When will we get some news on Branch?

[patsox23]

just thinking about the reported comps that Branch wants to present as evidence that a #2 is a reasonable return for him being a QB coming off a torn ACL. Think the Pats may want to mention that the same team that traded a #2 for Culpepper, also traded a #2 a couple of years ago for a healthy bust QB named A J Feeley?

Hmmm, and this is reasonable comp for a recent SB MVP who wants #1 WR money?

It doesn't get much truer than that.

 

[upstater1]

What it costs us is

a) the opportunity to use it on a different player such as Koppen

b) the risk that Branch decides being paid at the average of the top 5 WR's is better than sitting out, which means we get a disgruntled malcontent and have to overpay for him to boot

I think the idea is that you franchise him and trade him before the draft, even if you only get a #2 back. But in the meantime, Deion will have lost the season and be out some $$$. The franchise tag affords you the opportunity to hold onto his rights and trade him even after his contract runs out. Think of the Galloway trade (although I'm not expecting a bonanza like that).

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What it costs us is

a) the opportunity to use it on a different player such as Koppen

b) the risk that Branch decides being paid at the average of the top 5 WR's is better than sitting out, which means we get a disgruntled malcontent and have to overpay for him to boot

I don't believe we would ever tag Koppen because as I understand it the tag for OL is not broken down by position and the LT's of the world skewer that figure dramatically. We would be more likely to transition tag a Koppen or Graham which would retain for us the right to match any offer they receive in FA. That week long holdup is often enough to disuade some bidders who can't afford to wait it out while other options are being gobbled up, and the league has been pretty clear it will take poison pill ploys out of the equation before next season after the Minnesota-Seattle shenanigans of 2006.

And if Deion did decide to play under the tag the last thing he could afford to do is dog it in another contract season. His resume is a tad sketchy to begin with. Oakland may have gotten screwed when they tagged Woodson and he couldn't get back on the field or draw a trade, but Woodson also got screwed going forward as his Poston engineered $54M FA deal is really a one year deal the Packers can walk away from if they find out he is not worth anything close to top CB money after all.

 

[SaCaCh]

Interesting stuff from Peter King on this.

3. I think, speaking of the Patriots, the mistake they made in trying to reel Deion Branch back into the fold was giving his agent permission to make a deal with other teams for a week -- when they didn't want to trade him at all. Because the salary cap rose $17 million from '05 to '06, and because so many teams were so flush with salary-cap money (the Jets were $7 million under, Seattle $10 million), the idea of splurging on a good player who unexpectedly might be available was appealing.
The Jets and Seahawks each reached deals with Branch, for approximately $13 million in guaranteed money and $39 million over six years. In discussions with league sources close to the talks, I heard this weekend that the when both teams made their offers to New England, the Patriots did not counter either one. The Seahawks, my sources say, offered a second-round pick plus a lower pick; the Jets offered a second-rounder. The Patriots never asked for two first-round picks, contrary to what some people have said and they were never offered a first-rounder. So it will be easy, if the Patriots and Branch go to arbitration, as is expected, for New England to say it was never offered what it considered to be fair market value for Branch.
It's hard to imagine an arbitrator determining what is fair compensation for Branch; beauty, and value, is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to trading players, and so what Green Bay considers fair for a receiver is not necessarily what New England would consider fair.
One more thing about this story that bugs me. Branch wants to be paid like a No. 1 receiver, which is his right. But he hasn't performed like one -- other than in two magnificent Super Bowls -- in his four years. His average season: 54 catches, 686 yards, 3.5 touchdowns. When Branch signed his original contract, there were escalators in place to pay him at the level of high-achieving receivers. If he had four 900-yard receiving seasons, he'd have $1.5 million added to his '06 base salary of $545,000; he had one such season, last year, when he gained 998 receiving yards, and thus had $500,000 added to his base pay this year, bringing the total to $1.05 million. There would be, in addition, $1.5 million added in total if he had four 1,100-yard seasons. So if he'd performed like a No. 1 all four years, and had in excess of 1,100 yards each season, his base salary this year would have been a respectable (though under-market) $3.55 million.
The bottom line: New England created unrealistic expectations by allowing Branch to go out and seek his fortune, and even if the Patriots win in arbitration, Branch will be so unhappy that he'll be a divisive force in a harmonious locker room -- if he chooses to go back at all.

So we never even asked for 2 1's, thought so.

 

[FloridaPatsFan]

Interesting stuff from Peter King on this.

So we never even asked for 2 1's, thought so.

