I agree with Borges

[shmessy]

Excellent posts on the topic, smg93.

As for the issue of lowballing, I look at it this way.

The Patriots offered Branch a 3 year, $19 millon extension. This contract, averaged over the next 4 years would make Branch the 17th highest paid receiver in the league. Remember that number, 17.

Now take a look at Branch's statistical rankings for 2005 (his best season):

Receptions: 15th
Yards: 20th
YAC: 25th
TDs: 29th
Thrown to: 20th

Was the Patriots offer unreasonable? Was the Patriots offer unfair as a starting point in a negotiation (as smg93 has diligently pointed out)?

BTW, the average of those 5 statistical categories comes to 21st....rounded down.

Lowball? I don't think so.

That's great stuff, Murph. 'Nuf ced.

 

[smg93]

Excellent posts on the topic, smg93.

As for the issue of lowballing, I look at it this way.

The Patriots offered Branch a 3 year, $19 millon extension. This contract, averaged over the next 4 years would make Branch the 17th highest paid receiver in the league. Remember that number, 17.

Now take a look at Branch's statistical rankings for 2005 (his best season):

Receptions: 15th
Yards: 20th
YAC: 25th
TDs: 29th
Thrown to: 20th

Was the Patriots offer unreasonable? Was the Patriots offer unfair as a starting point in a negotiation (as smg93 has diligently pointed out)?

BTW, the average of those 5 statistical categories comes to 21st....rounded down.

Lowball? I don't think so.

Makes the Pats starting offer look even less insulting! Thanks for those stats. That surely is an eye opener.

 

[lobster]

This is a grievance against the NFL right, so why are the Jets and an anonymous "league general manager" acting like boosters for the players union?

 

[fgssand]

Excellent posts on the topic, smg93.

As for the issue of lowballing, I look at it this way.

The Patriots offered Branch a 3 year, $19 millon extension. This contract, averaged over the next 4 years would make Branch the 17th highest paid receiver in the league. Remember that number, 17.

Now take a look at Branch's statistical rankings for 2005 (his best season):

Receptions: 15th
Yards: 20th
YAC: 25th
TDs: 29th
Thrown to: 20th

Was the Patriots offer unreasonable? Was the Patriots offer unfair as a starting point in a negotiation (as smg93 has diligently pointed out)?

BTW, the average of those 5 statistical categories comes to 21st....rounded down.

Lowball? I don't think so.

Nice info, now tie this directly to one Wrong Borges and please help me to understand:

One would think that a responsible journalist / columnist would present facts, such as you have, to support both sides and then allow the reader to come to their own conclusion?

Or, is it a journalist / columnists duty to grind his axe whenever possible specifically because he has been made to look foolish countless number of times by this organization?

I really would like to see a non biased presentation of the facts of the Deion Branch saga presented, for all to read, positive and negative with all things considered.

Personally, the way I see it is we have a Patriot organization that has been wronged by an over zealous, inexperienced agent with a personal agenda to make a name for himself representing a player with overblown visions of grandeur.

 

[DaBruinz]

An extension is a new contract. Here's why I think that a 3-year extension is a 4-year deal.

Branch's cash intake under his current contract
2006 - $1.045 million
2007 - $0
2008 - $0
2009- $0

Under the Patriots' proposal
2006 - $5.45 million
2007 - $5.5 million
2008 - $4.4 million
2009 - $4.85 million

Branch's cash intake increases all 4 years and the Patriots are able to prorate the 2006 signing bonus over 4 years. That is why I think that it is a 4-year deal

Nick Cafardo reported in the Boston Globe:
"Some interesting tidbits from the 22-page contract of Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, which was signed May 4:
Here is how the first line reads: ''TERM: This contract covers 5 football seasons and will begin on the date of execution or March 1, 2005 whichever is later and end Feb. 28 or 29, 2010 unless extended, terminated or renewed as specified elsewhere in this contract."

I take the above as Brady's contract including the 2005 and 2006 seasons even though he was already under contract for them. What 5 seasons does Brady's contract cover??

IMO, 2005/2006/2007/2008/2009 and the Patriots had an option for 2010 which they exercised in 2006.

Look at the standard NFL contract in the CBA:

1. TERM. This contract covers __________ football season(s), and will begin on the date of execution or March 1, __________, whichever is later, and end on February 28 or 29, __________, unless extended, terminated, or renewed as specified elsewhere in this contract.

