I agree with Borges

[p8ryts]

Troy Brown did get offered more money by the Saints but he decided to sign with the Pats and it looks like he made the right decision.

I agree with Crazy Dave (that just doesn't sound right).

 

[Jacky Roberts]

I hope they issue Doug Gabriel # 83. FU Deion

 

[CrazyDave]

Troy Brown did get offered more money by the Saints but he decided to sign with the Pats and it looks like he made the right decision.

I agree with Crazy Dave (that just doesn't sound right).

Thanks bud.
And seeing as Graham is making "emotional statements", I'll make one too.
If Graham has issues with how things are run around here, he can hit the road too. If he thinks he's such a hot s#%t, than maybe we should start shopping his ***** around as well.
Don't get me started.

 

[CrazyDave]

I hope they issue Doug Gabriel # 83. FU Deion

YEAH!! Now we're talking!

 

[patpatriot]

MoLewisRocks...very good assessment of the situation. Part of the reason players like Bru and Vrabel signed for less than their market vallue is that they understand the value of working conditions. How much does $ compensate for a job situation you do not like? It may vary according to the individual but I think it means a lot. If all you are interested in is getting the last dollar, this isn't the place for you nor do the Pats want you here...end of story.

The Pats offered DB a contract commensurate with what they and 29 (30?..did Seattle really make an offer or are they just trying to weaken a SB rival?) other teams felt was his true value as a player. One piss-poor team and maybe 1 SB contender offered more money. If DB ends up in Seattle playing for significantly more money he wins. If he ends up on the Jets playing for significantly more money he loses IMHO.

Are the Pats a better team without DB..no. Can they still win the SB without him? I think we all know the answer to that one.

BTW

In the Beast's article:

"Patriots toadies...out of the media..." refers to the Patsfans web site probably Congratulations people! Keep up the good work! Maybe if we try hard enough, some day we can get the Beast's head to explode!

 

[hwc]

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.

OK. For the sake of argument, let's run with your definition.

Then, the Jets offer is not really a 6 year/$36 million deal unless one ignores the fact that the Jets must adequately compensate the Patriots for the value of the year remaining on Branch's contract at below market prices.

For example, suppose that the arbiter ruled that the Jets have to give the Pats two 1st round draft choices. Do you think they would continue to offer Branch 6 year/$36 million? Or, would the cost of buying out his final year reduce the money they would pay Branch?

The value of that final year is real and cannot be ignored. The value is real to the Patriots. It is real to any team seeking to trade for Branch.

We could just as easily write the Pats extension offer to Branch as:

$6 mil (1st year)
$6 mil (2nd year)
$6 mil (3rd year)
$6 mil (4th year)
-$5 mil (credit for value of final year of rookie contract

Total: $19 million

It's all semantics. Call it three years. Call it four years. It is what it is. What it is is finish out the contract you signed and in exchange we will agree to pay top-of-the-market prices for addtional years and guarantee significant dollars from the additional years to protect you against injury while you play out the final year of your contract.

If the value of the final year were not factored into the negotiations, why would the team even bother negotiating early? Why not just let the player assume the full injury risk and negotiate when he become a free agent?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Thanks bud.
And seeing as Graham is making "emotional statements", I'll make one too.
If Graham has issues with how things are run around here, he can hit the road too. If he thinks he's such a hot s#%t, than maybe we should start shopping his ***** around as well.
Don't get me started.

Crazy, easy dude, just because someone allegedly close to Grahambo is being quoted in Borges' daily dump, doesn't mean it was anything negative. So assume Graham did say it, and it is somewhat close to context, all he saying is he expects a competative bid for his services, if it isn't in the ballpark, he just won't get into a big counteroffer exchange and will let Free Agency decide his worth. Nothing you or I wouldn't be doing or saying. Because crap for brains wrote the piece, it automatically starts with a major negative spin. Let's not dump on Graham before he dumps on us, the poor guy has already had to deal with the bogus rumors of his trade to Denver, be sensitive bro, and go beat up an obnoxious, drunken news slug to ease your anxiety. Peace.