Thanks for posting that quote from Peter King. For a reporter, he knows what he's talking about. If you watch "Inside the NFL" on HBO, you can tell the players respect his opinion as well. So what I surmise from this is that the Pats will win the ugly battle and the prize will not be worth it. So how do you cut your losses to a minimum? I would bet that teams around the NFL can understand why the Pats want a 1st round draft pick for him but who is going to give them one? My guess is nobody will. And we'll be stuck with an unhappy player counting the days until he's gone. Which leads me to my 2nd thought: Maybe Chad Jackson has #1 reciever potiential and the Pats are betting that he will be as good as Branch- but much cheaper. As for Branch, I bet Brady misses David Givens as much as he misses Branch. Givens was a tough SOB and was on the field more than Branch.

 

[brady2brown]

What it costs us is

a) the opportunity to use it on a different player such as Koppen

I hope we dont pay Koppen the average pay of the top five OLinesmen in the NFL! Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Glenn Tarik, what do these guys make?

 

[PromisedLand]

I don't believe we would ever tag Koppen because as I understand it the tag for OL is not broken down by position and the LT's of the world skewer that figure dramatically. We would be more likely to transition tag a Koppen or Graham which would retain for us the right to match any offer they receive in FA. That week long holdup is often enough to disuade some bidders who can't afford to wait it out while other options are being gobbled up, and the league has been pretty clear it will take poison pill ploys out of the equation before next season after the Minnesota-Seattle shenanigans of 2006.

And if Deion did decide to play under the tag the last thing he could afford to do is dog it in another contract season. His resume is a tad sketchy to begin with. Oakland may have gotten screwed when they tagged Woodson and he couldn't get back on the field or draw a trade, but Woodson also got screwed going forward as his Poston engineered $54M FA deal is really a one year deal the Packers can walk away from if they find out he is not worth anything close to top CB money after all.

My post was only to take issue with the part of your post which said using the franchise tag costs us nothing. It does cost us something. We can argue with how likely it is that we would use it otherwise and we can argue about how much value to put on the lost opportunity, but it does cost us something.

 

[Miguel]

If we were to franchise him next year, we would release him before the season, if there were no acceptable offers. Even then, the patriots will likely get a 3rd round 2008 compensation pick.

You do not get a comp pick if you release a player.

 

[Miguel]

What if Seattle told Branch last week??

If we don't make the trade for you this year, why don't you wait until Day 2 of the draft to sign the tender so we can postpone giving up a Day 1 pick for you until 2008.

 

[fgssand]

What if Seattle told Branch last week??

If we don't make the trade for you this year, why don't you wait until Day 2 of the draft to sign the tender so we can postpone giving up a Day 1 pick for you until 2008.

It wouldn't surprise me to see that fat bastid walrus of a coach to do something as slimy as that. I cannot stand Holmgren, I would love to see the Pats whack him but good in the Superbowl.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

What if Seattle told Branch last week??

If we don't make the trade for you this year, why don't you wait until Day 2 of the draft to sign the tender so we can postpone giving up a Day 1 pick for you until 2008.

I would have no problem with a 2008 pick.

OTOH, if he did that he may end up having to play for the horrible Patriots in 2007 and if he pulls this stunt again will only get $3M or so of his Franchise money.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What if Seattle told Branch last week??

If we don't make the trade for you this year, why don't you wait until Day 2 of the draft to sign the tender so we can postpone giving up a Day 1 pick for you until 2008.

Wouldn't that be tampering?

Won't do Seattle much good if next March 21st we get an offer of a 1+ from a team drafting ahead of Seattle and decide to take it. Also opens the door for BB to decide not to trade him until 2008 because he believes he can't afford to sit out a second season and forfeit several million dollars (or feign injury and come off like a real scumbag or serious durability concern ala Woodson).

And if Seattle should have a better offer come along next March or find the top WR in the 2007 draft fall to them, what would Deion do - file a grievance against Seattle claiming that they didn't illegally bargain with him in good faith?

 

[Miguel]

Wouldn't that be tampering?

Yes but good luck proving it.

Won't do Seattle much good if next March 21st we get an offer of a 1+ from a team drafting ahead of Seattle and decide to take it. Also opens the door for BB to decide not to trade him until 2008 because he believes he can't afford to sit out a second season and forfeit several million dollars (or feign injury and come off like a real scumbag or serious durability concern ala Woodson).

No team is going to give up picks for Branch unless they have a deal with Branch and the Patriots can not force Branch to accept another team's deal. If the Patriots want to trade Branch, he has some control over when the trade will occur.

Graham/Samuel/Koppen will welcome Branch being tagged as it prevents the Patriots from holding that tag or the transition tag over them in their negotiations.

