Branch is bluffing

[PonyExpress]

My read on the situation is that the Patriots will win the grievance hearing outright, and will not trade Branch. Once Branch realizes the Pats aren't doing anything, he will report for duty. Sitting out ten games doesn't help his cause in any way. The pressure on him to return to the team, from his friends and his own desire to play the game, will overcome his agent and his own patience. The solution to the Branch problem is to do nothing at all.

 

[sarge]

He may have been prior to the trade stuff, but not now. Atleast I don't think so!

 

[WV-Colt]

the situation in GB with walker from last year also hurts the chances of branch reporting before week 10, IMO.

 

[Pats726]

he doesn't wish to be here...U really do NOT care about what he does now..time to move on.

 

[Patriot Missile]

My read on the situation is that the Patriots will win the grievance hearing outright, and will not trade Branch. Once Branch realizes the Pats aren't doing anything, he will report for duty. Sitting out ten games doesn't help his cause in any way. The pressure on him to return to the team, from his friends and his own desire to play the game, will overcome his agent and his own patience. The solution to the Branch problem is to do nothing at all.

You don't think it helps him in any way? If he sit's out then he is less likely to be injured on a football field. Hence he will be healthy to pick up his 30+million dollar contact with 20+ guaranteed. This is the difference between Willie Parker and Branch and it has been discussed in another thread. Parker took the lesser of the deal full knowing it was still alot of money. If he got injured this season he get's zip.Zero.

I don't agree with the situation in the least but as far as a money standpoint he's playing as smart and as greedy as they come. I just wished he took Brady's advice and asked himself some of the questions Brady suggested. Who knows maybe he did. I'm sure Branch's crappy agent didn't though.

 

[Patters]

The Boston Herald had an interesting article today:

"Branch’s side plans to highlight a number of players traded in the past year for second-round picks or lower, such as Dolphins quarterback Daunte Culpepper (second), Broncos receiver Javon Walker (second) and Eagles wideout Donte’ Stallworth (conditional third or fourth, plus backup linebacker Mark Simoneau). Players Association attorney Richard Berthelsen also noted that Branch was selected at the end of the second round with the 65th overall pick in 2002.
The goal, Kessler said, is to force the Patriots to accept the second-round pick and send Branch to the Jets."

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots/view.bg?articleid=155742

Until I read that, I thought that Branch did not have a valid grievance, but now I think that at least he can make a good case.

So, what I think is going on right now is that the Jets and Branch are really moving to prevent a trade to the Seahawks (which BB would probably prefer), and meanwhile BB is making things difficult in the hope of getting the Jets to sweeten the pot. I'm thinking Branch will go to the Jets and we'll get their better second or a second and something else.

 

[AzPatsFan]

My read on the situation is that the Patriots will win the grievance hearing outright, and will not trade Branch. Once Branch realizes the Pats aren't doing anything, he will report for duty. Sitting out ten games doesn't help his cause in any way. The pressure on him to return to the team, from his friends and his own desire to play the game, will overcome his agent and his own patience. The solution to the Branch problem is to do nothing at all.

I strongly concur. "Time heals all wounds and wounds all heals". The significant differences from the Pats offers and the others was that DB gets his money NOW, rather than, NEXT Year.

As time goes on it will become clear that he CAN'T get his money NOW from anyone. The Pats offer for next year is almost the same as the alternative offers. If there is to be an early resolution, then another team will have to pay the Patriots MORE than they will get in trading him NEXT off season.

Incidentally with Branch holding out He costs the team essentially nothing for his non services.

 

[primetime]

Yeah, but the thing is, the Patriots don't have to make the trade if they don't want. Then any player could go to arbitration and be like look, I want out, and then the arbitrator would award the player a trade and the team who loses out a draft pick equal to players traded previously. That makes no sense and destroys the whole system.

 

[upstater1]

You don't think it helps him in any way? If he sit's out then he is less likely to be injured on a football field. Hence he will be healthy to pick up his 30+million dollar contact with 20+ guaranteed. This is the difference between Willie Parker and Branch and it has been discussed in another thread. Parker took the lesser of the deal full knowing it was still alot of money. If he got injured this season he get's zip.Zero.

The only thing holding him back from that line of thinking is the franchise or transition tag.

 

[PatsWorldChamps]

The only thing holding him back from that line of thinking is the franchise or transition tag.

the pats are obviously planning on franchising him.... if not, he agreed he would come in and play for the $1M... DB WILL be franchised.

 

[RI Pats Fan]

the situation in GB with walker from last year also hurts the chances of branch reporting before week 10, IMO.

