I more meant by not signing Samuel to a long term deal before the season. But to be fair, BB probably couldn't have expected Samuel to have the kind of breakout season he had--I think he got surprised more by his performance than his market value.
Branch is a better example. I don't think BB expected anyone to give up a 1st round pick in addition to that kind of contract for him. The fact that he let Branch look for trades suggests that was the case.
How would it be a misstep if BB didnt think he would get a #1, then did?
I think he handled the Branch situation very well. He offered Branch fair value, Branch declined, and he got fair value in a trade.
Its hard to play both sides of the fence on Samuel. If you say he had only one good year, and are one of those making the (IMO ridiculous) claim that he was a nickelback forced into a starting job (I guess we forced it 3 years) then how could you say BB not signing him to a long term deal prior to 2006 was a misstep?
I think sometimes as fans we expect all of contract issues that the other 31 teams deal with to not exist here. Then when anything imperfect happens, we treat it as if the player is a jerk or the franchise screwed up. It happens to every team. It probably happens more to us, because we have an excellent track record in the draft.
How many other teams are facing top dollar contracts with the first 4 years of 2nd round WRs and 4th round corners? Not to mention the ones that have already been extended (2nd round LT, 5th round C) or those that were not, 7th round WR.
I would bet if you looked at the first 4 years of BBs drafts (the ones that have aged appropriately) the players he picked have combined contracts today that are the highest of any team (you would probably need to discount teams that took QBs high, or had multiple top 5 picks, but if you only look at the 2nd contract, I bet BBs draft picks ultimately make more in the 2nd contract than anyone elses, because of the quality of his drafts).
When you have fit the best team in the NFL over th elast 6 years under the salary cap, when those contracts expire it is impossible to fit them all under the cap.
This would be an interesting exercise, if anyone had the time and ability to do it: Take the 2003 (or 2004) Championship roster, and add up the current cap numbers of those 53 players (throw in a vet at the min for anyone no longer in the league) and how much would the Pats be over the cap if they kept them all. I'd bet it would be a ton.