If Branch's extension is going to say that it covers 4 football seasons (from Brady's contract it would), then, IMO, it is a 4-year deal and that its value should be divided by 4 to come with its APY.

Side note to DaBruinz, IMO, this is not BS thinking. This is a reasonable position supported by facts.

Sorry, Miguel, it is BS thinking. And let me explain why.

1) During Brady's 1st extension, that is exactly what he got. A straight extension. With a straight extension, you look at the value of the new years alone. You do NOT look at the value including the year remaining on the old contract.

2) With a NEW CONTRACT, which is what Brady got with his most recent deal, they SCRAPPED the last 2 years of his old contract and replaced them. Hence, the deal was viewed in its entirety.

Chayut wants you to look at an extension as if it was an entirely NEW contract because of his ludicrous claims that the Patriots FORCED Branch to sign a 5 year deal and not a 4 year deal. And that is NOT what was being offered.

Since you were the person who taught me that with your pages and previous discussions, I would think you would understand that better.

Also, if you look at the stuff you posted, I'd be willing to bet that the extension offered Branch said March 1st, 2007, not March 1st, 2006. But that is besides the point.

 

[DaBruinz]

I just look at it in its simplest form. For the next four years, I will be paid to play football. The pats are offering me my $1 million this year + X amount next year, Y amount the year after and Z amount in the fourth year.

$1 million + X + Y + Z = TC, where TC = total compensation I will receive in the four year duration of the contract. TP divided by four would obviously give me the average annual compensation over that period.

The jets and seahawks are offering a contract let's say for 4 years and $24 million or an average annual salary of $6 million per year.

So I look at the 3 year extension in Real World dollars. Over the next four year period, how much will I be making in TC (Total Compensation) and in average annual salary in the Patriots offer, the Jets offer, and the Seahawks offer.

This is why I consider the extension to be a 4 year package for all intents and purposes. Semantics aside, that's what it is in real world dollars.

Except, in the real world, You would be expected to submit counter offers and actually negotiate with your employer. You'd also be expected to complete your current contract.

BTW, I'd be willing to bet the Brady, when he signed his extension in 2002, saw that he was getting a huge boost from where he was and was perfectly happy with his extension.

 

[Mark Morse]

And his column today. This Branch situation was handled horribly. The Pats say a guy like Branch is everything they want... then they lowball him. If you're a Pats player and see this happen, how do you think it won't happen to you?

I'm done drinking the Kool-Aid on every topic. Belichick is a great coach... an HOFer... but he screwed this up royally.

Get this straight ... nothing was going on ... there were no negotiations. The Branch Camp never liked the fact that they were "forced" to sign for 5 years in his original contract. They saw the large amount of room left in most teams salary cap and wanted to cash in now, today for their big bonanza. They saw what kind of money was being thrown at Reggie Wayne and David Givens (who was the teams #2 receiver). They wanted theirs now not next year ( or dread the year after if he got rranchised). he would be close to 30 and wouldn't get the kind of money he felt he deserved.

The Patriots did the only thing they could do ... find out what the market would bring while he was under contract ... not wait until he was a Free Agent. They have an opportunity to do one of three things. 1.) Try to come close to the offers that were made and keep Branch. This is unlikely because they have each position slotted with a salary. They also want this year at $1M ... anything more will be an extension (which Branch doesn't want). 20 They can keep him and let him play the final 6 games (I predict he will tweak a hamstring). I would then Franchise him for next year (no signing Bonus) and listen to the offers then. 3.) Trade him now for whatever the market will bear for (1st and 5th).

 

[mikey]

Excellent posts on the topic, smg93.

As for the issue of lowballing, I look at it this way.

The Patriots offered Branch a 3 year, $19 millon extension. This contract, averaged over the next 4 years would make Branch the 17th highest paid receiver in the league. Remember that number, 17.

Now take a look at Branch's statistical rankings for 2005 (his best season):

Receptions: 15th
Yards: 20th
YAC: 25th
TDs: 29th
Thrown to: 20th

Was the Patriots offer unreasonable? Was the Patriots offer unfair as a starting point in a negotiation (as smg93 has diligently pointed out)?

BTW, the average of those 5 statistical categories comes to 21st....rounded down.

Lowball? I don't think so.

