or states that they retain their right to accept or reject any trade it would likely be a high hurdle for Branch to overcome. It is expected under an expedited hearing request, that Burbank will rule quickly once the two sides complete their arguments a week from tomorrow. A ruling could come down as early as the following day or it might drag out over the season’s second weekend.

 

Losing the motion to make two grievance claims combined is not a sign of how the case will ultimately be decided but it is a reminder to both sides that once an arbitration or legal process begins, control leaves the hands of the disputing parties and is vested others who may see your argument in a far different light than you do.

 

Burbank was the special master in such a case in 2004 and is believed to have been ready to rule in favor of Terrell Owens in his dispute with the San Francisco 49ers. Before Burbank declared Owens a free agent the league stepped in and brokered a three-cornered trade between the 49ers, Eagles and Ravens that cost the Ravens Owens’ services after they had completed both a trade agreement with San Francisco and what they thought was a satisfactory contract with Owens. Before the trade was finalized Owens decided he preferred to play for the Eagles and filed a grievance arguing that he had followed the requirements of his contract in San Francisco and should be declared a free agent.

 

Unexpectedly, Burbank gave clear signs he was ready to rule for Owens but before he issued that order the three-way deal that sent a late round pick to the Ravens and Eagles’ defensive Brandon Whiting to the 49ers was made and Owens landed in Philadelphia without ever having him challenge the system.

[lb3g4m3rcyl 0]

Just saw on ESPNews that the arbitrator has dismissed Branch's complaint.

 

Apparently, it's not over until the 14th for some reason, though...not sure what that means.

 

I think what you are really trying to say is it safe to pick him up from FA?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Branch did not lose the grievance, but lost the venue and one of his arguments. This was completely expected and should not be a decisive blow to Branch. However, given some of the other legal arguments, it is not likely that the grievance(s) has (have) much merit. Even if Branch wins, it is unlikely that it will force a trade or compensation and even if he loses, it is unlikely that he will report.

 

As such, keep Branch on the WW or stash him if you have a roster spot. This means nothing and it sure seems that both sides are digging in for a long fight.

[redtodd 7]

The price of Branch is increasing as this game goes on.

[t.j 35]

REC YDS TD LG

B. Watson 3 50 0 34

R. Caldwell 2 33 0 24

D. Graham 1 23 0 23

C. Dillon 2 22 0 16

T. Brown 2 18 1 9

K. Faulk 1 17 1 17

 

 

O Gabriel where art thou?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

REC YDS TD LG

B. Watson 3 50 0 34

R. Caldwell 2 33 0 24

D. Graham 1 23 0 23

C. Dillon 2 22 0 16

T. Brown 2 18 1 9

K. Faulk 1 17 1 17

 

 

O Gabriel where art thou?

He was inactive along with Chad Jackson. Both have a bad hammy.

[Gepetto 987]

Deion Branch was traded to the Seattle Seahaws for a 1st round pick in 2007 per Dan Patrick on ESPN Radio.

[SayChowda 0]

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

 

September 11, 2006

Branch traded

The Deion Branch holdout is over, but Branch isn’t returning to the Patriots. Branch, the fifth-year receiver, has been traded to the Seattle Seahawks for a first-round draft choice today.

 

The 5-foot-9, 193-pound Branch was entering the final year of the five-year contract he signed as a rookie in 2002. Unhappy with that deal, he held out of training camp.

 

Then, in late August, the Patriots gave Branch permission to negotiate with other clubs, and the Seahawks and Jets made contract offers. But a trade with New England couldn’t be consummated by the Patriots’ imposed deadline of Sept. 1 and Branch remained with the Patriots.

 

Branch and his representatives then filed two grievances against the club. The grievances hadn’t been heard before today’s trade.

[Texansfan 0]

As a Matt Hasselbeck owner!

 

[mikeod11 0]

Wow, surprising, especially considering NEs performance yesterday. They aren't exactly overflowing with good WRs.

[plasma george 52]

 

Fock yeah, now Holt, Chambers, and Branch.

He needs to be studying right now !

[OB1 33]

Deion Branch was traded to the Seattle Seahaws for a 1st round pick in 2007 per Dan Patrick on ESPN Radio.

I wonder if this is any indication that DJax might be worse off then they are letting on, or are they just loading up the offense for another run? Kudos to the Pats for getting a 1st rounder for him, even if it will likely be a late one. I did not think they would pull that off, though they now have a very suspect receiving corps.

