Pats726

So is that the only yardstick needed to be used?? Or do you think the actual situation needs to be looked at?? Or just be critical because of that..What did you want the front office to do?? The amount of money was close to what he got in Seattle..the problem was Branch did NOT want to play for the contract he had this year..PERIOD!! That was the deciding thing as the money the Patriots offered was very similar to what he is getting in Seattle.
What did the front office do wrong? WHat should they have done with a player that fialed to negotiate with the team? What do you think they should have done when instead of a counter offer, they receive a demand for taking the franchise tag being taken away? What should they have done with him since he refused to honor his contract and report to camp? What makes the Twig so special that they should have ripped up this year's contract when in the cases of Brady and Seymour they didn't even do that? Franlkly, I don't care how many yards Branch gets this year or what he does..unless one can answer those questions as to what the front office should have done, you can not even begin to be critical of the front office.

Jimke

What the front office should have done better was plan for the eventual

departure of both Deon Branch and David Givens. If we don't draft wide

receivers just about every year, we will be left shorthanded whenever one

signs with another team. In 2007 or 2008, we should be seeking Chad

Jackson's replacement.

Pats726

If you are ripping the front office for not planning for that their departure, you are missing it. I know you said eventual departure..so then since Branch was under contract this year, they should have a mulligan on that as he WAS under contract and his departure could not be planned for. I think they plan in advance quiete well..they can not plan for selfish players that do not honor contracts..NO team can really plan for that. And if you saw Branch leaving like he did, you had better play a lottery or something because NO ONE say that coming at all.

Oswlek

The front office deserves some criticism for not realizing how steadfast Branch was in his decision to treat 2006 as his FA year. Most fans, and I have to assume that includes you, completely overlook that once NE's offer kept Branch's final year intact (which is their MO, and only Brady and Seymour have circumvented this) every single move Branch made was to get out of NE.

So fault them for not treating Branch on the same level as Brady and Seymour if you must, but you cannot fault them for anything that happened from that moment on. They offered competitive money to Branch, but he was already gone.

Now, with regard to Givens, they couldn't give him as much as he was offered by TN because that would make Branch unsignable. Again, had they known what the Branch situation might come to, I'm sure they would have done a little differently, but letting Givens go was the right decision at the time.

As far as not having a plan, sure they got caught with their pants down with Branch, but every indication he had given them was that he was on board. Even then, NE did draft a top WR, TE, FB and RB this year, so you can't say that they didn't have an eye on the offensive future without coming off like a fool.