According Econ 101, Deion's MARKET VALUE is whatever value a team will offer him in the free market.

All those statistics are MEANINGLESS.


.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

And his column today. This Branch situation was handled horribly. The Pats say a guy like Branch is everything they want... then they lowball him. If you're a Pats player and see this happen, how do you think it won't happen to you?

I'm done drinking the Kool-Aid on every topic. Belichick is a great coach... an HOFer... but he screwed this up royally.

I honestly thought if Branch got a legit offer, the Pats would use that as his value and sign him at that amount. When they turned their back on him after the offer, I agree the Pats screwed this up.

 

[RayClay]

According Econ 101, Deion's MARKET VALUE is whatever value a team will offer him in the free market.

All those statistics are MEANINGLESS.


.

Since he's under contract the term "free market" is meaningless for a year or two.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

According Econ 101, Deion's MARKET VALUE is whatever value a team will offer him in the free market.

All those statistics are MEANINGLESS.


.

Really? How do you determine market value if your a bidder?

 

[mikey]

I honestly thought if Branch got a legit offer, the Pats would use that as his value and sign him at that amount. When they turned their back on him after the offer, I agree the Pats screwed this up.

They pulled the same stunt on TROY BROWN.

They also told TROY BROWN to shop around.

When all Troy got was a crappy offer from New Orleans, the ploy worked.

But they GROSSLY underestimated the WORTH of Deion in the free market.

Now they are faced with the CONUNDRUM.

Losing Deion will undermine our BEST opportunity of winning our 4th Lombadi this year.

.

 

[Bostonian1962]

That's great stuff, Murph. 'Nuf ced.

Originally Posted by Murphys95
Excellent posts on the topic, smg93.

As for the issue of lowballing, I look at it this way.

The Patriots offered Branch a 3 year, $19 millon extension. This contract, averaged over the next 4 years would make Branch the 17th highest paid receiver in the league. Remember that number, 17.

Now take a look at Branch's statistical rankings for 2005 (his best season):

Receptions: 15th
Yards: 20th
YAC: 25th
TDs: 29th
Thrown to: 20th

Was the Patriots offer unreasonable? Was the Patriots offer unfair as a starting point in a negotiation (as smg93 has diligently pointed out)?

BTW, the average of those 5 statistical categories comes to 21st....rounded down.

Lowball? I don't think so.


"That's great stuff, Murph. 'Nuf ced."

I'll second that Murph. Great break down.

Isn't it interesting that one of the teams after Branch (Seattle) had a WR (Galloway) who sat out the first 10 games of a season? They traded him for what? You guessed it, two first round draft picks. If it was good enough for them when they were on the receiving end, then clearly the Patriots were not unreasonable in asking for the same thing.

As for a grievance intended to force them to accept only a 2nd round pick from one of their main AFC East rivals. Ludicrous!

My theory has always been that if a player is drafted from the 2nd round on, and he becomes one of the better players at his position, by definition, he should be worth better than that in a trade. A 2nd round pick like Branch, whom many, if you recall, criticized the Patriots for drafting, is one of the better players at his postion. He's worth more than what they used to get him originally.

P.S. - The fact that the Patriots just gave up a 5th for a WR that was a 5th round pick should make the Raider fans VERY angry. And, if you go to their sites, as I did, IT DOES!!!!

 

[Miguel]

Sorry, Miguel, it is BS thinking. And let me explain why.

1) During Brady's 1st extension, that is exactly what he got. A straight extension. With a straight extension, you look at the value of the new years alone.

Why???

You do NOT look at the value including the year remaining on the old contract.

Why not???
Deion would get a $4 million million signing bonus in 2006.
The Patriots would be able to use the 2006 year in its amortization of the $4 million signing bonus.

2) With a NEW CONTRACT, which is what Brady got with his most recent deal, they SCRAPPED the last 2 years of his old contract and replaced them. Hence, the deal was viewed in its entirety.

Chayut wants you to look at an extension as if it was an entirely NEW contract because of his ludicrous claims that the Patriots FORCED Branch to sign a 5 year deal and not a 4 year deal. And that is NOT what was being offered.

From what I can tell from the CBA, Branch would have been signing a contract that says that it covers 4 seasons. Is my assessment of the CBA incorrect???

Since you were the person who taught me that with your pages and previous discussions, I would think you would understand that better.

