Deion Branch

[Patters]

I think I'm one of the few who has not posted a Deion Branch thread, so didn't want to be left out of the fun.

If BB is the man we think he is, he's going to soon make a decision whether to cave to Branch. In theory, BB is only concerned with winning football games. While the business of football might be important, winning is what he's hired to do. That's his first priority. I don't think BB will let pride get in his way if he thinks the team needs to have Branch back. Based on the first game, Branch's value has gone up, and BB knows it. If there must be a choice, I'd rather see the team win games, than beat Branch and Chayut.

 

[QuiGon]

If BB is the man we think he is, he's going to soon make a decision whether to cave to Branch. In theory, BB is only concerned with winning football games. While the business of football might be important, winning is what he's hired to do. That's his first priority. I don't think BB will let pride get in his way if he thinks the team needs to have Branch back. Based on the first game, Branch's value has gone up, and BB knows it. If there must be a choice, I'd rather see the team win games, than beat Branch and Chayut.

But you're overlooking the fact that Belichick will not sacrifice long term stability for short term gains. There's no doubt this team is better with Branch than without him. There's also no doubt we have the cap room to sign him. But the problem is if you cave now, you only guarantee yourself the same problem will recur time and again going forward.

Shortsighted people tend to favor caving into Branch without considering the negative ramifications down the road.

 

[BelichickFan]

I don't think that game made the holdout's value go up. We still have Gabriel and Jackson on their way back. And we moved the ball fine, though differently, in the second half once the protection got fixed up. Sure, I want the holdout back. But I wouldn't cave based on one game. Especially since we dominated on the ground even without a good passing game. With that kind of ground game plus our TE all we need is reasonable WR play to be very effective and I think the 4-some of, in some order, Jackson, Gabriel, Caldwell, Brown will be fine as the season progresses.

Of course, I'm a bitter grudge holder

 

[desi-patsfan]

I think I'm one of the few who has not posted a Deion Branch thread, so didn't want to be left out of the fun.

If BB is the man we think he is, he's going to soon make a decision whether to cave to Branch. In theory, BB is only concerned with winning football games. While the business of football might be important, winning is what he's hired to do. That's his first priority. I don't think BB will let pride get in his way if he thinks the team needs to have Branch back. Based on the first game, Branch's value has gone up, and BB knows it. If there must be a choice, I'd rather see the team win games, than beat Branch and Chayut.

Branch's value will never go up or down. We could lose every WR on the team right now, BB would go out and get FA who more or less suck and keep going. Deion can go somewhere else. We dont need that **** here.

 

[SCPatBoy]

Why are people saying this. Please point out a series or play in the game when Brady was disgusted with the WR's, where they failed to make a play.I must have missed all the poor WR play.I'll wait until Jackson and Gabriel can play in a game together before I say that. I mean did you watch the game......It wasn't like Brady had lots of time in the pocket and guys weren't getting open. The Bills D Pressure was more the cause with Brady getting balls knocked down and tipped at the line 4 or 5 times. If the Pats had kept pounding the ball in the 1st Half( Which was very succesful in that TD drive) and forced the Bills to stop the run, Brady would have had a better day. Instead the Pats insisted on trying to get the passing game going......Our offense is going to be a different offense this year. We have a great running attack and we know what we have in Brady. Once we force defenses to have to respect , and gameplan around having to stop our run, Brady with Watson, Graham, Jackson, and Gabriel will provide enough concerns for secondaries to keep defenses off balance....

 

[mgcolby]

Chris Mortenson on yesterday's pre-game show stated that he expects the Pats to start trying to move Branch today. So hopefully he ends up in Seattle or something and we get First rounder for him and maybe a player or a mid-round pick.

 

[DefenseRules]

Question, would Branch's presence have prevented that strip sack returned for a TD at the beginning of the game yesterday? I don't think so.

Would his presence have prevented Matt Light from almost getting our QB killed? Would he have improved the pass blocking of the rest of O-line?
How about all of those batted down passes at the line of scrimmage? Would Branch have been able to stop those?

Our problems on offense started up front. Not at WR. It would have been great to have Branch back, but unless he could play O-line in the first half yesterday, he wouldn't have made much of a difference.

 

[Patters]

But you're overlooking the fact that Belichick will not sacrifice long term stability for short term gains. There's no doubt this team is better with Branch than without him. There's also no doubt we have the cap room to sign him. But the problem is if you cave now, you only guarantee yourself the same problem will recur time and again going forward.

I'm saying BB would rather win games than achieve all his fiduciary aims. I agree caving to Branch would create problems, but those can be managed more easily than losing games.

Why are people saying this. Please point out a series or play in the game when Brady was disgusted with the WR's, where they failed to make a play.I must have missed all the poor WR play..

Branch opens up the play book far more than anyone but Troy Brown, who, let's face it, is at this time no Deion Branch.

 

[QuiGon]

I'm saying BB would rather win games than achieve all his fiduciary aims. I agree caving to Branch would create problems, but those can be managed more easily than losing games.

I know you favor cut & run strategies, but you are both shortsighted and foolish - and hopelessly naive - if you believe anything you've said in this thread.