[jmueller44 0]

Link to ESPN.com Story

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2583149

[Chronic Husker 85]

NE has screwed things up so much that Branch will never play for them again. Their options are to let him sit or to trade him and try to get something for him.

I hate to say I told ya so......wait a minute, no I don't.

[Bill E. 666]

Their options are to let him sit or to trade him and try to get something for him.

 

I hate to say I told ya so......wait a minute, no I don't.

 

Nice call. You pointed out their only two options.

[lb3g4m3rcyl 0]

This seems to happen almost every year. Neither Branch nor NE can afford to let him sit just out of principal. My guess is he will be somewhere by Sunday and suited up by week 2.

 

Hey Bill. Good call man.

[Bill E. 666]

Hey Bill. Good call man.

 

Thanks, I was a day late though. It was not much of a call. It seems to happen every year and very few go beyond week 2. The best thing is someone dropped him in my $100 league yesterday and I picked him right up. I will not start him right away but he should have some value down the line.

[Chronic Husker 85]

Nice call. You pointed out their only two options.

 

Look through the thread and you'll realize that at least one or two of you chowderhead homers disagreed with me and were under the impression Branch would play for the Pats again.

[phillybear 364]

I think it's a good move by Seattle. They are trying to win now, and if Jackson's knee is really that bad, they need a #1 WR. I hate to give up a 1st rounder, but it's a move they probably had to make.

 

Branch might still be the victim of a passing game that spreads it around to much to put up major numbers, like in NE, but he is going to get some decent numbers when he adjusts to the offense.

[mulletia 0]

I am stunned that the pats got a first for branch, late first or otherwise, does this mean they draft olsen the te from miami with that pick?

[Justy2 0]

Yeah, it would be fun to watch Favre send a few balls spiraling towards Branch in triple coverage and get picked off.

 

The pats are going to get a first round pick for Branch. That is his market value, an end of round first pick. Seattle with its predicted low level first round pick will pay fair market value. Branch is a decent WR who can get it done in the clutch, as evidenced by his performance in the playoffs and SuperBowl. That sounds like first round material to me. If you were a coach or an owner on NFL / College draft day and you had future knowledge of Branch and your competition did too, would you let Branch fall to the second round? If you needed a WR, would you let him fall? He is a first round pick.

 

One point that many of you are missing here is that the Pats don't NEED Branch. Brady spreads the ball around, alot! Therefore the Pats can posture all they want in these trade negotiations, they are not going to be hurt by a missing Branch. That is exactly what they're doing.

 

In the end, all sides will be happy. The Pat's will have two first round picks next year. Branch will get mo money. Branch's agent will have some bragging rights. Seattle will add another weapon to its arsenal.

 

You heard it here first.

 

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I am surprised that the Seahawks would give up a first for Branch. Even a late first is a high price for disgruntled guy on a team that needs some help. I guess the game Seattle played yesterday forced their hand a little.

 

It works out for both teams in that Seattle gets a WR that will help for the immediate future and they are in pretty good cap shape. The Pats are going to suffer this season (although Branch would not have contributed anyway) and they (can) get a player who will contribute for the next 4-5 years at short money.

 

Of course Branch gets what he wants, which is the interesting thing. As was discussed quite a bit this afternoon, the ramifications of the move might have a ripple effect on negotiations later on with other players and the Pats. Should be interesting.

[t.j 35]

He was inactive along with Chad Jackson. Both have a bad hammy.

 

Yeah I know. I benched him even though I had nobody else to start. I'm just saying... get yo'self ready Douggie! My team (and the Patriots as well) need you!

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Yeah I know. I benched him even though I had nobody else to start. I'm just saying... get yo'self ready Douggie! My team (and the Patriots as well) need you!

 

Need them both, but I am not sure that either will play in Week 2. I think that if the Jets lost on Sunday, they would not play. Now that the Jets won, there is a higher likelihood of one (Gabriel) or both playing.

[BMoney 0]

i think its a win-win as much as NE could have it be...

 

they werent going to trade branch to a team in their own division...

 

djax is always banged up..hes as good as he'll be...

 

this, for seattle, was a bargain..as they figure, only 50% of 1st rounds pan out..branch is proven...

 

and ne had lost branch already and turned this into, hopefully, the last pick of the 1st round..

