Welcome to PatsFans.com

How Would You Solve the Branch Problem ?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by BelichickFan, Aug 21, 2006.

  1. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,916
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +775 / 17 / -22

    #24 Jersey

    OK, here's my creative thinking for the day.

    Problem :

    - Branch thinks he's worth more than Belichick thinks he's worth.
    - Belichick wouldn't pay him top dollar anyway based on his position.

    Additional Facts :

    - Branch would play this year if the Patriots promised not to Franchise him.
    - Patriots can't promise not to Franchise as they'd lose any trade value under the Franchise tag,

    My Solution :

    Agree with Branch/agent to a reasonable trade value for Branch under the Franchise tag. Say a #2, whatever they agree on, but I'll use that. Agree, in writing if necessary, with Branch that he'll play this season but instead of promising not to Franchise him, promise that if he can find a team willing to trade the #2 that was agreed on in addition to giving him the contract he wants, we guarantee we'll make the trade.

    Although they'd have to be slightly careful about the wording of things due to the intent of Franchising not supposed to be for trade purposes, this would work for both sides. The Patriots would get the player for this season and get the agreed to trade value. Branch would get his chance to negotiate his own long term deal and not be "stuck" with the meager $8M or so for one year that the Franchise Tag for a WR would give him.
     
  2. flutie2phelan

    flutie2phelan Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Intriguing ... but i haven't truly considered your solution yet.

    What i do want to compliment BelichickFan for right off, though ...
    is overcoming the great bitterness he expresses at Branch in posts
    (and which i share) ...
    to craft some kind of arrangement - ANY kind - acceptable to both sides!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2005
  3. RIP#40

    RIP#40 On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    May 11, 2005
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +6 / 3 / -2

    I think they have to play hardball with Branch. After giving in to Big Sey, if they give in to Branch, that will become the norm. If you're not happy with your contract, just hold out, the Pats will redo it. They need to draw the line here and now.
    If he doesn't accept the last offer(I think 3 years 19 mil w/ 8 bonus)thats it, let him come back game 10, impose the fine. Franchise him next year, he'll play hard for a contract and say bye bye. Unless you can franchise him 2 years in a row, then I would do that. This crap has to be stopped now.
     
  4. chowder

    chowder On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I'd just franchise him... done deal. I guess Branch should be glad that i'm not BB. LOL
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2005
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,916
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +775 / 17 / -22

    #24 Jersey

    The problem is that doesn't get him into camp tomorrow.
     
  6. PromisedLand

    PromisedLand Virtual Internet Person

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I agree. It's like negotiating with terrorists - it only encourages them to kill more people. Or to put it more gently, it's like giving in to a four year old when they have a tantrum. It teaches them that the way to get what they want is to have a tantrum.
     
  7. PromisedLand

    PromisedLand Virtual Internet Person

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    So you play without him. Remember 2001 and Terry Glenn? ("How are they going to be able to survive without their best WR?") Sound familiar?
     
  8. RIP#40

    RIP#40 On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    May 11, 2005
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +6 / 3 / -2

    I think he'll cave after the 3rd pre season game. With his injury history, I don't think he wanted anything to do w/ contact. I say the Pats give him a four year deal, 10 up front with an ave of 6 per year. If he doesn't take it he's nuts. I think the Pats would be crazy to do it, but they probably want to keep TB happy. I on the other hand, would let him rot.
     
  9. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I say they promise not to franchise him and let him get his money somewhere else next year. To me, the bridge seems burned anyway so we might as well get one last season out of him.
     
  10. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,916
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +775 / 17 / -22

    #24 Jersey

    That's not a win-win IMO. The CBA gives us the right to Franchise him, there's no quid pro quo there - we get nothing out of it.
     
  11. PATSNUTme

    PATSNUTme Paranoid Homer Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    14,601
    Likes Received:
    148
    Ratings:
    +381 / 3 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I don't think that the league allows tagging a guy just to trade him. So, anything in writing would not be in the cards.

    They can do what someothers have done. Tag him then tell his agent to go seek any trade that they want as long as the Patriots get "value' for it.

    It would be totally stupid and bad business for the Patriots to agree not to tag him.
     