 

[RI Pats Fan]

They got a one year younger guy yesterday who had half of last year's Branch production (Deion's best ever, btw) cathching errant missiles thrown by Kerry Collins, for godssake......in a weak RB offense where opposing D's played Nickel 80% of the time. What can he do in ours???????

That's 50% of Branch for 10% of the money. And if they lose Branch they'll get AT LEAST a 2nd rounder for him.

That's freakin SYMPHONIC.

And for those reasons, Gabriel is on my team, the Dwayne Sabb 11 and why Pyper is going down this time. (A few years back he barely beat me in a Yahoo! League Superbowl, he doesn't remember, but I do.)

 

[hwc]

Thanks bud.
If Graham has issues with how things are run around here, he can hit the road too.

Apparently the Pats agree. That would explain why they drafted another tight end in the first round the year after Graham and why they drafted two more tight end prospects this year.

If Graham wants to hit free agency and test the market for blocking tight ends, then the Pats are in a position to just move on with the other three TEs on the roster.

 

[CrazyDave]

Crazy, easy dude, just because someone allegedly close to Grahambo is being quoted in Borges' daily dump, doesn't mean it was anything negative. So assume Graham did say it, and it is somewhat close to context, all he saying is he expects a competative bid for his services, if it isn't in the ballpark, he just won't get into a big counteroffer exchange and will let Free Agency decide his worth. Nothing you or I wouldn't be doing or saying. Because crap for brains wrote the piece, it automatically starts with a major negative spin. Let's not dump on Graham before he dumps on us, the poor guy has already had to deal with the bogus rumors of his trade to Denver, be sensitive bro, and go beat up an obnoxious, drunken news slug to ease your anxiety. Peace.

You're probably right. I had a bad hangover this morning.
A dozen PBR's and a bottle of wine.

 

[Kdo5]

Borges is a piece of crap. Man he is the worst and most negative writer in the world. All he does is take a crap on the Pats whenever he gets a chance.

Hes a scrotum sniffin piece of trash

 

[Miguel]

For example, suppose that the arbiter ruled that the Jets have to give the Pats two 1st round draft choices. Do you think they would continue to offer Branch 6 year/$36 million?

No.

Or, would the cost of buying out his final year reduce the money they would pay Branch?

Probably.

The value of that final year is real and cannot be ignored. The value is real to the Patriots. It is real to any team seeking to trade for Branch.

I am not arguing that the final year is real and cannot be ignored. I have been arguing the opposite - that the all of the cash made in the final year of the rookie contract should be included when determining the APY.

We could just as easily write the Pats extension offer to Branch as:

$6 mil (1st year)
$6 mil (2nd year)
$6 mil (3rd year)
$6 mil (4th year)
-$5 mil (credit for value of final year of rookie contract

Total: $19 million

It's all semantics. Call it three years. Call it four years. It is what it is.

Where in the CBA does a team get credit for final year of rookie contract when amortizing a signing bonus??

Semantics - I can accept. BS thinking - I can not.

 

[shmessy]

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.

.

Yeah! let's do whatever the Jets do!!!!! So you want the Pats to jump down the same rabbit hole that the Jets do?

You go first, Mikey. I'll watch.

 

[hwc]

Where in the CBA does a team get credit for final year of rookie contract when amortizing a signing bonus??

I'm not talking about amortizing signing bonus money. That's a separate issue.

I'm talking about the total annual value over 2006/07/08/09 of the Pats offer to Branch.

It doesn't matter what we call it. The answer is some approximation of market value over the additional three years and some approximation of the current contract for the 1st year. That is the only "win-win" answer that recognizes both the player's market value AND the value the team currently holds in having the player under contract for 2006.

