SITE MENU
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.mikey said:
He noted that Branch was the 65th player drafted in 2002, one of the last in the second round, and that Miami sent a second-round pick to Minnesota before this season for quarterback Daunte Culpepper.
BradfordPatsFan said:1. Culpepper has never been super bowl MVP.
2. Culpepper is coming off a very difficult knee injury to rehab.
3. Culpepper was not traded within the division.
4. A player may exceed his draft status.
Could the NFLPA and Branch's agent please make this a little more difficult to defend?
mgcolby said:Interesting so they are saying Branch isn't worth a first round pick but he is worth a top 10 salary?
Didn't the Pats get **** about this exact same thing. The only difference is the Pats own his rights for atleast two seasons so they can ask and offer what ever they choose.
What a couple of dumbasses.
zippo59 said:Ack you're too quick for me.
6. After the love boat incident, the Vikings owner was a motivated seller.zippo59 said:5. Culpepper had an absolutely terrible year statistically.
Maybe we're missing something here (and it wouldn't be a first), but even if the Pats verbally agreed (as Branch alleges) to trade Branch if presented with a "fair and reasonable" trade offer, that's in no way an enforceable contract because the Patriots received nothing in exchange for allowing Branch to explore a trade.
The law calls it "consideration" -- in every binding contract, there must be some consideration given by each side to the transaction. If, for example, I promise to give you a pimento loaf sandwich, I have no legal obligation to honor the commitment unless you also have promised to give me something of value in exchange for it. Here, Branch gave up nothing to the Patriots, who had no obligation to even allow him to explore a trade; thus, there is and was no binding agreement that the team would trade him.
"The grievance alleges that in allowing Branch to work out a contract with another team, the Patriots agreed they would trade him if Branch was comfortable with that contract and the draft choice compensation for him "was commensurate with what has been the value of similar players," Berthelsen said in a telephone interview.
Chris said:theres no way they could ever agree in favor of the players union.. this would ruin all teams ability to trade.. basically it would say that if a player thinks he should be traded for a 2nd then it goes.. no way will this grievance go anywhere.. waste of time
AzPatsFan said:Let the NFLPA check in and assert that a valid contract exsits between and among the three parties, the Patriots, Branch and NY Jets. Let teh NFLPA assert that a verbal contract exsits and should be binding on all three parties.
I am more and more sure that arbitration will lead to two #1 picks from the Jets to the Patriots in return for the services of Branch at the agreed negotiated compensation rate! The NFLPA apparently agrees! Concurs that a implicit verbal contract amomgst the parties exists and is enforceable !!!!
Woo Hoo !!!
There is no other compensation that that prescribed in the collectively bargained compensation. That is 2 #1s for a player payed at the "franchise rate" for a WR And both the Pats and Jets have made offers at that rate or equivalent.
See my post on the legal Consequences to the NY Jets
Goody Goody Goody!!!