  12. Jacky Roberts

    Jacky Roberts 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Easy solution:

    Trade Branch to the Red Sox for a week and let him see what a pathetic organization looks like. After two days, he'll be screaming to come back to Foxboro.
     
  13. tailgater

    tailgater Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The Pats have already done with Branch what they did with Seymour - negotiate an extension with a year left on an existing deal.

    The only difference is the Pats did give Seymour an additional 2M or so in his 2005 salary, along with the 4yr extention thru 2010. As far as I know, they did not do the same, at least in their initial offer.

    Pats can tag him 3 years in a row if they like. If he holds out this year, he might refuse to sign the tag next year.


     
  14. Pats726

    Pats726 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Maybe NOT solveable...

    To be honest...I don't know IF there is a win-win situation...yes get him into camp, but does anyone really want a disgruntled player here?? What does that do to hurt the team?? Unless Branch wishes to be here..it may NOT be a win...for the Patriots. I am sort of seeing this as Branxh out on a limb and burning the tree..no way out. I can NOT think of a reasonable solution to this..to get him here..NOW!! I do agree rhe team can not promise NOT to Franchise him...he doesn't want to play here...so at least the team can sign and trade. Branch wants that no Franchise agreement for what?? HE has to give up something MORE than just coming to camp...he already HAS a contract that says he should be here. SO?? I just think this will have to play out...and I agree with the Patriots totally on this one.
     
  15. PromisedLand

    PromisedLand Virtual Internet Person

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    This has certainly been done in the past. IIRC we used that tactic with Tebucky Jones.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2005
  16. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,916
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +775 / 17 / -22

    #24 Jersey

    Re: Maybe NOT solveable...

    My proposal was a win-win :)
     
  17. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,916
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +775 / 17 / -22

    #24 Jersey

    Right, I'm just saying that they could agree now to what "value" is and promise that if Branch's agent bring that value from another team that they would make the trade.
     
  18. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,947
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    I'm glad to hear via Michael Smith that any rumors of an increased offer to get him in are untrue. Cannot negotiate with a holdout. I don't believe any team will. Holdouts are generally used to get a team to agree to consider an extension or to facilitate a trade because they won't or you hate each others guts. In Branch's case they had begun offering him an extension in March of 2005, right after his Superbowl MVP and with 2 years remaining on his egregious rookie deal and before he ever even reached the minimal 900 yard escalator that had been in his contract all along. He just didn't like the numbers. If they were to give him anything more now including even an agreement to somehow mitigate the use of the franchise tag, it is a win for holding out.

    I thought they were wrong to do it with Seymour last season even though all they gave him was a shifting of some existing (old) money from year 6 to year 5. He then had to wait for his deal until this season. And although his extension is for 3 years at $10M with upwards of $18M guaranteed, it does not cover this season when he will continue to play for what remains in his 6th year of his rookie deal (albeit while poketing some of his bonus money in advance - same scenario they offered Branch). Seymour's present and future deal divided by the 4 years he remains under contract = $8M per. That is just less than the previously highest paid DL contract from a few years ago averages. Not a bad deal for arguably the best DL (or at least top 3) in the league.

    Branch is demanding a new deal to his liking NOW before he will report. He wants a salary commensurate with the highest paid WR in the league so that when his average is divided by 4 he will still average in the top 5 WR. He wants bonus money akin to what other WR received for deals twice as long. And barring that he wants an assurance he cannot be tagged for retention or traded next season. NO CAN DO on so many levels it isn't even worth discussing what he wants. Which is apparently why they are not.
     
  19. PATSNUTme

    PATSNUTme Paranoid Homer Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    14,601
    Likes Received:
    148
    Ratings:
    +381 / 3 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Yes, but it wasn't a formal agreement. The Jets did it with ABe but that wasn't formal either. His agent went out and got a deal with Alt that was agreeable to all.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2005
  20. PATSNUTme

    PATSNUTme Paranoid Homer Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    14,601
    Likes Received:
    148
    Ratings:
    +381 / 3 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I guess we are saying the same thing. The only difference is that it can't be written formally. It would have to be a verbal and the Partiots would not have agree to the deal if they didn't like it.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2005

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>