ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
The Pats did make a bad move, but it wasn't playing hard ball per se. It was failing to realize that DB so unhappy and therefore letting Givens walk without so much as a backwards glance. The Branch shenanigans seemed to take them completely by surprise; it's hard to believe they didn't see it coming in some way and couldn't have headed it off, either by making a good offer to Givens or by bolstering their receiving corps in a better way before the start of the season.
What is so difficult for the people here to understand about how Belioli works? They have a system in play which does not believe in paying "a" money to "b" or even "a-" players. That means that it would have been a mistake to actually pay those two receivers what they were demanding, because it would have destroyed the sytem. As a man named Lawyer Milloy discovered, this team doesn't like bloated contracts. Givens was given #1 receiver money for a #2/#3 type of receiver, and Branch was given Franchise receiver money for a low end #1/high end #2 receiver. Well, neither one is exactly earning that money and the Patriots are 10-4 without them, haven't set a precedent for the other players to point to and have 2 first round picks in next year's draft along with an additional compensatory pick for Givens.
Mistake? It was a stroke of genius under the circumstances.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
What is so difficult for the people here to understand about how Belioli works? They have a system in play which does not believe in paying "a" money to "b" or even "a-" players. That means that it would have been a mistake to actually pay those two receivers what they were demanding, because it would have destroyed the sytem. As a man named Lawyer Milloy discovered, this team doesn't like bloated contracts. Givens was given #1 receiver money for a #2/#3 type of receiver, and Branch was given Franchise receiver money for a low end #1/high end #2 receiver. Well, neither one is exactly earning that money and the Patriots are 10-4 without them, haven't set a precedent for the other players to point to and have 2 first round picks in next year's draft along with an additional compensatory pick for Givens.
Mistake? It was a stroke of genius under the circumstances.
I agree with Deb, the Pats miss Branch more than Branch misses the Pats. I think having Branch on the roster or a viable #1, 1A type of player would significantly improve their overall offense and help their chances in the play-offs. If Branch (or someone like him) were on the roster, maybe that equates to one more win (Jets, Denver) which would put us in the hunt for a 1st round bye dramtically increases the chances of reaching the Superbowl.
The current crew of WRs is embarrasing, our number 1 is Caldwell, all teams have a better WR than him and most have 2.
The draft pick for next year is great but as with Jackson this year the chances of a rookie WR coming in and making an impact are low. In the end looking at the 2006 season the construction of the receiving core was an offseason mistake, it could be the difference between the playoffs and championship.
Not much we can do about it now, maybe it wasn't the worst offseason move but it certainly hasn't helped the team.
I don't see how this proves your point. I wish we had either Walker or Branch on the Pats this year.
Javon Walker is a better receiver than Branch. The Packers had more time to trade Walker than the Patriots had to move Branch. Yet, somehow, the Patriots got the better deal.
And, while you're wishing, you might as well wish that L.T. were on the Patriots this season, too. That had just about the same chance of happening.
I don't see how this proves your point. I wish we had either Walker or Branch on the Pats this year.
Branch advised Walker to not come here and then spurned the team again by forcing a trade. Other than NE not waiving the 5th year of the rookie deal (which they didn't for Seymour either, or for Brady's extension last year) can't really blame NE for either of those guys not being on the team right now.
Javon Walker is a better receiver than Branch. The Packers had more time to trade Walker than the Patriots had to move Branch. Yet, somehow, the Patriots got the better deal.
And, while you're wishing, you might as well wish that L.T. were on the Patriots this season, too. That had just about the same chance of happening.
The point of the column, I believe, is what the worst moves were for this year. My point is that the Pats left themselves in a deep hole in terms of the receiving corps in mishandling the Branch/Givens issues, and then their aftermath. I agree that getting a first round pick for Branch will be good next year and was the best they could possibly do after the whole thing was botched to begin with. The Pats did not get the better deal for this year. And, since Walker (I believe I am remembering correctly) said he had plane reservations for Foxboro but Denver made him cancel them, I can't agree that the LT/Walker trade had the same chances of happening.
The point of the column, I believe, is what the worst moves were for this year. My point is that the Pats left themselves in a deep hole in terms of the receiving corps in mishandling the Branch/Givens issues, and then their aftermath. I agree that getting a first round pick for Branch will be good next year and was the best they could possibly do after the whole thing was botched to begin with. The Pats did not get the better deal for this year. And, since Walker (I believe I am remembering correctly) said he had plane reservations for Foxboro but Denver made him cancel them, I can't agree that the LT/Walker trade had the same chances of happening.
Givens and Branch are separate issues. Givens was more than covered by Reche, so there was no "mistake" there at all. The only "mistake" to look at is the Branch situation, and it's not a "mistake" of the Patriots that their player refused to honor his contract, refused to negotiate, and flat out lied about playing out his contract.
Under those circumstances, caused entirely by the player, the team was still able to get a better pick for Branch than was gotten for Javon Walker, a pro bowl receiver. That's not just ok. That's not just good. That's a stroke of genius.
Givens and Branch are separate issues. Givens was more than covered by Reche, so there was no "mistake" there at all. The only "mistake" to look at is the Branch situation, and it's not a "mistake" of the Patriots that their player refused to honor his contract, refused to negotiate, and flat out lied about playing out his contract.
Under those circumstances, caused entirely by the player, the team was still able to get a better pick for Branch than was gotten for Javon Walker, a pro bowl receiver. That's not just ok. That's not just good. That's a stroke of genius.
A simple view of my understanding of the situation and why SI may have thought it was a bad move:
Getting a #1 for Branch = Good, Very Good, Excellent
Void at WR - Bad, very bad, significantly hurts chances in 2006
A simple view of my understanding of the situation and why SI may have thought it was a bad move:
Getting a #1 for Branch = Good, Very Good, Excellent
Void at WR - Bad, very bad, significantly hurts chances in 2006
Let's say that you are buying a house. Based on all quantifiable data, you make a very fair initial offer, except you overlook the fact that the owners for whatever reason don't want to go through the normal negotiations; they wanted your final offer first. Because you made that mistake, the owner refuses to negotiate with you any further. Afterwards, you use your knowledge of this owners situation to facilitate a purchase of the house for another person and receive a handsome finders fee.
Was facilitating the sale of the house for the other party a mistake considering the stance of the former owner?
Re: Ten Worst NFL Offseason Moves
Linear Mode