Hence why Brady was smart enough to not get involved in the way Favre did.

That settles it. Brady >>>>>>>> Favre.

 

[Willie55]

The Boston Herald had an interesting article today:

"Branch’s side plans to highlight a number of players traded in the past year for second-round picks or lower, such as Dolphins quarterback Daunte Culpepper (second), Broncos receiver Javon Walker (second) and Eagles wideout Donte’ Stallworth (conditional third or fourth, plus backup linebacker Mark Simoneau). Players Association attorney Richard Berthelsen also noted that Branch was selected at the end of the second round with the 65th overall pick in 2002.
The goal, Kessler said, is to force the Patriots to accept the second-round pick and send Branch to the Jets."

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots.bg

Until I read that, I thought that Branch did not have a valid grievance, but now I think that at least he can make a good case.

So, what I think is going on right now is that the Jets and Branch are really moving to prevent a trade to the Seahawks (which BB would probably prefer), and meanwhile BB is making things difficult in the hope of getting the Jets to sweeten the pot. I'm thinking Branch will go to the Jets and we'll get their better second or a second and something else.

They didn't have anything in writing. It was a very vague agreement. There is nothing to win. Branch is just grasping at straws.

 

[Willie55]

The Boston Herald had an interesting article today:

"Branch’s side plans to highlight a number of players traded in the past year for second-round picks or lower, such as Dolphins quarterback Daunte Culpepper (second), Broncos receiver Javon Walker (second) and Eagles wideout Donte’ Stallworth (conditional third or fourth, plus backup linebacker Mark Simoneau). Players Association attorney Richard Berthelsen also noted that Branch was selected at the end of the second round with the 65th overall pick in 2002.
The goal, Kessler said, is to force the Patriots to accept the second-round pick and send Branch to the Jets."

http://patriots.bostonherald.com/patriots.bg

Until I read that, I thought that Branch did not have a valid grievance, but now I think that at least he can make a good case.

So, what I think is going on right now is that the Jets and Branch are really moving to prevent a trade to the Seahawks (which BB would probably prefer), and meanwhile BB is making things difficult in the hope of getting the Jets to sweeten the pot. I'm thinking Branch will go to the Jets and we'll get their better second or a second and something else.

It wasn't in writing. It was a very vague agreement. Branch is just grasping at straws.

 

[zarakotas5]

I haven't been able to read every last post on the subject, so perhaps someone can explain this to me: Branch filed a grievance because he feels the Pats failed to execute their verbal agreement/contract, yet he is currently under a written contract that he neglecting in a vulgar manner...

He signed that contract, way back when, and I am fairly certain that he was a happy man in knowing he should never have to worry about money again. Now, times have changed. I agree he deserves a raise, and I believe the offers the Pats have been reported to give are both generous and appropriate.

I am all for NFL players trying to secure money for themselves whilst they can and understand steadfast negotiation tactics are sometimes warranted, but this becoming, again, vulgar.

I applaud the Pats front office for (at least) their public display of patience. My frustration would get the better of me in a similar situation. Personally, I cannot understand where f*** Branch gets off calling the Pats out for not fulfilling an "agreement".

 

[Patters]

It wasn't in writing. It was a very vague agreement. Branch is just grasping at straws.

The article also says, "As proof of the oral agreement, Kessler cited the Aug. 25 press release in which the Patriots announced their intentions to let Branch seek a trade. The release read, “The New England Patriots have given Deion Branch permission to seek a trade and negotiate a contract with other clubs. This permission will extend until Sept. 1, 2006.â€
Said Kessler: “The Patriots agreed with the player and his agent that if he could find a team where he could work out his player contract, and that team was willing to provide the Patriots with the type of draft-choice compensation that other teams have received in the past for comparable players, they would make the trade.â€

***

Since the press release constitutes proof the Pats gave Branch permission to seek a trade, it follows that the Pats would expect reasonable compensation. If a second can be shown to be reasonable (and it looks like Kessler has some good examples) then Branch may have a valid grievance. I think a similar game is going on here as went on when BB came to the Pats. A deal is in the works, and all sides are trying to get a little bit of an advantage.

 

[mcbee]

Perhaps the Patriots SHOULD trade him for a 2nd (I wish they would). Perhaps it would be only fair.

But they aren't under any obligation to. None whatsoever. I don't know what his case is.

The best they'd get later this year is a second. They were offered a high second NOW. Why hold out? He's not coming back this year. Not after this bad blood.

