patsfan55
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,656
- Reaction score
- 1
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.patsox23 said:Okay, I just wrote a nice post telling you not to worry about it the first time - repeating info that's common knowledge - but that hollow "compromise" offered up by Branch's agent was in the Providence Journal last night and, I believe, has been part of the discussion already.
patsfan55 said:so i just heard on espn that he'll show up as long as he's not franchise tagged next offseason
BRANCH WILL REPORT IF TEAM DOESN'T FRANCHISE HIM
Agent Jason Chayut says that Pats receiver Deion Branch won't make good on his threat to not report for training camp if the team promises not to slap the franchise tag on him after the 2006 season.
Says Chayut: "If [the Patriots] came to me and said, 'Jason, we won't franchise Deion,' I would talk with them every day of the season in good faith to get a long-term deal done."
Sure you would, Jason, because then you'd have some real leverage. As long as the Pats have at their disposal the ability to use the franchise tag, you don't.
So why should Branch be treated any differently than any other player? Because he signed a five-year deal and necessarily gave up his first year of free agency?
If we were the Pats, we'd make no such deal. Let Branch hold out (and incur $14,000 per day in fines) if he wants to. It's not as if the oft-brittle receiver gets a ton of reps in camp and the preseason anyway.
And as for Chayut, he'd be wise to quit talking about the situation, and start focusing on giving his client good advice in light of the system that is in place not just for Branch but for every other guy in the league.
patsfan55 said:arite
i guess ive just been under a f***in rock the last few days
patsfan55 said:arite
i guess ive just been under a f***in rock the last few days
I don't undestand the problem with franchising. If he got a long term deal, he'd get about $8 mil signing bonus and his first year woukld be close to minimum.RayClay said:If they franchise Branch they would be overpaying him. Where's the leverage?
...........patsox23 said:Okay, Ijust wrote a nice post telling you not to worry about it the first time - repeating info that's common knowledge - but that hollow "compromise" offered up by Branch's agent was in the Providence Journal last night and, Ibelieve, has been part of the discussionalready.
The downside is Branch may get a career ending injury and he doesn't get the front end money of a signing bonus. There is a small downside of not getting the upfront money of a signing bonus so you can invest it and start to get a return off of it.spacecrime said:I don't undestand the problem with franchising. If he got a long term deal, he'd get about $8 mil signing bonus and his first year woukld be close to minimum.
So he gets franchised, gets $7+ mil in 2007, only a couple mil less than he would hve AND STILL CAN DO A LONG TERM DEAL IN 2008 WITH BIG SIGNING BONUS
Where's the downside?
Ican see Vinatieri's not liking it. He didn't want to be paid the averageof the top five. He wanted to be the top one, and althogh in his case franchising made him the top paid kicker (he already was so he got 20% bump), it wasn't high enough more than #2.
But Deion isn't the highest paid WR, and franchise number for him would be overpaying him, as you state.
RayClay said:If they franchise Branch they would be overpaying him. Where's the leverage?
Wow, I think we finally agree on something. Branch isn't a top 5, top ten, top 15, probably not top 20 WRs in the league. This whole thing is a posturing act by Branch and his agent for next year. The more his name is in the paper, especially if it is associated with the words "franchise tage" the better for him next year. It also puts pressure on the Pats to get a deal done this year if they want to hold on to him. I'm thinking the Pats let him test free agency next year. If he walk then he can see how good he is with Ken Dorsey at QB.spacecrime said:I don't undestand the problem with franchising. If he got a long term deal, he'd get about $8 mil signing bonus and his first year woukld be close to minimum.
So he gets franchised, gets $7+ mil in 2007, only a couple mil less than he would hve AND STILL CAN DO A LONG TERM DEAL IN 2008 WITH BIG SIGNING BONUS
Where's the downside?
Ican see Vinatieri's not liking it. He didn't want to be paid the averageof the top five. He wanted to be the top one, and althogh in his case franchising made him the top paid kicker (he already was so he got 20% bump), it wasn't high enough more than #2.
But Deion isn't the highest paid WR, and franchise number for him would be overpaying him, as you state.
Make it two things. (Capable WRs are easy to find through FA or draft.) .ClosingTime said:Wow, I think we finally agree on something. Branch isn't a top 5, top ten, top 15, probably not top 20 WRs in the league. This whole thing is a posturing act by Branch and his agent for next year. The more his name is in the paper, especially if it is associated with the words "franchise tage" the better for him next year. It also puts pressure on the Pats to get a deal done this year if they want to hold on to him. I'm thinking the Pats let him test free agency next year. If he walk then he can see how good he is with Ken Dorsey at QB.
Capable WRs are easy to find through FA or draft.
JoeSixPat said:The short term risk/reward of a 1 year under the franchise (possibly even 2) is something that works in the Patriot's favor and does NOT give Branch the long term payout he wants.
Why else do you think Branch would he be demanding a no-franchise agreement?
The existing cap is set to a large degree by pre-newCBA salaries and therefore is right around the market rate for Branch right now - but again, without the long term risk on the part of the front office
MoLewisrocks said:Deion's or his agents fear of the franchise tag is likely rooted not only in our using it to retain him for a year or two at $7-8M, but also in his agents fear that we wll tag and trade him. That means his one big FA period will not be exactly free because his market will be limited to the team or teams who will both meet our demands in a trade for him AND sign him to a huge contract. Very different scenario from being a truly FA.
But if he doesn't have a better season than he's had to date I'm not so sure anyone is going to be offering him $7M for 5-6 years anyway in 2007. If he holds out into the season he is committing FA suicide. And if any of Brady's new targets really emerge it will give other GM's pause as to just who is responsible for what in NE. Deion may have broken Jerry Rice's SB reception record, but he is no Jerry Rice.
And it was reported earlier that Deion was looking for a $12M+ signing bonus or guarantees minimum. At the time some poo poo'd such reports, but it would seem now that may well be the case. So playing for the tag would be risking his career for $5-6M or so less than he hoped to net in the first year of a long term deal.