NO deal for Branch

[LooGie]

The kid was gonna get $1.05 Mil this year and he's got about $500 K in fines this year. Somebody tell me how this is smart? If he would have just shut his mouth and played out his contract he'd be an UFA next year and eligible for his payday. Now, he's gonna take it up the ass in the press and lose a bunch of money and destroy his rep. Someone is not giving him good advice.

 

i think that was th point of him holding out bud.

[LooGie]

Hilarious. If that's how it should go down, what's the point of a contract at all? Why don't we just have a uniform system across the league where players' compensation is 100% incentive driven? Everyone is under contract with the NFL - each team funnels a portion of its revenue to the NFL and its players are paid accordingly?

 

To put the issue in layman's terms - let's say you're a small business owner and you sign a lease for space at $2K per month for 5 years - and your business explodes because it ends up being a prime location. Are you going to go back and offer your landlord more money before those 5 years are up just because his space ended up being great? How about a car lease? You sign on to pay $350/mo but find that the car performs more like a $400/mo car once you've driven it for a few months. You going to go offer some more money to the dealer? No. Why would an NFL team do any different?

 

While I agree that (performance-wise) Branch does deserve more money, he is also under contract with the New England Patriots. He signed a contract and should be (and legally is) bound to it. In that vein, I think he IS asking for something ridiculous - a contract is a contract. Asking out of it simply because you played well is ridiculous and I'll never understand for the life of me how it's (seemingly) become the norm in the NFL.

 

 

oh that is for to laugh.

come on man. Apples and empty beer cans your comparing. Would my car company ever call me and go, you know, we're not making enough money, so would you mind paying us a little more so we can afford to do more advertising to get some more customers? That's exactly what every NFL franchise does when it needs cap room. Wake up junior.

 

Would my mortgage company call me and go, "wow, you've been great, but your house is worth WAY more than your paying on it, so we're not going to take any more payments from you and you have to be out by the 1st. We'll give you a nice letter at another mortgage company in another state"

 

edit:

Edited September 7, 2006 by LooGie

[LooGie]

Oh, come on. He's getting offers for 6/36, which is the same deal. Nobody ever sees the l;ast couple of years of a six year deal.

 

Regardless, what I am saying is stupid is that the Patriots treated him like crap. 4/24 with 12 guaranteed for a guy that didn;t have 1000yds receiving is not treating someone like crap.

 

he's a two time superbowl MVP, and the ONLY WR in that offense that could put up high numbers. He didn't 1000 yards because Brady is Mr Spread-It-Around.

 

Put him anywhere else, and he'll be a top 10 wide out and we all know it.

 

I predicted early on that the Jets would come a knocking not just because they need a great wide out, but because Mangini obviously has ties with Branch and IF ANYONE WOULD KNOW IF BRANCH IS WORTH TOP 10 WIDE OUT MONEY, IT WOULD BE HIM! So apparently Mangini either reads the huddle forums and thought I had a good idea, OR, he knows Branch is capable of some really nice high numbers.

[LooGie]

If he's still playing at a level that would entice a team to keep him on for those last 2 years for $6mm a piece, he'd be better off if he were a FA after 4 years . . . he'd get more money, as the team in question would only keep him on for that if they felt they were getting a bargain.

 

Not if he shatters his hip and has to sit out for a few years. Come one guys. The teams have a right to cancel contracts and the players have a right to ask for more money. The only thing they can do to demand it is hold out.

 

I suppose they could throw the first game of the season, but that would pretty much solve all their problems now wouldn't it?

[LooGie]

Anyway, I don't understand this whole concept of treating players "fairly". Football teams are businesses - they do what's best for the franchise. Paying players "what they're worth" instead of holding them to contracts that they signed is stupid and it's bad business (and giving undeserved contracts to vets who have more or less outlived their usefulness is even dumber). Why anyone would expect a team to give a player more than what they signed on for simply because the player asks for it is beyond me. If Branch were a franchise WR who the Pats felt they could build around for years to come, I could see them making an exception and paying him b/c they don't want him to get away - the problem here is that (in their eyes and my own) Branch isn't worth as much as he's asking for. The Pats would prefer to let him go and then just go out and get another $6mm/yr caliber WR . . . one that would most likely perform just as well as Branch has (let's recall that Deion hasn't exactly done anything spectacular in his career). Doing otherwise would be bad business.

 

as i go through and read this thread, you keep popping back up as the moran in the group.

having said that..

 

why is it a business when it comes to the teams, but not to the players?

