Welcome to PatsFans.com

Bad precedent set with Branch trade

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by marcus, Sep 12, 2006.

  1. marcus

    marcus Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Any way you look at it, the Branch trade sets very bad precedent. Now any player teamed up with a sharp agent can try to wiggle their way out of a contract early simply by refusing to show up and creating a major distraction.

    Does anyone think the 640K in fines are anything other than chump change for a man about to earn 13 million in signing bonus this year alone.


    I know they did not want this to drag on...but... the next "unsatisfied and underpaid" player will pull a Deion Branch/T.O.
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,517
    Likes Received:
    172
    Ratings:
    +398 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    Letting him get his way is a bad precedent but there's only about a half dozen, if that, players who I wouldn't trade for a #1 pick as their contracts are close to expiring.
  3. patsox23

    patsox23 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +10 / 1 / -0

    Eh. I don't know. I think the players saw a pretty brutal situation for Branch and it's not necessarily something they'd want to go through. Who knows, maybe they would. Thing is, the Patriots handle things on a case-by-case basis - I don't worry about this occurring over and over.

    If someone's worth keeping around at a good price - Seymour, Brady at the top-level, but Bruschi, Vrabel, Light, Rodney, Corey at a lower level - then the F.O. will do it. Otherwise, feel free to go through the nonsense Branch just went through, and leave for a team that, while very good, looks nothing like "historic."
  4. brady2brown

    brady2brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    They always could hold out and create a distraction. Branch isn't the first, won't be the last.

    BUt why bad any way you look at it? There are two ways of looking at it that sets a very good precedent.

    1) We got a first round pick. We had a good player at rookie rates for four years, and replace him with a first round pick. What better could you want? ALL our fifth year players should be traded for first round picks. We would have an unbeatable team.

    2) Branch refused to come to work unless he was paid more. Instead he was traded for terrific value. This is far and away a better precedent than paying him what he wanted. You want a bad precedent? Try giving every player all the money he wants if only he ends his holdout.

    I think Deion got a lot more money that he is worth, but I hope after three years he decides his family needs more and holds out again.

    Signing a player who held out on his former team is like marrying a man who was cheating on his first wife to go out with you. Yeah, you got the man, but you got a man you KNOW cheats on his wife. That's where Seattle is. They have a player who puts himself ahead of the contract he just signed. Like Philly and Dallas have no squawk about TO, Seattle has no squawk coming if Deion doesn't honor his new contract.
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2006
  5. Jacky Roberts

    Jacky Roberts Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    $600k is $600k. If they let his fines slide, THAT would be a bad precedent.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>