 

[SCPatBoy]

Sure Branch would open our offense up more.......But we don't know yet that Gabriel and Jackson won't be able to do that either. Lets see what our offense looks like after those guys are playing and we have had a week or two to adjust our offense...

 

[p8ryts]

The team would be better with Law, McGinest, Givens, Malloy, Washington, Vinatieri and Branch. Maybe not, they would all be home counting their money.

Give it up we can't be paying 6M+ a year for two WR's. If we did it your way we would have all those guys on the team but we would be missing 10 other important players.

Let BB and SP do their job. Somethimes they'll be right and sometimes they will be wrong but their plus percentage is good enough for me.

Maybe if we just brought back Bobby Grier things would be ok.

 

[Patters]

I know you favor cut & run strategies, but you are both shortsighted and foolish - and hopelessly naive - if you believe anything you've said in this thread.

I see, so you think now that Kraft has won 3 SBs, he's sitting back in figuring out how to rake in the profits? I think the difference between what Branch wants and the Pats are willing to pay is relatively small, and I don't think the Pats will let pride get in the way. The question is, Does BB think that Branch brings to the table what the Pats need? All the other issues may stimulate your emotions, but they have nothing to do with winning football games. (Also, QuiGon, you'd be wise to read your post in that other forum where you ranted about people playing politics on this solemn day.)

 

[Garbanza]

Sure Branch would open our offense up more.......But we don't know yet that Gabriel and Jackson won't be able to do that either. Lets see what our offense looks like after those guys are playing and we have had a week or two to adjust our offense...

Hmmm....so Branch WOULD open the offense more and Gabriel/Jackson MIGHT open it up. So, where do you put YOUR money?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If BB is the man most of us think he is that decision was made several weeks ago and it was made by Scott Pioli because BB trusts him to make it based on value. This isn't a pissing contest on their side, although it appears to have been one from the get go on the other side. It's not about winning the negotiation as so many opine. It's about adhering to certain principles that are the financial foundation for the entire system. You simply do not pay top 5 money to appease a top 15 WR or before you know it you cannot afford to acquire or retain a top 10 at some other position unless you are willing to forego quality depth beyond the starting 25. And it's about retaining or acquiring players to whom winning football maters. Once the player crosses a certain line, which Deion crossed yesterday in ansentia, you do not reward that player lest they all adopt the same approach. That's not being hard nosed either, it's just rational common sense. The ball has been in Deion's court since May. If he wanted more he should have negotiated with them in good faith throughout the off season. By not doing so he leaves them and us no choice but to assume that money matters more than winning football, and if anything that lessens his value to this team going forward.

 

[Patters]

For crying out loud, what are we most interested in?

(1) Winning football games
(2) Teaching the likes of Deion Branch a lesson
(3) Ensuring the Pats remain a fiscally responsible organization

I like 2 and 3 as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, I just want to see this team win, not just win but dominate!

 

[captain stone]

Chris Mortenson on yesterday's pre-game show that he expects the Pats to start trying to move Branch today. So hopefully he ends up in Seattle or something and we get First rounder for him and maybe a player or a mid-round pick.

I don't understand why the FO would trade The Holdout during the season; they gain absolutely NO advantage by doing so. Why give him away to a possible playoff/SB opponent? The draft pick/s will not help at all this season. Get the pick/s when the FO needs it - on Draft Day. No, I say: let him stew in his own juices. If he returns after week 10, so be it. Use him, then lose him. After all, BB had to put up with Terry Glenn during all of '01.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

For crying out lout, what are we most interested in?

(1) Winning football games
(2) Teaching the likes of Deion Branch a lesson
(3) Ensuring the Pats remain a fiscally responsible organization

I like 2 and 3 as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, I just want to see this team win, not just win but dominate!

That not just win but dominate BS sounds like something NEM would say. Belioli are operating this franchise not to win every superbowl for the next few seasons but to remain competitive enough to compete to win the superbowl for the next 10+ seasons.

We've won football games without Deion Branch on at least a dozen occasions in the past, including yesterday. There are just a handful of players on this team without whom we are hard pressed to win. Each of them took a little less to come or remain here. They represent the core of the team. You do not overpay for a WR who is not core material for that very reason.

 

[Born_a_Patriot]

Branch needs a Rectal Exam

And no amount of money the shove up that thing is going to fix it.

 

[RayClay]

For crying out loud, what are we most interested in?

(1) Winning football games
(2) Teaching the likes of Deion Branch a lesson
(3) Ensuring the Pats remain a fiscally responsible organization

I like 2 and 3 as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, I just want to see this team win, not just win but dominate!

Yes. Thank you for listing the three things we need to do to remain a successful organization.

 

[PATSNUTme]

For crying out loud, what are we most interested in?

(1) Winning football games
(2) Teaching the likes of Deion Branch a lesson
(3) Ensuring the Pats remain a fiscally responsible organization

I like 2 and 3 as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, I just want to see this team win, not just win but dominate!

Please tell us how you would get Branch back? Give him the $40mil contract, with the big signing bonus?

And if we did that, what kind of future effect do you think this would have on the team for the next few years?

No lessons are being taught here. It's all business and about the team.