http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots/view.bg?articleid=154531 According to Felger: But what was wrong with doing something last year, or even two years ago? ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢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 heÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s proven to be in the summer of 2006. But the Pats werenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢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?