Ring 6
PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
2021 Weekly Picks Winner
2022 Weekly Picks Winner
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 63,761
- Reaction score
- 14,113
Why not give him Reggie Wayne money?
He is a better WR than Reggie Wayne. Of course Wayne is overpaid because the Colts will overpay anyone who catches passes.
Wayne here would not produce what Branch does, and Branch in Indy would produce more than Wayne.
Branch is the best WR we have. If you trade him, then you no longer have your best WR. If we refuse to pay Deion Branch like our best WR, then where do you propose we find a replacement?
This concept of trading Branch says we should refuse to pay our best WR like he is our best WR, ie that we are better than actually paying market value to a player. Who will you replace him with if you wont pay market value?
If you think you can get better, you have to pay more than Wayne money, so you wouldn't do that. It sounds like a plan that says its OK to get worse, as long as we can feel good that we didn't pay market value.
The goal here is winning championships not pounding our chests that the organization is so clever it wont pay market value. Got news for you, the Patriots pay players market value. The ones we let walk or sing with someone else in FA are because someone else overrates them compared to us. Thats why there are 1700 players in the NFL and one team only has 53 of them. Everyone disagrees on the rating and value of almost every player in the league.
I'm not sure if your anti-Branch stance is because you don't think he is good or because you have this idea that paying market value for a player is somehow a bad thing and the false believe that the Pats dont pay market value.
Finally, why would you trade Branch and reduce the chances of winning in 2006? We have 9 months to resolve the contract issue. Trading him sounds like an immature move because you find the fact he wants to be paid what he is worth somehow offensive.
He is a better WR than Reggie Wayne. Of course Wayne is overpaid because the Colts will overpay anyone who catches passes.
Wayne here would not produce what Branch does, and Branch in Indy would produce more than Wayne.
Branch is the best WR we have. If you trade him, then you no longer have your best WR. If we refuse to pay Deion Branch like our best WR, then where do you propose we find a replacement?
This concept of trading Branch says we should refuse to pay our best WR like he is our best WR, ie that we are better than actually paying market value to a player. Who will you replace him with if you wont pay market value?
If you think you can get better, you have to pay more than Wayne money, so you wouldn't do that. It sounds like a plan that says its OK to get worse, as long as we can feel good that we didn't pay market value.
The goal here is winning championships not pounding our chests that the organization is so clever it wont pay market value. Got news for you, the Patriots pay players market value. The ones we let walk or sing with someone else in FA are because someone else overrates them compared to us. Thats why there are 1700 players in the NFL and one team only has 53 of them. Everyone disagrees on the rating and value of almost every player in the league.
I'm not sure if your anti-Branch stance is because you don't think he is good or because you have this idea that paying market value for a player is somehow a bad thing and the false believe that the Pats dont pay market value.
Finally, why would you trade Branch and reduce the chances of winning in 2006? We have 9 months to resolve the contract issue. Trading him sounds like an immature move because you find the fact he wants to be paid what he is worth somehow offensive.