Sorry to disappoint you. For the record, I did not teach you to call an differing opinion BS thinking. That is on you.

Also, if you look at the stuff you posted, I'd be willing to bet that the extension offered Branch said March 1st, 2007, not March 1st, 2006.
But that is besides the point.

I'm willing to bet that you are wrong and it is not besides the point. It is precisely the point.

It is a 3 year, 18 million deal averaging out to 6 million only if one ignores the fact that $4 million of the $18 million is being paid in 2006. Why isn't it then a 3 year, 14 million deal???

 

[Pats726]

They pulled the same stunt on TROY BROWN.

They also told TROY BROWN to shop around.

When all Troy got was a crappy offer from New Orleans, the ploy worked.

But they GROSSLY underestimated the WORTH of Deion in the free market.

Now they are faced with the CONUNDRUM.

Losing Deion will undermine our BEST opportunity of winning our 4th Lombadi this year.

.

Pulled a stunt?? what planet are you on?? The Patriots could ahve all along told Deion to poind sand..so you understand that?? They HAD NO ZERO oibligation to negotiate at all whatsoever!! Deion WAS under contract..they did not have to do anything but say play and we'll talk after the season. But they didn't..did they..they wanted to be FAIR about it. Don't go shooting off your mouth about stunts unless you wish to talk about the stunts that Branch has pulled.. 1--not negotiating in good faith 2--not reporting to camp 3--demanding that the Franchise tag be promised not to be used...STUNTS bu Branch and his agent. You are critical and yet..what would you do??? Or have done with Branch not negotiating?? And actually they hardly underestimated his worth..if you had read the test of the thread, the Patriots FIRST offer was hardly a lowball offer.

 

[belichickaholic]

They pulled the same stunt on TROY BROWN.

They also told TROY BROWN to shop around.

When all Troy got was a crappy offer from New Orleans, the ploy worked.

But they GROSSLY underestimated the WORTH of Deion in the free market.

Now they are faced with the CONUNDRUM.

Losing Deion will undermine our BEST opportunity of winning our 4th Lombadi this year.

.

They told Troy Brown to shop around and no other team wanted him. I wonder why they brought him back when no one else wanted him? Must have been that cold hearted SOB, Belichick.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Borges is up to his old embittered nonsense.

The longer this goes on the greater is the chance that a settlement will be oimposed brokered by the leageu or by arbitration.

The more likely that becomes, the higher will be the compensation to the Patriots. I predict (eventually) they will get two #1 picks. that is what the law and precedent specify.

But its time to let tempers cool. Branch can sit for several weeks and perhaps see the error of his ways. If all that is wanted is a #2 pick, that will come today or next offseason, so why do it now? Branch becomes in effect, a member of the shadow roster who can be mobilized for pure money or perhaps even the forgiveness of fines.

 

[mikey]

Pulled a stunt?? what planet are you on?? The Patriots could ahve all along told Deion to poind sand..so you understand that?? They HAD NO ZERO oibligation to negotiate at all whatsoever!! Deion WAS under contract..they did not have to do anything but say play and we'll talk after the season. But they didn't..did they..they wanted to be FAIR about it. Don't go shooting off your mouth about stunts unless you wish to talk about the stunts that Branch has pulled.. 1--not negotiating in good faith 2--not reporting to camp 3--demanding that the Franchise tag be promised not to be used...STUNTS bu Branch and his agent. You are critical and yet..what would you do??? Or have done with Branch not negotiating?? And actually they hardly underestimated his worth..if you had read the test of the thread, the Patriots FIRST offer was hardly a lowball offer.

What would I do?

Pay him whatever the Jets are going to pay him.

There is not much of a difference anyway.

Really ... it is that simple.

.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Some excellent points made in this thread.

I think Deion BS'ed everyone including the guy who got him that MVP nod in the Superbowl. I think he's been gone for two years now unless the Patriots ripped up his contract. And since they didn't do that with Brady (twice) or Seymour whose $10M per year extension doesn't kick in until 2007 which means he's really signed for 4 more years at $8M per, it wasn't going to happen with a twig WR who in his best season production wise ranks in the midddle of the pack at his position.

