Branch still loves BB, would love to be back (el mergio)

[Patjew]

He's Canadian, they're allowed.

So Ross Perot was wrong and that giant sucking sound was coming from the north? Now it's all starting to make sense.

 

[Patjew]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

Players do have the freedom to refuse to report and hold out, which is exactly what Branch did. I don't like what he did, but it was a business decision, just as it is when the Pats forced Wilfork to accept another year on the end of his rookie contract.

That's like saying people have the freedom to rob a bank if they're willing to go to jail.

 

[Deus Irae]

So Ross Perot was wrong and that giant sucking sound was coming from the north? Now it's all starting to make sense.

Well, Perot's ears were big enough that he could have heard that sound coming from pretty much anywhere in the world.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Wait... you pointed to non-existent 'trends', but my thinking that Aiken sucks is personal?

I note what appears to be a performance issue and you accuse me of a personal agenda - your Branch lust aside, he's not the Super Bowl MVP of 2004 anymore - so yes, it's personal, which is why I've written nothing but summaries of departure drama and said naughty things about his mother.

I understand that Aiken was signed as a special teams player, and I have nothing at all against the man. It's not his fault that he's not really an NFL quality receiver, and it's not his fault that Belichick did such a terrible job with wide receivers last year that Aiken became the team's #3 wideout.

It's all Bill's fault - got it, and no need to repeat it.

Regarding Stallworth... neither you nor I have any idea of what level of interest there might have been between the team and the player, and it's irrelevant now. Stallworth, like Branch, was a likely upgrade over Aiken as a receiver, and that's how I was looking at the position.

Which is truly pathetic in Wide Receiver terms, but don't let Donte's health woes and odyssey to sign with all 32 teams stand in the way of a pretty fantasy.

That same thinking applies to Branch. I'm all for bringing in all the receivers necessary in order to insure that the Patriots aren't stuck with Sam Aiken as the WR3 for 12 games again this season. It's not because I've got something personal against Aiken. It's because Aiken is a lousy wide receiver.

Right - you like the broken twig and whomever with the NFL pedigree and I'd rather see the Pats' energy focused on drafting and developing some youngsters - be it resolved, we have identified our preferences..

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

That's like saying people have the freedom to rob a bank if they're willing to go to jail.

How so? There are holdout provisions written into the CBA- what the team can dock from the player in the event that he is unwilling to report is written in there right alongside everything else. It's part of the players' contracts.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

Aiken is a crappy WR. There's nothing personal about it, and it's not an opinion. He just is; he's a good STer, but he's not an NFL-caliber WR, and, at his age, he'll never become one.

Also, as Deus pointed out, a trend, by definition, consists of more than one data point. What you've spelled out, in terms of YPC, isn't a trend in any sense of the word. Obviously, Branch isn't as desirable as he was in 2005; nobody claimed otherwise, so you're just arguing against a point that nobody supported in the first place. Some of us are just pointing out that, if the Pats signed him, he'd open the season as our #3WR at worst, and maybe even the #2. Personally, I'm worried about his knee, but if it checks out with the Pats' medical staff, then that's good enough for me.

Bottom line: if it doesn't cost much to get him here, then why not bring Branch back? For all the hand-wringing that we do about how we never know if FAs will fit the Pats' system (see: Galloway, Stallworth), it seems like that much more of a slam dunk to go get a guy who's only 30 and has won a SB MVP here.

 

[Patjew]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

How so? There are holdout provisions written into the CBA- what the team can dock from the player in the event that he is unwilling to report is written in there right alongside everything else. It's part of the players' contracts.

Those provisions are in place for violating rules. They don't make breaking contracts "OK". They are the same as punishments. Branch could be punished for holding out, just as someone could be punished for robbing a bank or stealing a snuggie. And there are guidelines for those punishments in all cases.