 

[Willie55]

The article also says, "As proof of the oral agreement, Kessler cited the Aug. 25 press release in which the Patriots announced their intentions to let Branch seek a trade. The release read, “The New England Patriots have given Deion Branch permission to seek a trade and negotiate a contract with other clubs. This permission will extend until Sept. 1, 2006.â€
Said Kessler: “The Patriots agreed with the player and his agent that if he could find a team where he could work out his player contract, and that team was willing to provide the Patriots with the type of draft-choice compensation that other teams have received in the past for comparable players, they would make the trade.â€

***

Since the press release constitutes proof the Pats gave Branch permission to seek a trade, it follows that the Pats would expect reasonable compensation. If a second can be shown to be reasonable (and it looks like Kessler has some good examples) then Branch may have a valid grievance. I think a similar game is going on here as went on when BB came to the Pats. A deal is in the works, and all sides are trying to get a little bit of an advantage.

Just because those teams traded their players for that value doesn't mean the Pats have to trade their player for that value.

IIRC reading somewhere, it was contingent on the Pats agreeing with the compensation, not what Branch and Chayut thought were fair market value.

 

[Patters]

Just because those teams traded their players for that value doesn't mean the Pats have to trade their player for that value.

IIRC reading somewhere, it was contingent on the Pats agreeing with the compensation, not what Branch and Chayut thought were fair market value.

I'm not saying that Branch has an open and shut case, but he does have a good argument, especially if the verbal agreement used a phrase like "reasonable compensation." In that case, the question would be who gets to determine what reasonable compensation is. I think there's a presumption that when the Pats gave Branch permission to seek a trade they were acting in good faith. I see these technicalities as a legal grounds for an arbitrator to rule in Branch's favor. That said, I do think that the Pats are in a stronger position, but maybe not as strong as some of us thought.

 

[BradyManny]

This is the difference between Willie Parker and Branch and it has been discussed in another thread. Parker took the lesser of the deal full knowing it was still alot of money. If he got injured this season he get's zip.Zero.

Dude, these guys have their bodies insured for millions of dollars. If they get injured, they don't get zip or zero, they get millions of dollars due to the insurance they are paying into.

So no, the whole "he might get injured" argument is even dumb from the finacial standpoint. But its besides the point because HE IS UNDER CONTRACT AND ITS HIS FU**ING JOB TO PLAY FOOTBALL AND YES THAT MAY RESULT IN INJURIES - OH F**KING WELL.

************. I can't take this anymore. Deion Branch is so stupid someone should drag him outside and beat him senseless. He used to be one of my favorite players on the team, now I hate him. The guy deserves a career threatening injury at this point. What makes him think he is different from every other NFL player who goes out there and puts it on the line for his team? It's disgusting.

 

[upstater1]

I haven't been able to read every last post on the subject, so perhaps someone can explain this to me: Branch filed a grievance because he feels the Pats failed to execute their verbal agreement/contract, yet he is currently under a written contract that he neglecting in a vulgar manner...

He signed that contract, way back when, and I am fairly certain that he was a happy man in knowing he should never have to worry about money again. Now, times have changed. I agree he deserves a raise, and I believe the offers the Pats have been reported to give are both generous and appropriate.

I am all for NFL players trying to secure money for themselves whilst they can and understand steadfast negotiation tactics are sometimes warranted, but this becoming, again, vulgar.

I applaud the Pats front office for (at least) their public display of patience. My frustration would get the better of me in a similar situation. Personally, I cannot understand where f*** Branch gets off calling the Pats out for not fulfilling an "agreement".

Here's the problem with your post. The NFL owners have clearly allowed players to holdout and to dishonor a written contract by giving the players an incentive. They can have the year count on their contract even IF they don't return until the 10th game.

So, you're looking at the contract only and saying he has to follow it because it's a written agreement. But you're ignoring the CBA which is also a written agreement, and in the CBA it says Branch can do this sort of thing if he's willing to accept the fines. In the scheme of things, the CBA takes precedence over the contract with the Patriots.

I once signed a 3 year contract with an employer. After it ran out, I wanted to stick around for personal reasons, and the employer wanted me back at fewer hours (less pay too). When we sent the contract to the union, they basically ripped it up and said, if the employer wanted to retain my services, he would have to either pay me at the same level as my previous salary or give me an increase. This happened even though I was very willing to take less money. In fact, I was the one who approached the employer with the idea. But the union wouldn't budge because of the CBA.

This isn't Deion's fault for not honoroing the contract. It's the owners fault for allowing this sort of thing in the CBA. Holdouts into the season would NEVER happen if players were in danger of losing the year.