Welcome to PatsFans.com

Do we really know why?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by RAWKY, Sep 3, 2006.

  1. RAWKY

    RAWKY On the Roster

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The following is a quote from todays Globe article.

    Branch a long shot to return: Grievance may be heard before opener
    By John Tomase
    Boston Herald Sports Writer

    Sunday, September 3, 2006 - Updated: 11:06 AM EST

    "The Patriots had hoped to show Branch he wasn’t worth as much as he thought on the market, but the last week disproved that. The Seahawks offered Branch the same deal as the Jets, but the Jets made their offer first."


    In this Globe article and on this board many have ASSUMED the Pat's allowed Dieon to seek a trade in order to show him his market value was less then he thought it was.

    First off can anyone show a quote where BB or any FO person says that this is why they allowed Branch a week to negociate with another team was too show him his market worth was not what he thought it was?

    This premise, IS SIMPLY THAT, A PREMISE an ASSUPTION, yet it is reported as FACT.

    No one knows the Pat's FO real thinking on this matter.

    It is just a plausable that the Pat's said "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH' and wished to identify teams willing to pay Branch his desire so they could get rid of him and move on with this season.

    I personaly think BB has seen this Branch fiasco comming for some time, all the way back to the SB MVP Branch won and then rejected the Pat's offer to extend him.

    I think that is why BB took Jackson in the second round and would have in the first if Maroney had not been there and why he took Three, count them Three tight ends in the draft.

    He was looking ahead and implementing his plan to move on when Branch decided to holdout and became a jerk.

    BB was doing what he always does planning ahead for every possible problem.

    My premise is just as logical as the other and in fact it fits BB's MO to never be unprepared and always have a plan for any eventuallity.

    There is alot of somke being passed off as fact in this drama.

    I will always watch and err on the side of BB and the front office in these matters....

    Why: well 3 Super Bowls and BLEDSOE and Milloy are 5 good reasons.

    The press has been wrong and BB has been right on all of these what gives the Press any credibility now.
     
  2. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    You blind Homer you!!!

    :rocker:
     
  3. Murphys95

    Murphys95 Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    That's an excellent point. To say that the Patriots ploy "backfired" implies there was something being done surreptitiously on the Patriots part. There is no hard evidence of that; but that doesn't sell newspapers.

    It's quite likely, based on their record, that the Patriots simply wanted to expedite this whole Branch thing before the season started. It's also likely that Belichick and the Patriots were prepared to accept any outcome - trade or otherwise. Allowing Branch to test the trade waters was a means to an end - an end to this whole saga. One could argue it's best to have all this on the table now, and not in November or December.
     
  4. 40yrpatsfan

    40yrpatsfan PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +10 / 5 / -1

    Absolutely. In fact BB-SP fully expected the possibility that 1 team out of 32 would show Branch the money. If that team also offered a high 1st or multiple low 1st's, we'd have a deal by now. The Patriots just wanted some certaintly to the situation, before the season began. They didn't want to play Chayut's game of holding out till week 10. These claims that "it blew up in their face" is total BS.
     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2006
  5. upstater1

    upstater1 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,105
    Likes Received:
    48
    Ratings:
    +112 / 9 / -3

    I'm sorry. I can't agree.

    I can't figure out what the upshot is for the Patriots. What's the logic? What's the endgame? What's the eventuality?

    The Patriots gambled, and they lost. It was a major loss, but they were made to look like cheapskates. That perception is unavoidable given what the Jets and Seahwaks offered.

    There were only 3 potential outcomes to the gamble, and two of them were good. One was bad. The Patriots gambled, and they got stuck with the worst outcome.

    If someone can explain to me the upside of allowing Branch's agent to deal with other teams, I'm all ears. Just explain it to me.
     
  6. Richter

    Richter In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,112
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    The upside is, the Pats move Branch in a good deal, or show him that he's not worth what he thinks he is, which is precisely what those offers from the Jets and Seahawks should have done. They didn't offer him Reggie Wayne money. No one knows how this situation will be resolved, so it's totally unreasonable to proclaim that this approach has blown up in the Pats' faces. If they get a 1st and a mid-round pick or a player from Seattle for Branch, I'd declare the strategy a total success.
     