The "offers" made by the Jets and Seattle are not real offers at this point, because they do not adequately reimburse the Pats for the value they hold in Branch's 2006 contract year. For either team to adequately reimburse the Pats, they would likely reduce the dollars going to Branch and redirect that money (or draft pick equivalent) to the Pats.

Would the Jets offer be real and would Branch make more money if he were an unrestricted free agent? Sure. But, he is NOT an unrestricted free agent.

Would he have been a free agent if he had not signed a 5 year rookie contract? Sure. But, he did sign a 5 year rookie contract. He could have just signed a one year tender like Guss Scott did.

 

[Miguel]

I'm not talking about amortizing signing bonus money.

I was.

That's a separate issue.

Ok, then.

 

[Miguel]

The answer is some approximation of market value over the additional three years and some approximation of the current contract for the 1st year. That is the only "win-win" answer that recognizes both the player's market value AND the value the team currently holds in having the player under contract for 2006.

The "offers" made by the Jets and Seattle are not real offers at this point, because they do not adequately reimburse the Pats for the value they hold in Branch's 2006 contract year. For either team to adequately reimburse the Pats, they would likely reduce the dollars going to Branch and redirect that money (or draft pick equivalent) to the Pats.

FWIW - I agree with the above. As far as I can tell, I have never indicated that I did not.

Would the Jets offer be real and would Branch make more money if he were an unrestricted free agent? Sure. But, he is NOT an unrestricted free agent.

Thanks for sharing that information. Do not know why you would think that anyone reading this board did not know that Branch is under contract.

Would he have been a free agent if he had not signed a 5 year rookie contract? Sure. But, he did sign a 5 year rookie contract. He could have just signed a one year tender like Guss Scott did.

Ditto.

 

[hwc]

Do not know why you would think that anyone reading this board did not know that Branch is under contract.

Several posters on this board have suggested that the Pats should simply match the Jets offer (presuming that it is really 6 years/$36 million). Those suggestions fail to recognize the value the Pats currently hold for the final year of Branch's contract.

Therefore, I feel it is worthwhile to point out that Branch is NOT a free agent. That he IS under contract. And, that the value to the team of that contract must be recognized in any deal -- whether it is a deal with the Pats or a trade deal with another team.

Speaking of the Jets' offer, I wish one of the local newspaper pundits had been able to dig up the real structure of that offer. That would be more interesting reading this morning than another Borges rant.

 

[DaBruinz]

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.

.

You keep spouting this BS that the Patriots underestimated Branch's worth. However, just a week ago, Borges was reporting that Branch was looking for a contract BETTER than Reggie Wayne's potentially in the 8-9 million range.

The Patriots proved that their extensions were right on the money and commensurate with what Branch would have gotten on the open market. All Branch would have had to do is actually had his agent negotiate and none of this garbage would have happened.

BTW, No where has it been said that the offers from the Jets and Seahawks would have cancelled out Branch's final year of his current contract. That is a gross assumption that Borges and Chayut would have you believe so they can win support for their case.

 

[DaBruinz]

Why???

Because it talks about NEW money only. You are acting like Chayut in thinking that you should count in the current contract money with everything else. That's not how it works. Not in ANY negotiation.

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.

Because that is the wonderful semantics of the NFL and the league CBA. Its how everything has worked up until now. Just because some garbage wannabe agent and a hack sportswriter want to twist things around doesn't mean that we should let them.

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???

I think your assessment is inaccurate yes.

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

Miguel, this is beneath you. Pulling out statements and making up garbage that are totally off track.

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???

Sorry, Miguel, I'm willing to bet that I am right and if you ask ANYONE who negotiates a contract they will tell you that, with an extension, you talk about NEW MONEY.

It is a 3 year/18.75 million a year deal with a cash advance of $4 million. Just because its paid in advance, it doesn't change the fact that its part of the 3 year/18.75 million extension. Its not part of his current contract. That is why you wouldn't consider the extension 3 years and 14.75 million.

 

[oldrover]

Miguel, don't waste your time arguing with DaBruinz. He's always right. LMAO!!!