BB/Pioli - Contract Negotiations - New England Patriots Forums

kurtinelson · 08-26-2006, 07:23 AM

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/pat...ticleid=154531

According to Felger:

But what was wrong with doing something last year, or even two years ago? Itâ€™s been obvious for a long time that Branch can play. He won the Super Bowl MVP award after his third year. Everyone knew when his five-year deal ended. He would have been far more affordable in the summer of 2005 than heâ€™s proven to be in the summer of 2006.

But the Pats werenâ€™t about to reach across the negotiating table, especially when Branch was playing for pennies under his rookie contract and the Pats had all the control. Same thing happened with David Givens, who was a perfectly fine (and potentially affordable) No. 2 receiver. But instead of extending themselves a little bit last year, they wound up chasing Givens after it was too late this spring. Givens is now in Tennessee.

Is Felger correct in stating that the Patriots made no attempts to sign Givens and Branch to contract extensions prior to the final years of their contracts? If it is true, I'd say he has a legitimate point. Although there is no guarantee that Givens and Branch would have accepted fair market contracts if they had been offered earlier, IMO it would have been in the team's interest to at least try. Do BB/Pioli have some sort of policy where players must playout their rookie contract (except for HOFs like Big Sey and Brady)? Is this why there have been no reported attempts to resign Graham?

smg93 · 08-26-2006, 07:26 AM

I think with Givens it was true. With Deion, obviously not because they offered him an extenstion earlier in the year. They extended Brady as well before his contract had run out.

***patsfan13*** · 08-26-2006, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kurtinelson

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/pat...ticleid=154531

According to Felger:

But what was wrong with doing something last year, or even two years ago? Itâ€™s been obvious for a long time that Branch can play. He won the Super Bowl MVP award after his third year. Everyone knew when his five-year deal ended. He would have been far more affordable in the summer of 2005 than heâ€™s proven to be in the summer of 2006.

But the Pats werenâ€™t about to reach across the negotiating table, especially when Branch was playing for pennies under his rookie contract and the Pats had all the control. Same thing happened with David Givens, who was a perfectly fine (and potentially affordable) No. 2 receiver. But instead of extending themselves a little bit last year, they wound up chasing Givens after it was too late this spring. Givens is now in Tennessee.

Is Felger correct in stating that the Patriots made no attempts to sign Givens and Branch to contract extensions prior to the final years of their contracts? If it is true, I'd say he has a legitimate point. Although there is no guarantee that Givens and Branch would have accepted fair market contracts if they had been offered earlier, IMO it would have been in the team's interest to at least try. Do BB/Pioli have some sort of policy where players must playout their rookie contract (except for HOFs like Big Sey and Brady)? Is this why there have been no reported attempts to resign Graham?

From what I've seen the Pats will redo a deal early if the player is the best at what they do and it is a position of high vallue (Brady and Seymour).

Look at the Patten situation, he looked good here not so good in Wash. givens has been injured, but we'll see how well he performs in TN. IMO Brady does a lot to make his receivers look good. On another thread there was a list of WR's who are arguably better than Branch, it was fairly extensive.

Deion isn't an elite player at his position. I think the offers Reiss put in his blog yesterday seemed to be very fair.

SeanBruschi54 · 08-26-2006, 07:41 AM

Also it seems likely that the Patriots dont view WR as a highly pais position for their players.

***PatsDeb*** · 08-26-2006, 08:09 AM

Don't you think BB and SP have taken a big gamble at doing things this way though? I am sure with all the cap $$ floating around someone out there is going to meet Deion's price, then the Pats will either have to match it, or they will lose him. If the Pats reject the deal because it doesn't meet their "terms", then it will harden Branch even more.

Brady must be having fits. I remember the 60 Minutes interview with Brady where he had Branch come out on the field with him and without saying a word to eachother, Branch would run down the field and Brady would throw the ball to a spot. where Deion would catch it. That comes from playing together for a long time, and both players being somewhat cerebral (Even that loser Peyton Manning has said that is the key to the success of the Colts passing game - longevity of passer & catcher). It will be hard to replace that for Brady, especially with Givens gone in the same year.

I guess the way Branch conducted himself (holding out and refusing to negotiate) instead of reporting to camp and continuing to negotiate kind of tied their hands, but I don't have a good feeling about how this is going to end. I hope they know what they are doing, but it seems that they have given up on Branch and are preparing to move forward without him. This isn't the same as cutting Lawyer Milloy though. We don't have any one to replace Branch, unless Chad Jackson suddenly recovers and becomes a rookie phenom.

***Miguel*** · 08-26-2006, 08:16 AM

I do not think that it is true. I distinctly remember reading a report in 2005 that Givens was looking for Hines Ward money.

It could be that if the Pats had offered Givens in 2005 what they offered at the last minute in 2006 that Givens would be a Patriot today but that's no guarantee and is 20-20 hindsight.

***patsfan13*** · 08-26-2006, 08:18 AM

IMo this will be a win/win situation either Deion get his deal and we get fair value in return or he may sign the deal that has been offered.

There is a saying lawyers have: Don't ask a question unless yo know the answer. I'll bet the Pats have a pretty good idea of the answer here. I don't think it is an accident this gambit was made AFTER the Liele deal was done taking Atl out of the market.

***PatsDeb*** · 08-26-2006, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

There is a saying lawyers have: Don't ask a question unless yo know the answer. I'll bet the Pats have a pretty good idea of the answer here. I don't think it is an accident this gambit was made AFTER the Liele deal was done taking Atl out of the market.

There is that saying, but you'd be surprised how many times you think you know the answer, but it comes out totally different (speaking from experience, unfortunately). I hope what you said is right. I hate crises at the beginning of the season, and we always seem to have one.

tdw777 · 08-26-2006, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miguel

......It could be that if the Pats had offered Givens in 2005 what they offered at the last minute in 2006 that Givens would be a Patriot today but that's no guarantee and is 20-20 hindsight.

Miguel...you are a lot more knowledgable about those type of things that I am...but, weren't there "unknowns"...CBA, unkown CAP limit for 2006 for the Pats to have made the offer they did in 2006 in 2005?

PatsChick87 · 08-26-2006, 09:26 AM

A major consideration left out of Felger's article - just a small detail called the CBA! HELLO!!!
Seems to me a lot of teams, not just the Pats, were waiting to see what happened before committing to players who's contract were soon up, never mind those who still had a year or more to play.