Not sure where to put this so...Seahawks still intrerested

[PatsRI]

Sorry to start another on but I couldn't figure out where to post it. Seems to be the latest from Len P.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2570152
But there were indications on Friday night and early Saturday that the Seahawks remain very interested in Branch and could try to resuscitate a potential trade

 

[BelichickFan]

The Seahawks need him, the Patriots aren't going to have him . . . getting this done makes WAY too much sense.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Nice recap.

 

[Brownfan80]

It does make sense, as long as the compensation is at the level that the Patriots are looking for.

 

[Julius]

The seahawks should have no problem with giving up a first for Branch. It's likely to be a late first and they are close to a superbowl.
Anyone else think that it was curious that Seattle and Vikings were listed as potential suitors for Branch? Bringing up the Vikings in connection with the Seahawks has to bring the emotions up a little considering the offseason these two have had. Sounds like some kind of head game on someones end.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

The seahawks should have no problem with giving up a first for Branch. It's likely to be a late first and they are close to a superbowl.
Anyone else think that it was curious that Seattle and Vikings were listed as potential suitors for Branch? Bringing up the Vikings in connection with the Seahawks has to bring the emotions up a little considering the offseason these two have had. Sounds like some kind of head game on someones end.

No, the Vikings just signed Pinkston so they were in the market and it was just speculation in the media.

Per Tomase, the hawks started with a second and have indicated they would go with a first - NE started at 2 firsts and have indicated they will settle for a first and middle round pick. The horse trading continues, I'm pulling for a minimum 1st and 5th.

 

[Brownfan80]

No, the Vikings just signed Pinkston so they were in the market and it was just speculation in the media.

Per Tomase, the hawks started with a second and have indicated they would go with a first - NE started at 2 firsts and have indicated they will settle for a first and middle round pick. The horse trading continues, I'm pulling for a minimum 1st and 5th.

A first and a 5th would be okay. A first and a 4th would make me think we got a great deal (with our batting average on firsts alone). A first and a third and I'd be laughing. Never happen, but a boy can dream.

 

[upstater1]

Given our WR depth, I really think at this point that we need Engram as part of the deal. I'd drop the 5th and ask for a 1st and Engram.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Given our WR depth, I really think at this point that we need Engram as part of the deal. I'd drop the 5th and ask for a 1st and Engram.

We've got him - Troy.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Given our WR depth, I really think at this point that we need Engram as part of the deal. I'd drop the 5th and ask for a 1st and Engram.

I agree, we really need a WR in return, at least that's what I think. The FO may think differently and just want the draft choices. I'd sweeten the deal and offer Branch and a 4th (or 3rd if that's what it takes) for DJ Hackett and a 1st. I'm a big DJ Hackett fan, good size and speed, causes a lot of interference penalties. They'd have Burleson and Branch as starters, with Jackson and Engram as their 3rd and 4th WR's. It makes sense for both sides to do this, so that's why it won't happen.

 

[upstater1]

We've got him - Troy.

Yes, but right now we need two Troys. Two Troys is better than a Troy and Kite, isn't it?

 

[ayjackson]

we shouldn't be surprised if the Patriots are taking a little longer on the Branch trade, since they have a dealine of 2pm today to pour through film and assessments and other team's rosters to try to decide on cuts. They're still only half way there with 90 minutes to go. Talks with Seattle could get more serious tonight. I think the Pats will cut below 53 to give some flexibility in the receiver situation.

 

[Brownfan80]

Yes, but right now we need two Troys. Two Troys is better than a Troy and Kite, isn't it?

The consensus (around here anyway) is that Bam Childress looks much like a young Troy Brown, so there you go!

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

The consensus (around here anyway) is that Bam Childress looks much like a young Troy Brown, so there you go!

Bingo, we've got bingo again!

 

[sarge]

Any word if negotiations are still going on with Seattle?

I was really hoping to wake up this morning and see the headline "Branch traded to Seattle ofr a first"

That would do 2 things

1. It would probably quell any locker room issues because the Pats would have allowed Branch to get his payday.

2. The Pats would have been proven right for not allowing Branch to go for just a second round pick!

 

[DaBruinz]

I would still like to see the Patriots trade Branch and a 4th for the Seahawks 1st and Hackett. I think that would REALLY solidify our WR corps and we could have some pretty good 3 and 4 WR sets.

 

[mavfan2390]

Branch for Burleson and a second or a third......

1. Burleson
2. Gabriel
3. Jackson
4. Caldwell
5. Brown

 

[mavfan2390]

I just realized if we trade for a wide reciever we will have 6 meaning either one will have to go, or we have to cut someone else.....what happened to 3rd QB spot? who took it?

 

[DaBruinz]

Branch for Burleson and a second or a third......

1. Burleson
2. Gabriel
3. Jackson
4. Caldwell
5. Brown

The Hawks just signed Burleson with a huge signing bonus. Plus there are still bonuses needing to be paid. Its doubtful the Patriots would be interested in him.

 

[jeffd]

Any word if negotiations are still going on with Seattle?

I was really hoping to wake up this morning and see the headline "Branch traded to Seattle ofr a first"

That would do 2 things

1. It would probably quell any locker room issues because the Pats would have allowed Branch to get his payday.

2. The Pats would have been proven right for not allowing Branch to go for just a second round pick!

Nothing will happen until the grievance is decided on. Why would Seatle give up a 1nd round pick when there is a possibility (longshot at best) that the league will tell the Pats to accept a 2nd round pick?
A few years ago I would have said it's impossible, but look at the TO - 49ers deal. He was under contract with the 49ers(agent error, but none the less under contract), traded to the Ravens (making him under contract with the Ravens). The league stepped in and decided that the Ravens had to give him up for what the league thought was reasonable compensation.