betterthanthealternative

-a contract is a contract; Branch owed them his services for the year regardless of how he felt. Regardless. He is responsible for doing whatever intrapersonal and emotional work he needs to do to get himself on the football field. It is one of life's few black and white situations.

Branch had already accepted money to play this year, in the form of a bonus, so he has a double obligation. If someone paid you a year in advance, and then you decided you didn't want to show up because something was bothering you, and you insisted on keeping the money and demanded more, wouldn't that be a bit unreasonable?

-anything management did to give in to Branch would have been a precedent that would be used against them in other contract situations, and in future arbitration situations for other players. It wasn't just about the money they would have spent on Branch, it was about every contract for every player on the team.

-other teams would have been rightfully upset at the Pats for creating a precedent that their players would use against them.

-management bent over backwards by offering him an extension before his contract was up - that's already offering the player something they aren't obligated to do.

-the team's offer would have taken care of many generations of Branch's; nobody needs any more than $30M (or any substantial portion of it); the issue is entirely emotional.

PatsWorldChamps

agree totally... but we dont need any more DB threads... the guy is a traitor... If he blows an ACL, that's fine with me. If he comes across the middle vs us, id LOVE to see rodney decapitate him... he is the enemy now.

__________________
"If you didn't know better, you'd think the Jets sent Bill Belichick north
to destroy the Patriots from within. (When) they could have had
impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson or the second-best tackle in
the draft in Kenyatta Walker, they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard
Seymour, (who is) too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end." - Xerox Borges, April 2001

BelichickFan

It's simple for me, although it hurts us in 2006, a 1st round pick paid $1-$2M a year is worth more over 5 years than a Deion Branch paid $6M a year over 6 years.

5 Rings for Brady!!

The Pats had to trade Deion, YES!

But this was not a 'WIN' for the Pats, in the sense that Felger is implying.

This was the only thing to do. A 'WIN' for the Pats Front Office would have been for Branch to negotiate an extension with the Pats and then play, starting last week.

An extension would have been a 'WIN' for Brady, the Front Office, the locker room, and the Fans.

The trade was simply a way out of a terrible mess which Chayut created. It was the only thing to do, and the correct thing to do. But it was not a win in the sense that Felger puts it.

Felger wants to make it sound like the Pats stiff armed Branch to the Seahawks and stole a first round pick for him, and that this is a big victory for the brutal and bad Pats front office at the expense of the team.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Chayut was by far the winner in this trade, and the Pats were very lucky to have squeezed out of this mega-distraction with help from the Seahawks. The Pats will make out well in the trade, I think, but it was certainly not what the front office envisioned when they tried to sign Deion to several extensions.

EDIT: To avoid confusion, I will repeat that the trade was an excellent trade for us and a great way out of the situation. But Felger's definition of the Pats FO 'WIN' is very much different than what we are saying, Felger is suggesting that the Pats Front Office really wanted this outcome all along, above the interests of the team, ect.

Born_a_Patriot

I think we have the lions to thank for a 1st round pick.

__________________
Tonight A Dynasty Is Born

mgteich

As has been pointed out before, Branch gave fine service for four years and we traded him for a 1st rounder with one year left on his contract.

PRECEDENTS SET FOR ALL EXCEPT THOSE NAMED BRADY AND SEYMOUR
1. The patriots will not tear up existing contracts.
2. The patriots will offer a fair deal on extensions, or to patriot free agents
3. The patriots will accept a 1st as compensation for the last year of a contract.

Are these bad precendents? I don't think so. However, the strong preference should be to get these done long before Game 1, but I think the Detroit game sealed the deal.

Also, if Branch were on the opne market, the patriots wouldn't consider trading a first for him and then sign a contract for $6M per year.

brady2brown

When you put it that way it seems ludicrous, doesn't it? No, of course I would not want to give up our first in order to sign Deion at top rates. Makes me wonder about Seattle now.

MDPATSFAN

The tumor has been cut out and sent to Seattle for a biopsy. Good riddance!

rookBoston

Too true. They are bad enough that a close game is humiliating.


-----------

Without a doubt, the preference was to have Branch for the next five years.

But that cannot supercede the cap structure that BB/SP have put in place. You cant make exceptions to your principles when they have served the team very well.

Once it was clear that resolution on contract was not forthcoming, I think the Pats really made lemonade out of the situation. We got two Day Two picks for Terry Glenn. We had to force the Bills to give up a first for Drew. We got three late round picks for Tebucky. We got squat for Lawyer. In comparison, the deal that SP arranged with the Seahawks is easily the best trade this FO has ever negotiated.

That softens the sting. We'd rather have had him on our roster at the right price. But, better this than Milloy's resolution. Better than the Vinatieri resolution, too (we're likely to get a 4th, certainly no better than a 3rd).

I only wonder what players like Asante, Wilson, Graham, Koppen... plus the entire 2003 draft class, one of the finest we've ever had... are thinking. They're taking notes on how BB treats his stars: Brady, Light, Seymour, Branch, Milloy, Law, Washington, Givens. They will each have their own decisions to make when the time comes.

__________________
"We want to build a big, strong, tough, smart, fast, disciplined football team that will consistently compete for a championship."
-- Scott Pioli, from the Patriots scouting manual

scott99

You have an asset that is refusing to play despite being under contract. You receive a 1st round pick for that asset, Excellent move. What would have happened if we didn't trade him, he comes back after 10 games (and after being a distraction at that ) ? No thanks, we got a 1st round pick for someone who refused to play for us. We most certainly won that trade. It was pretty much a 1st round pick, or nothing. I'll take the pick.