It is nothing like the Wilfork situation. Branch violated his contract. Neither the Pats or Wilfork did with Vince's contract. The Pats never "forced Wilfork to accept another year on the end of his rookie contract." They signed a contract with an extra year tacked on after each party agreed to it, and unlike Branch, Wilfork was a man and played it out.

If you want to say that NFL contracts are unfair to players, that's a completely separate topic.

But that all being said, I'd still love to sign that little beast.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

Those provisions are in place for violating rules. They don't make breaking contracts "OK". They are the same as punishments. Branch could be punished for holding out, just as someone could be punished for robbing a bank or stealing a snuggie. And there are guidelines for those punishments in all cases.

It is nothing like the Wilfork situation. Branch violated his contract. Neither the Pats or Wilfork did with Vince's contract. The Pats never "forced Wilfork to accept another year on the end of his rookie contract." They signed a contract with an extra year tacked on after each party agreed to it, and unlike Branch, Wilfork was a man and played it out.

If you want to say that NFL contracts are unfair to players, that's a completely separate topic.

But that all being said, I'd still love to sign that little beast.

Choosing not to honor a contract is always a viable option. That's where the analogy to a criminal transgression falls pretty flat. We're seeing a lot of it now, for example, with homeowners choosing to allow their homes to be foreclosed on. You see it all the time in all areas of business, which I'm sure you're well aware of. Typically, contracts spell out what happens in the event of non-performance, and that's the case in players' contracts. Players are can hold out, and teams can take whatever recourse is allowed for in the contract, and both are well within their rights to do so.

As for whether or not NFL contracts are unfair to players, agreed that that's a separate discussion, although I will say that where you're probably assuming that I come down on that one wouldn't be right. The contracts are the way that they are because that's what the NFLPA agreed to, so pretty much by definition it's fair. It's what their union agreed to. Out of curiosity, though, does your stance change when a player holds out after being franchise tagged, since that's a contract that he didn't agree to?

 

[Patjew]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

Choosing not to honor a contract is always a viable option. That's where the analogy to a criminal transgression falls pretty flat. We're seeing a lot of it now, for example, with homeowners choosing to allow their homes to be foreclosed on. You see it all the time in all areas of business, which I'm sure you're well aware of. Typically, contracts spell out what happens in the event of non-performance, and that's the case in players' contracts. Players are can hold out, and teams can take whatever recourse is allowed for in the contract, and both are well within their rights to do so.

As for whether or not NFL contracts are unfair to players, agreed that that's a separate discussion, although I will say that where you're probably assuming that I come down on that one wouldn't be right. The contracts are the way that they are because that's what the NFLPA agreed to, so pretty much by definition it's fair. It's what their union agreed to. Out of curiosity, though, does your stance change when a player holds out after being franchise tagged, since that's a contract that he didn't agree to?

I think we have different perspectives on contracts. I'm really a stickler for the legal honoring of them, probably more so than most people. I would not feel cmfortable saying that violating a contract is within anyone's "rights", regardless of the punishment clauses contained therein. Holding out is not allowed. I mean, the guy is being fined for holding out, what else can they do: kill him? But I admit that I'm a black and white kinda guy with this kind of thing. It should be obvious by now that I'm not a lawyer.

To answer your question, I think holding out is never OK (franchise tagged or not or whatever) because as you said, contracts are the way they are because that's what the NFLPA agreed to.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

I think we have different perspectives on contracts. I'm really a stickler for the legal honoring of them, probably more so than most people. I would not feel cmfortable saying that violating a contract is within anyone's "rights", regardless of the punishment clauses contained therein. Holding out is not allowed. I mean, the guy is being fined for holding out, what else can they do: kill him? But I admit that I'm a black and white kinda guy with this kind of thing. It should be obvious by now that I'm not a lawyer.

To answer your question, I think holding out is never OK (franchise tagged or not or whatever) because as you said, contracts are the way they are because that's what the NFLPA agreed to.

