A September 2 Scenario

[mgteich]

We re-sign Branch
We sign a top special teamer (who few of us will recognize)
We sign a backup WR like Patten as injury insurance
-------------------------------------------------------
1) We'd be more than ready for the season.
2) Would anyone care how much we paid Branch?

 

[c_nice_37]

2) Yes. I care.

I'm all for bringing back Patten, but he hasn't been cut yet, so its wishful thinking for now.

 

[jimmyjames]

We re-sign Branch
We sign a top special teamer (who few of us will recognize)
We sign a backup WR like Patten as injury insurance
-------------------------------------------------------
1) We'd be more than ready for the season.
2) Would anyone care how much we paid Branch?

I'm curious, given your other posts about players on the bubble what makes you think they would pick up a player soley for special teams over a scenario where they would keep a Klecko, Evans, Cobbs, Thomas? Do you view ST as such a glaring weakness that they would devote another roster spot?

 

[Ring 6]

For the first time I am beginning to consider the long term impact of players holding out. Why wouldnt Watson do the same as Branch if he has a great season? Remember he held out over the 6th year.

So if Branch comes back, it needs to be on the Pats terms. If the Pats cave and the result is Branch made money by holding out, it can set up a precedent for the future.

However, I do not see that happening. I actually see the opposite. I think Branch gets no viable offers, and reports on or before 9/2 playing under his current deal, and the sides work out a renegotiation sometime early in the season. The deal will be almost exactly what has been reported in the media.

Branch is seen to have gained nothing from holding out, the Pats give him market value, and are seen to have been offering fair $$ all along.

Branch returns to a team where the players chastise him for staying away, and set an example of how this impacts the TEAM approach.

The alternative is that the Pats hold their ground, and go play with the guys who want to be here for the right reasons.

At this point, I would certainly prefer it to be WITH Branch, and I still doubt this will go beyond the weekend, but if the decision by the decision makers that have built this dynasty is that it is better for this football team to let Branch sit at home, or trade him somewhere I am fine with that.

We will not lose games because Tom Brady cant find someone to catch his passes. We may win more because the guy he finds is Branch.

 

[mgteich]

We've lost Mitchell, Jones, Guss Scott and Pass. All of these would have been primarily special teamers. Are you asking whether I would use the #53 roster spot for a top Ster instead of Klecko or Cobbs or Thomas or Biesel or Mincey? In a heartbeat!

I'm curious, given your other posts about players on the bubble what makes you think they would pick up a player soley for special teams over a scenario where they would keep a Klecko, Evans, Cobbs, Thomas? Do you view ST as such a glaring weakness that they would devote another roster spot?

 

[jimmyjames]

We've lost Mitchell, Jones, Guss Scott and Pass. All of these would have been primarily special teamers. Are you asking whether I would use the #53 roster spot for a top Ster instead of Klecko or Cobbs or Thomas or Biesel or Mincey? In a heartbeat!

Interesting. I am pretty sure Pass is headed to PUP, but keep assuming he will be back around week 6, although I have nothing to base that on, so another ST player may be in order. I personally would like to see one or two "projects" hang around and get to practice every day even if they don't dress on Sunday. Since it seems like our "49" seems solid, I would be fine with losing Klecko or Beisel, but would like to see Mincey, Thomas, Cobbs or even Evans stick around to see how they develop.

BTW, a little off topic, but did you catch the ST play of Mike Wright against Washington? I like that guy more every week.

 

[DaBruinz]

For the first time I am beginning to consider the long term impact of players holding out. Why wouldnt Watson do the same as Branch if he has a great season? Remember he held out over the 6th year.

Actually, Watson's agent at the time, Tom Condon, held Watson out because he didn't want Watson signing the 6 year deal. Watson didn't care. Also, there are sure to be playing incentives that will kick in on Watson's contract.

Basically, what I am saying is that they are different scenarios so you can't compare the two.

So if Branch comes back, it needs to be on the Pats terms. If the Pats cave and the result is Branch made money by holding out, it can set up a precedent for the future.

However, I do not see that happening. I actually see the opposite. I think Branch gets no viable offers, and reports on or before 9/2 playing under his current deal, and the sides work out a renegotiation sometime early in the season. The deal will be almost exactly what has been reported in the media.

Branch is seen to have gained nothing from holding out, the Pats give him market value, and are seen to have been offering fair $$ all along.

Branch returns to a team where the players chastise him for staying away, and set an example of how this impacts the TEAM approach.

The alternative is that the Pats hold their ground, and go play with the guys who want to be here for the right reasons.

At this point, I would certainly prefer it to be WITH Branch, and I still doubt this will go beyond the weekend, but if the decision by the decision makers that have built this dynasty is that it is better for this football team to let Branch sit at home, or trade him somewhere I am fine with that.

We will not lose games because Tom Brady cant find someone to catch his passes. We may win more because the guy he finds is Branch.

Great post, as always, AJ.