Welcome to PatsFans.com

FO gave Branch leverage

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by the taildragger, Sep 1, 2006.

  1. the taildragger

    the taildragger Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    559
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Dear posters who called me names last week,

    I hope you now understand why I became pessimistic last week...

    By allowing Deion to shop around, the Pats threw all of their leverage out the window. How? By making Branch genuinely disgruntled. YOU CAN'T KEEP A DISGRUNTLED PLAYER...regardless of his contract status.

    Last week, this obviously became WAY too contentious to be reconciled -- and it's now heading rapidly towards its inevitable conclusion -- a release (as per terms determined by league arbitrator).

    You can BLAME Chayut/Branch all you want for believing they were worth more than the FO's intial offered (ALL INITIAL OFFERS ARE LOWBALLED). Branch played hardball and "walked out of the dealership." The Pats played hardball by not countering their initial offer. But by simply deciding not to return with his tail between his legs (a risk the Pats never seemed to consider), Branch has forced the FO's hand.

    I do not believe he will ever play in navy and silver again.

    That probably makes most of you happy. But, if we'd been willing to budge at all, this was potentially avoidable. Nobody seems to be able to look at Branch's value in terms of FUTURE cap levels -- that's how Chayut was looking at it -- the Pats obviously didn't want to go there.

    That's business...welcome to the NFL.

    We'll make due without him -- Childress might be a decent fill-in -- but we would've been flat out awesome with him.

    Let's keep our fingers crossed on Jackson...the quicker he becomes an impact player the better.
  2. PATRIOTS-80

    PATRIOTS-80 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,786
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Deion was disgruntled before. Now we made him GENUINELY disgruntled. I clearly see the difference.

    And as far as not keeping a disgruntled player, we will because we are going to franchise him. We probably will own his rights until next years draft.
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2006
  3. 40yrpatsfan

    40yrpatsfan PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I don't agree. There were no talks happening, which was not a good thing from the team's standpoint. This was a way to get some action, and it worked.

    This is a negotiation. Some posters are a little too close to it right now and don't have the stomach for it. And Felger and Borges are way off base.

    But there's at least a 50-50 chance that the sides get together in the next week, and after that it will like nothing ever happened.

    If not, then Branch will be the loser.
  4. RayClay

    RayClay On the Roster

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    17,911
    Likes Received:
    168
    Ratings:
    +356 / 6 / -8

    #75 Jersey

    Chayut wouldn't negotiate. What would you have done?

    Let me guess. Give them whatever they want even though he's under contract.

    I do think this strategy made Branch disgruntled. With his agent.
  5. jct

    jct Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    851
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    1) Branch made Branch Disgruntled.
    2) A release will never be awarded.
    3) Why is it ok to Blame the Pats when a lowlife refuses to keep his word?
    4) He will pay dearly for holding out.
    5) Branch is overated, 668yd ave from BRADY throwing to him, and OFTEN injured.
    6) How could you possibly balme the Pats when Branch never counterofferred?
    7) Truly no one knows what will happen, whether he grows a brain fires his agent and returns, or reports for week ten and the SB run, only to be franchised for next year and then traded.
    8) I believe that we can be Flat out awesome without him O-line, RBs, TEs
  6. PATSNUTme

    PATSNUTme Paranoid Homer Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    15,209
    Likes Received:
    61
    Ratings:
    +97 / 2 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Dear the taildrager,

    Could you list the names that you were called last wek. I missed it and would enjoy knowing what they were.
    Thank you
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2006
  7. RI Pats Fan

    RI Pats Fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I disagree. At the end of the week, nothing happened and the advantage didn't sway one way or another. It's a complete standstill which is why you see so many posters going luney. The worst news has been no news for them. Who knows when this will get resolved. Week 10 might not even be the end of it.
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,326
    Likes Received:
    121
    Ratings:
    +248 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    I'm not sure Branch got a legit big offer. According to the one link that was posted, the jesters were the only ones to actually make an offer and it had a "funky structure".
  9. 5 Rings for Brady!!

    5 Rings for Brady!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I have a theory which I don't believe is very far-fetched.

    I think that Chayut is trying to pull a power play by going to a Player's Association which is openly ANTI-PATRIOT, and trying to pull a dirty trick on the Pats thru league politics.

    We all know that Gene Upshaw badmouthed the living crap out of Belichick about three weeks ago in the Boston media. We all hopefully realize by now that Tom Condon used influence on Upshaw to impose a bunch of so-called 'Patriot Clauses' into the new CBA agreement, all of which essentially took away certain powers of a team to retain rookie employees. We also know that Chayut and his ball-clown Borges have taken up the 'Patriots Suck' mantra, and repeatedly talked about the new 'Patriot Clauses' in the CBA.