Just to be clear, I personally agree with your stance that he shouldn't have held out. I don't think that it was the right thing to do, by any means; ethically, I think that he should have honored the contract that he signed. I'm just saying that it was within his rights to make that (bad) decision.

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

just as someone could be punished for stealing a snuggie.

I had no idea you had to pay for those things until security insisted i give him back his snuggie

 

[BradyManny]

Branch: 'I'm a Seattle Seahawk' - Extra Points - Boston.com

That was because as Branch boarded the plane for Seattle, Belichick and owner Robert Kraft called him to impart this message -- "We tried our best, you tried your best" -- and Branch told them he appreciated what they'd done for him. "Right there," Branch said, the hatchet "was buried."

"Looking back, I wish all that hadn't happened, I really wish we could've sat down and come to an agreement on a contract," Branch said. "Who knows how many Super Bowls we could've won? There were so many great players that have left since I left. I wish we'd sat down and got to the nitty gritty, and hashed it out. But that's the business side, and that stuff happens."

For those that think the Patriots hold a grudge.

Also, it's pretty clear Branch sees what a huge mistake he made.

 

[BradyManny]

So if things fell into place with Branch ... - Extra Points - Boston.com

More from Deion.

 

[Deus Irae]

I note what appears to be a performance issue and you accuse me of a personal agenda - your Branch lust aside, he's not the Super Bowl MVP of 2004 anymore - so yes, it's personal, which is why I've written nothing but summaries of departure drama and said naughty things about his mother.

I have no "Branch lust". If the team can find a better upgrade to Aiken than Branch, I'm all for it. The difference between our positions is that you seem to have gotten personally offended that anyone would even consider allowing the guy to compete for the job.

Which is truly pathetic in Wide Receiver terms, but don't let Donte's health woes and odyssey to sign with all 32 teams stand in the way of a pretty fantasy.

What fantasy? Again, I've been clear about this from the start. The WR position from last year needs to be upgraded. Stallworth and Branch are probable upgrades over Sam Aiken. Therefore, I have no issue with the team bringing them in for a look.

Right - you like the broken twig and whomever with the NFL pedigree and I'd rather see the Pats' energy focused on drafting and developing some youngsters - be it resolved, we have identified our preferences..

I have no problem with the team drafting and developing some youngsters. I have a problem with the team relying on nothing but those youngsters after having gone through last season. Edelman's been a heck of a find. P.K. Sam and Chad Jackson? Not so much. Given that Belichick has generally tended to bring in veterans to camp, I don't see why you've apparently got such an issue with him doing so this season.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: "I would love to be back" - Deion Branch

Aiken is a crappy WR. There's nothing personal about it, and it's not an opinion. He just is; he's a good STer, but he's not an NFL-caliber WR, and, at his age, he'll never become one.

Also, as Deus pointed out, a trend, by definition, consists of more than one data point. What you've spelled out, in terms of YPC, isn't a trend in any sense of the word. Obviously, Branch isn't as desirable as he was in 2005; nobody claimed otherwise, so you're just arguing against a point that nobody supported in the first place. Some of us are just pointing out that, if the Pats signed him, he'd open the season as our #3WR at worst, and maybe even the #2. Personally, I'm worried about his knee, but if it checks out with the Pats' medical staff, then that's good enough for me.

Bottom line: if it doesn't cost much to get him here, then why not bring Branch back? For all the hand-wringing that we do about how we never know if FAs will fit the Pats' system (see: Galloway, Stallworth), it seems like that much more of a slam dunk to go get a guy who's only 30 and has won a SB MVP here.

Branch is not even remotely close to a "slam dunk". The point is he is far more likely to do absolutely nothing to help than he is to come in here and bounce back.

Look we can bring in 30 guys that are better receivers than Aiken, why do you guys want to shoot for the bottom of that barrel? Branch and Stallworth are better receivers than Aiken but they aren't going to make this team a better offense than 2009. And neither of them would take Aiken's roster spot as he still has tremendous value on special teams.