And if Seattle should have a better offer come along next March or find the top WR in the 2007 draft fall to them, what would Deion do - file a grievance against Seattle claiming that they didn't illegally bargain with him in good faith?

There is truly no honor among thieves

 

[hwc]

Graham/Samuel/Koppen will welcome Branch being tagged as it prevents the Patriots from holding that tag or the transition tag over them in their negotiations.

As for Graham: I really don't think the Pats would use the tag on a blocking TE. They've apparently been preparing for Graham's departure for several years, starting with the drafting of Watson in the first round and two more TE prospects this year. The TE tag is relatively inexpensive, but do you really franchise a player for 16 receptions and 3 TDs in a season? With his lack of production over four years, he's actually a candidate to give some money back to the team for underperforming his 1st round contract.

No way they tag a center (Koppen) at the left tackle franchise tag dollars of nearly $7 million this year. They'll make him a legitimate front-line NFL center offer to stay. If he leaves, he leaves.

Samuels? $6 million on a one year CB tender? Doubt it.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Kirwin weighs in...
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9638711

Branch doesn't seem to hold the cards in this poker game.
-----
I asked three front office executives from other clubs what they would want for Deion Branch if he were their property, and all three felt a first-round pick was mandatory, especially at this late date. As one GM said, '"there is no way I trade the guy in my division unless I got extra compensation beyond a first and a good player." My favorite analogy of the situation came from an old school personnel man who said, "I never thought I would live long enough to see a player determine what the appropriate value was for himself to be traded." The third exec said before the Super Bowl in 2005, Branch was playing like a second-round pick: 28 starts in three years, 135 receptions and nine touchdowns. But the Super Bowl and the 2006 production (78 receptions, five touchdowns -- which led the team) upgraded the guy.

My advice to the talented wide receiver is fight battles you can win and be patient when you're in a situation you can't win.

 

[hwc]

Box O Rocks:

I thought this paragraph of Kirwin's article was even more interesting. Kirwin appears to outline an even more aggressive five-year extension offer from the Pats:

Branch is the No. 1 receiver on a division championship football team and a former Super Bowl MVP. He reportedly was offered a $33 million dollar deal over five years with close to 50 percent of it guaranteed. He wanted more money and consequently he wants out of New England if they aren't willing to pay. The club gave him the right to seek a trade and he was unable to come back to the Pats with the compensation the new club would have to surrender for the player.

 

[CrazyDave]

Another good read. Thanks
It seems to me to be one of the more accurate and simple explainations yet.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I believe Pat once worked for/with Bill.

He has focused on the 5 year offer which others have chosen to toss in favor of comparing 3/$19M to 6/$36-39M. And without seeing the specific structure of the JETS or Seattle deals all we have is spin. Pat is the only reporter I've heard refer to the Pat's 5/$31M as $31-33M, so likely he is counting in a half million in workout bonuses and some awards incentives. Those are likely what resulted in the JETS/Hawks offers quickly increasing from being touted as 6/$36M to 6/$39M.

At the end of the day this is all about our unwillingness/inability to tear up the rookie deal because Deion wants his $6M+ AAV to commence with 2006.

Something Seattle was not willing to do for Shaun Alexander, who they franchised in 2005 as a result of not being able to reach a long term deal with him. Then in a bizarre twist predicated on his refusal to sign the tag, his inability to get a deal from anyone also willing to compensate Seattle sufficiently, and his threat to hold out into the season unless he got a long term deal from somebody, he agreed to sign a 1 year deal with Seattle in lieu of the tag days before camp opened that paid him the same as the franchise tag but stipulated he could not be tagged again in 2006. Of course he was also a 4 time probowler, league MVP, Offensive POY and had just played through the final year of his rookie deal producing within a carry of leading the league in rushing yardage. A tad fuller and more consistent resume than Deion prior to any holdouts, yet he reached a risky compromise with a team who was unwilling to pay him his FA money or let him walk after all he did. And a year later he signed on with them again as the highest paid RB in the league. Hmm... why can't we get WR's who think outside the box like that. Or at least ones with agents who don't discourage any such thinking.

And then there was the case of John Abraham, who missed some time due to injury like Deion but also made the pro bowl in his first two seasons and again in his contract season, playing out his rookie deal and being tagged in back to back seasons before being allowed to engineer a deal to trade himself to the Falcons and get the JETS (who refused to trade him for a #2) a #1 in return...with the oddly conspiratorial tie in that the team they had first worked out compensation with was Seattle, whom he refused to negotiate with...

I think we'll get some news on Branch when he loses both of his grievances because they are in effect frivalous as Harry Mannion and others suggest before you even consider the very recent history of the two teams reportedly vying for his services.