    So why wouldn't these self-righteous clowns all get together in an effort to screw the Pats out of their rights to Deion?

    Am I the only one that thinks the NFLPA is jumping for joy at the chance to take a pound of flesh out of the Patriots Front Office?

    Am I the only one that thinks this could actually end badly for the Pats?

    I am inclined to agree with Taildragger that the Pats opened up a potential can of worms, although that was NOT their intent. It's all rather unseamly, IMO.
  10. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3


    If there was a 50/50 chance, then why did Chayut file a grievance?

    You can't ignore that.
  11. Bella*chick

    Bella*chick Addicted to the light

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    8,108
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I think many of us are wondering why Chayut filed a grievance.

    When you lay things out, he doesn't have too much of a case.
  12. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    The NFLPA is always going to side with the player's and agent's over management so I'm not sure why this is a big deal. In any case, the NFLPA doesn't have any power over this. Tehre are league bylaws about this sort of thing, and the Patriots haven't run afoul of anything. They maybe took a gamble that backfired but they are operating well within the rules.

    So is Branch. For some reason, the owners agreed to a formula in which a player can somehow skip most of the season and still accrue a year toward free agency.

    Branch is operating within the rules, obviously. I wish the rules said, you have to honor your contract. But they don't.
  13. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    Agreed.

    I'm just assuming that this means the split is definitei. We have a season that starts. These guys are throwing torpedos at one another. It's time to start focusing on other things. In fact, the front office should be thinking about Koppen, Samuel and Graham right now.

    In my view, the Branch saga is over and done with and it will end with a franchise player getting traded to a top NFC team for a late first rounder just before the next draft.
  14. SCPatBoy

    SCPatBoy Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0



    What did Upshaw blast BB for.....Any links...I just haven't heard or seen anything on it...
  15. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    Upshaw blasted the Pats for forcing their draft picks to 5 years deals and he insinuated the Pats were the first franchise to do so when profootballtalk.com reports it was actually the raiders that instituted the practice.

    I think the only thing that could have changed is public opinion. for example in this chat room. the player, agent, and team are right where they started with no negotitations.

    it's the agents job to negotiate. how can you do your job if you don't negotiate. to me he appears to be inept at his job.
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2006
  16. 5 Rings for Brady!!

    5 Rings for Brady!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    SCPatBoy:

    Upshaw went to the media about 3 weeks ago and explained that he negotiated the new CBA with the Pats specifically in mind, and that all his changes to terms of rookie employment were 'Patriot Clauses' to keep the Patriots from abusing and manipulating and tricking rookies into signing deals with the devil. Not his exact wording, but that is essentially what he went on and on about. Slamming the Pats above all other teams and using them as the example of bad front office shennanigans.

    Ironically, it turns out that Tom Condon, the agent that was fired by Ben Watson, rather than sign the 6-year deal that Ben asked him to go ahead and sign with the Pats, inserted himself as personal advisor to Upshaw before this recent CBA negotiation. I wonder were the cute little phrase 'Patriot Clause' came from. :cool:

    Chayut, thru Borges, has levelled the exact same charges and exact same phrasing and language as Upshaw/Condon towards the Pats about half a week after Upshaw finished running his mouth.

    What makes this so clearly a personal agenda against the Pats is the fact that the Raiders, Browns and Bears very publicly tried to get all their rookies signed to the longest deals they could before the Patriots adopted the habit. Somehow, that escapes Upshaw when he lays into the Pats personally, thru the media.

    Edit: It may have been during mini-camp, i.e. more than 3 weeks ago.
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2006
  17. 5 Rings for Brady!!

    5 Rings for Brady!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Upstater1: We don't know if this will really go anywhere, clearly. But the reason that I think it is a big deal is that the NFLPA has gotten away with some real crap decisions as of late, and they seem likely to have an especially major bone to pick with the Pats, if you believe Upshaw.

    Did you read the Upshaw outbursts? Do you want this guy to have a say in anything related to the Pats front office?

    It really smells a little fishy to me that Chayut would file such a grievance. I think he is getting some moral support from some quarters which I just don't think is appropriate. There is not any real case here, and Chayut is doing everything possible to turn this into a media circus/witchhunt. It is totally uncool, IMO.
  18. Jacky Roberts

    Jacky Roberts Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The bottom line is if BB gives Branch the contract he wants, all this will be forgotten.
  19. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    And if my boss doubles my salary, I'm going to Tahiti!!
  20. 5 Rings for Brady!!

    5 Rings for Brady!! Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,753
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    That's the most optimistic thing anyone could possibly say at this point! LOL. ;)

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>