 

as far as disgruntled..he isnt anymore..and seattle was #1 in tds and the red zone last year..but they know that with no hutch..and if jones ankle gives him fits..they need to back that D up...

 

i have NO clue what branch will get as far as #s..heck, i think Mili is going to start getting them soon...but remember..a guy playing jurevicius's spot was a target for 10 scores..its just a matter of who is the x y or slot guy...

[Chronic Husker 85]

The Pats are going to suffer this season (although Branch would not have contributed anyway).

Sour grapes?

[Boston 0]

The good news for the Pats:

 

*Getting a #1 for Branch is great value. He's never had more than a 1,000 yards receiving, had limited TD totals and only played one full (i.e. healthy) season. The Pats got more for Branch than other teams got for Walker, Stallworth, Leile, McCardell, Lloyd and TO (as well as non-WRs like Culpepper and Dillon). The Pats got the same return that the Jets did for Abraham and I don't think there's a GM alive that wouldn't rather have Abraham.

 

*With the Pats drafting record in the first round under BB/Pioli (Seymour, Warren, Wilfork, Mankins, Maroney, Watson and Graham) there's an excellent chance this pick could turn into a very good player that has a contract far less than what Branch was looking for. For a team with a lot of young talent adding two first rounders next year is another step towards continued contending status.

 

The bad news for the Pats:

 

*The weakest area of the team lost it's best chance to improve. The WR position does not look pretty right now. It was an MIA unit on Sunday and unless Gabriel and Jax really step it up the Pats passing game could have some big issues.

 

*By not signing Branch early (or dealing him early) the Pats lost an opportunity to improve their team. By all accounts the Pats budgeted about 6 mil towards this years salary cap on Branch. That's money that could have been used on other assets to improve them this year. While they can use the money on other players currently on their roster it won't help them short term.

 

Bottomline:

 

*As far as this year the pressure falls squarely on the shoulders on Caldwell, Jax and Gabriel. How they perform will dictate the short term fallout of this deal. So far Caldwell has shown absolutely nothing, Gabriel is learning (and banged up) and Jax has been hurt for quite some time. Right now the WR unit has it's work cut out for them in a big way if they're going to be solid contributors. There's definetly reason to be skeptical about this unit.

 

*This is a good long term move. I don't think the Pats could have received more in a trade. To have a team give up a #1 and a big contract for Branch seemed farfetched to many. How this was accomplished wasn't pretty but they were able to swing it. With the Pats in possession of two #1's and a healthy salary cap situation they will have a lot of flexibility next offseason.

[nicewolf64 0]

How does this affect his fantasy value? With Burleson already there, I cant believe that Branch will put up huge numbers.

[zeppy10211970 0]

How does this affect his fantasy value? With Burleson already there, I cant believe that Branch will put up huge numbers.

 

 

Are you kidding me? Nate Burelson? He had 1 catch on Sun. They just gave Branch a boat load of money

and by week #3 he's the #2 wr on this team! If DJAX's knee keeps acting up he could be the #1 some time

this year. Bobby Engram is a better wr than Burelson.

[nicewolf64 0]

Are you kidding me? Nate Burelson? He had 1 catch on Sun. They just gave Branch a boat load of money

and by week #3 he's the #2 wr on this team! If DJAX's knee keeps acting up he could be the #1 some time

this year. Bobby Engram is a better wr than Burelson.

I dont disagree with this as I'm not a fan of Burleson's at all. But arent they paying him $7m a year? I dont think they'll just drop him from the offense. Just seems like Seattle has alot of WR now, and only one ball.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Sour grapes?

 

You are really riding my ass on this one. WTF is your problem?

 

He was not going to contribute because he was going to sit out. Now, get back to the corn fields and start pickin'

[Chronic Husker 85]

He was not going to contribute because he was going to sit out.

 

Really? A week ago in this same thread you said this:

 

Branch will play for this team again and he is in the wrong.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Really? A week ago in this same thread you said this:

 

Things change. I said that he was going to sit out after things degraded.

 

You really are a putz.

 

Here is one for you. Do you disagree with this guy?

 

"I would say you have to come back because you do have a contract. And once you’ve been fined and you’re thinking about staying off for 10 games and coming back, you’re going to lose all the money in 10 years. You might get another contract later on, the one you might want, but you’re not going to make the money now. Come back and play."