From PFT....http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm
BRANCH HAS FILED TWO GRIEVANCES
Ron Borges of the Boston Globe reports that Pats receiver Deion Branch has filed two separate grievances against the team. One grievance relates to the team's failure to trade him once Branch received offers from the Jets and the Seahawks. The other grievance alleges that the Patriots failed to negotiate in good faith regarding an extension of Branch's contract, which expires after the 2006 season.
Maybe we're missing something here, but does any team have an obligation of any kind to negotiate with a player at a time when the player is still under contract?
Our guess is that Branch has opted for the two-pronged approach in order to put the Pats in a position that what they say about the matter in the first grievance can be used against them in the second grievance, and vice-versa. If the team thinks he merits a first-round pick or more in trade, then the argument in the second grievance will be that he should have been offered at least as much as what the Colts paid Reggie Wayne. If the Pats think he's worth substantially less than Wayne financially, then the argument in the first grievance will be that the team should be willing to let him go for, as reported, a second-round pick.
Meanwhile, it appears that the offers made to Branch were legitimate, despite speculation from late Friday that was driven by the absence of any statements or other evidence suggesting that the Jets and Seahawks had made offers to the player, or to the team. The Jets now acknowledge that they offered a second-round pick for Branch, and that the Patriots made no response before the 4:00 p.m. EDT deadline on Friday. "They didn't ask for anything," Jets G.M. Mike Tannenbaum told Borges.
Stay tuned, folks. This one is getting good.
BRANCH HAS FILED TWO GRIEVANCES
Ron Borges of the Boston Globe reports that Pats receiver Deion Branch has filed two separate grievances against the team. One grievance relates to the team's failure to trade him once Branch received offers from the Jets and the Seahawks. The other grievance alleges that the Patriots failed to negotiate in good faith regarding an extension of Branch's contract, which expires after the 2006 season.
Maybe we're missing something here, but does any team have an obligation of any kind to negotiate with a player at a time when the player is still under contract?
Our guess is that Branch has opted for the two-pronged approach in order to put the Pats in a position that what they say about the matter in the first grievance can be used against them in the second grievance, and vice-versa. If the team thinks he merits a first-round pick or more in trade, then the argument in the second grievance will be that he should have been offered at least as much as what the Colts paid Reggie Wayne. If the Pats think he's worth substantially less than Wayne financially, then the argument in the first grievance will be that the team should be willing to let him go for, as reported, a second-round pick.
Meanwhile, it appears that the offers made to Branch were legitimate, despite speculation from late Friday that was driven by the absence of any statements or other evidence suggesting that the Jets and Seahawks had made offers to the player, or to the team. The Jets now acknowledge that they offered a second-round pick for Branch, and that the Patriots made no response before the 4:00 p.m. EDT deadline on Friday. "They didn't ask for anything," Jets G.M. Mike Tannenbaum told Borges.
Stay tuned, folks. This one is getting good.