  7. RAWKY

    RAWKY On the Roster

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It is impossible to know the end from this begining, So much can not be yet determined about this process, that being said i will point something we have all learned but has been lost in the smoke and mirrors of this TO like event.

    One upside is that now everyone, including Branches team mates, knows it is about the up front money, read GREED, for Branch and not about his value in the market place.

    The Pat's offered 30 mill over 5 yrs Dieon says now he will accept 39 mill over six yrs which, if reports are correct, Seattle's is back loaded and the one from NY has a Funky structure, read in both these descriptions FULL VALUE IS NOT ATTAINABLE over the course of the agreement.

    The real difference in the offers IS NOT THE WORTH OF THE PLAYER, for each values him at 6 to 6 1/2 mill per yr so its not about the per yr value but about the up front money which is reported at 13 mill from both NY and the Hawks.

    The Pat's offered 8 mill garnuteed. so that is what Brach is looking at not the overall contract value or the value per yr.

    Branches team mates in the locker room now see that the overall Pat's offer is in fact at market value per year and it is not back loaded or funky but straight forward and achieveable.

    Branch is looking at the 13 mill garnuteed because Givens got 10 mill garnuteed and Branch is sure he is better then Givens a mere seventh rounder in the same way Peyton Manning is sure he is better then TOM BRADY a mere sixth rounder.

    Thus any player approached by the Pat's knows he may get less up front but he will infact get his true market value over the term of the agreement. This is a most important fact for future negociations with other players.

    So while the Pat's are finanically more responsible with their cap dollars, they are not going to throw more then is reasonable up front in garnutees, they do value the player at FAIR MARKET.

    It is like TOM BRADY said one has to decide where one wants to be and if these are the coaches and organization one wants to play for and if the answer to this question is yes then the amount of money you take is how much you NEED not how much you WANT.

    We now know for sure Branch does not want to play here and the money is not about how much he NEEDS but how much he WANTS, read TY LAW in place of Branch.

    Too have that verified By Branches actions and in the press is important to long term stability and to give fans and players comfort when they move Branch out of NE and too another team.

    It was not about the Pat's undervalueing Branch it was about Branch wanting the absolute most money he could get up front.

    Branch is motovaited by greed and fear, sadly both those emotions will come back to haunt him.
     
  8. Gon_Trevil

    Gon_Trevil On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I would wait until the issue is resolved before passing out judgement. Talk about jumping the gun-- how can they possibly say the thing has backfired right now? And if they end up trading him for a first during next week, will it still have backfired? Those media-types are so full of it.
     
  9. upstater1

    upstater1 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,105
    Likes Received:
    48
    Ratings:
    +112 / 9 / -3


    I disagree with you about the money part. I think it's clear right now that the Seattle offer in the first 3 years far exceeds what the Patriots were offering. branch one that part. But I totally agree with your last sentence, and I already have. If he's traded for decent value it's good for the Patriots and worth the gamble. Go back to my original post. I said this gamble had three outcomes. Two were good and one was bad. Unfortunately, we are still in the bad outcome phase right now.
     
  10. upstater1

    upstater1 Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,105
    Likes Received:
    48
    Ratings:
    +112 / 9 / -3

    I think the Seattle offer that averages 7 million in the first 3 years with a lot of upfront money is clearly better than the Patriots offer. There's really only one conclusion you can draw looking at the short term Seahawks offer.

    On the other hand, Chayut never counteroffered so it's not like the Patriots ever had a negotiating partner.

    The fact that Patten and Givens are so wildly overpaid, though, would make me think that someone was going to match Branch's deamnds.

    Lastly, it could be that the Patriots felt a team would be more willing to give up a good draft pick if they gave Branch the right to negotiate. Teams probably believe something is imminent, whereas if the Patriots had picked up the phone, a GM might think they were just kicking tires.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>