Creating this little melodrama was the best possible way to get him moved. Had they shopped him quietly there would have been little interest. The teams who took the bait, and there were only 2 of the 31 potential suitors who did and one of them wasn't even prepared to offer anything in trade by the deadline, have fallen victim to the here's your chance to make a splash strategy. The JETS have greater glaring needs, which will become apparent in the next month or so, but for now it gets the NY/NY media monkey off Tangini's back. And the defending NFC champs appear to be scuffeling a bit and know a slow start out of the gate could ramp up the criticism from even the laid back west coast fanbase.

NY is looking for a WR who can prop up their shaky QB controversy carousel. Deion is not that kind of WR. And after swapping to regain Coles for Pennington last season a move to pay top dollar for Branch in a locker room full of guys who were told 6 months ago to restructure or be cut/dealt and who watched their defensive leaders move on because the team couldn't afford them, the rookie FO of a historically mismanaged team may at the end of the day have just added to their own internal strife. Coles must be livid.

Seattle at least has a stable QB who might make good use of a WR who at least makes the catches. But the funny part is they are interested in him primarily because they are concerned about their existing #1's inability to practice this pre season. So they are looking for a guy we have had similar concerns about to back him up....

Neither of these offers would constitute much of an improvement if they were factoring in the 5th season on that rookie deal, which is something they should be doing from a good business standpoint. It would also ramp up the compensation value. Just because they have chosen to be poor businessmen does not mean the Patriots can be forced to. Both of those FO's are being run by first time GM's with far less talent evaluation and negotiation experience than Pioli. Add in a player agent with virtually none (his deals to date have been primarily rookie signings which are fairly formatted) and the result is a tempest in a teapot.

My money is on the guys with all the bling quietly working through this and coming out with the best deal for this franchise when all is said and done. Even if that is no deal. These are the guys who just replaced David Givens with an up and coming 26 year old WR under contract for 2 more years for peanuts in exchange for a 5th (which seldom works out for them in the draft anyway). Philly was equally desperate for a solid WR and properly decided not to go the overkill route, which is exactly what the JETS and Seahawks seem intent to do. Even Minnesota and Chicago passed because most savvy NFL personnel men know that Deion Branch is not an elite WR and to pay him like one just to incrementally improve you situation short term is foolish.

As for the locker room effect here, the guys it really bothers don't belong here anyway. Part of the system is locating and retaining the players who really fit the system on and off the field. Guys to whom winning football games and championships matters. Brady said it best that if you need a hug and you crave approval or measure respect and success by the size of your paycheck you are probably not going to be happy here. This is a special place and Belichick is looking for self motivated men with reasonable talent who can be expected to police themselves freeing he and his staff up to surround them with like minded players and coach and scheme them into a position to win.

And Brady also observed some time ago that the guys who leave for that don't seem to be any happier after they move on. Probably because in order to chase that $$$ they more often than not end up on poorly coached and managed teams, often with deep seeded problems that result in their not seeing the money in the final analysis there either while toiling in increasing obscurity on losing teams. If Deion struggles trying to assimilate into his new team, or if his presence doesn't dramatically alter their performance over the course of a season, he will find out what it's like to play in a more open atmosphere where coaches and GM's and owners articulate their frustration with players and situation in the media and he will be far more likely to face the restructure or else scenario before he ever sees the 4th year of either of the deals he's been offered.

 

[CrazyDave]

I hear what you are saying and agree the wedge is insurrmountable. But I think the wedge was ALREADY insurrmountable. I think Branch ALREADY was determined not to play in NE ever again.

As such, the letting him talk did not change Branch's mind and make him not want to play in NE. He had already decided that.

What has changed is that the Patriots now realize Branch's position, and know that he is serious.

ThePatriots' action is a mistake only if your successful outcome of this impasse required the return of Branch. If you needed Branch to be back then the Pats did screw up, because the Patriots let Branch PROVE to everyone that he wasn't coming back.

If you wanted the situation resolved, well the Pats action did that. Branch is gone, Gabriel is here, we have our WR core. Let the games begin.

But if you needed Branch to come back, then yeah, I fully understand your dissappointment.

This guy is on to something.
Maybe the FO has known all along that he was as good as gone.
To insinuate that the FO was outsmarted by Branch and his agent is, IMO, off base. DB has been a prick about this from day 1. Perhaps the writing was on the wall all along, and the FO saw it. To say that this has blown up in their face is just wrong IMO.
The FO, is doing what is best for the club, as usual.
DB wanted a fight, he got one.