Would we really want Branch around in 2010 anyways?

[richpats]

I think the Pats original extension term of 3 years was the right call. There was no need to give him a 5-6 year deal (even if after year 3 its all tentative). He would have still put up decent numbers the next few years, but at the age of 31, the inevitable decline in production would begin to show itself.

I know what you're thinking - "Troy Brown". Well, considering Branch's attitude towards getting his due, I don't think Branch would take kindly to stepping down to a #2 or 3 spot on the depth chart (nor getting paid like one). And if there are concerns about his durability NOW, wait til he gets a few more years on his fragile self.

So I say good call Pats

 

[flutie2phelan]

That's one way of looking at it, alright.

But between now ... and then ... would have been okay.

 

[Pats726]

I agree..3 years 4 tops...Good call..remember right after the Super Bowl win they went after Derrick Mason...so obviously they did not see Branch in the same light..in teh same way. he's a GOOD receiver..but he has liabilities..more so than the elite receivers. I would have LOVED to have him stay with the Pats..but he didn't want to...