If you asked your boss for a raise, that you felt you were worth, and he didn't give it to you, you'd leave.

ESPECIALLY if you had an offer for WAY MORE money on the table, or thought you could get WAY more money.

So, it's a business to the teams, and they pay what they will and have every right to cut players and cancel contracts and yadda yadda. But when the player looks at like a business and says "hey, my services are worth more elsewhere, pay me or let me go" he's beeing an geezer?

I really don't get this argument, and I think I'm done having it with you, until you can DEBATE with actual valid points.

[AtomicCEO]

No. As a fan I would rather know that my team is going to deal with players in the fashion that they advertise they will deal with players. I want the players to know that holding out on this team is not going to get it done.

 

Really? Really??

 

I couldn't possibly disagree more. I would way rather my team have a 2nd round pick.

 

I really don't think Branch is getting such a bad rep. Do you have a negative opinion of Walker?

[Balzac]

as i go through and read this thread, you keep popping back up as the moran in the group.

having said that..

 

Loogie thinks I'm a moron - I guess I can look forward to yet another sleepless night.

 

why is it a business when it comes to the teams, but not to the players?

If you asked your boss for a raise, that you felt you were worth, and he didn't give it to you, you'd leave.

ESPECIALLY if you had an offer for WAY MORE money on the table, or thought you could get WAY more money.

 

When did I say it wasn't a business for the players? Anyway, and I'll say this again - the difference b/w me and any NFL player is that they CAN'T leave - they signed contracts (knowing full well what they were signing letting them know in clear, black ink that THEY CAN'T LEAVE). They have no other offers "on the table" when they're under contract because they CAN'T ACCEPT THEM. A contract is a contract is a contract - and I'm the moron?

 

So, it's a business to the teams, and they pay what they will and have every right to cut players and cancel contracts and yadda yadda.

 

Correct - that's the way the NFL contracts are structured - right or wrong.

 

But when the player looks at like a business and says "hey, my services are worth more elsewhere, pay me or let me go" he's beeing an geezer?

 

A geezer? Uh - no, but I'd say he's not living up to his end of a contract that he willfully and knowingly entered into, which is quite lame.

 

I really don't get this argument, and I think I'm done having it with you, until you can DEBATE with actual valid points.

 

 

I'm pretty sure you never even had an argument with me. Anyway, your saying that my points are invalid puts my mind at ease - if you're not intelligent enough to comprehend the simple concept of the contract, I wouldn't expect you to have any viable responses to my posts on this topic.

[Balzac]

Not if he shatters his hip and has to sit out for a few years. Come one guys. The teams have a right to cancel contracts and the players have a right to ask for more money. The only thing they can do to demand it is hold out.

 

Are you saying that it's cool for players to sit out the season whenever they think that they could get more money elsewhere at that moment in time? Anyone could shatter their hip at any point in time, which would ruin their ability to make additional money down the road. Is the risk higher for someone who is going into their FA season? Most definitely. Does this mean that it's ok for any player going into their FA season to just sit out to avoid injury and hope for a bigger payday next year? No - that's terribel and ridiculous precedent to be setting.

 

The concept of what peoples' "rights" are in connection with NFL contracts needs some work here.

[Balzac]

oh that is for to laugh.

come on man. Apples and empty beer cans your comparing. Would my car company ever call me and go, you know, we're not making enough money, so would you mind paying us a little more so we can afford to do more advertising to get some more customers? That's exactly what every NFL franchise does when it needs cap room. Wake up junior.

 

Would my mortgage company call me and go, "wow, you've been great, but your house is worth WAY more than your paying on it, so we're not going to take any more payments from you and you have to be out by the 1st. We'll give you a nice letter at another mortgage company in another state"

 

edit:

 

 

these examples couldn't be any more off-point. nice try though, kid - think harder.

[LooGie]

When did I say it wasn't a business for the players? Anyway, and I'll say this again - the difference b/w me and any NFL player is that they CAN'T leave - they signed contracts (knowing full well what they were signing letting them know in clear, black ink that THEY CAN'T LEAVE). They have no other offers "on the table" when they're under contract because they CAN'T ACCEPT THEM. A contract is a contract is a contract - and I'm the moron?

 

you never said it wasn't a business for the players. You jumped on a player for making it a business, and doing the only thing that he could to get more money. You made it seem like he was a personal commodity owned by the franchise and the fans and should shut his punk ass mouth and play a game for money, whatever the amount happens to be.

 

however, i notice in the next quote down, you go on to imply that it's not a business for the players. You really don't know where you stand in this argument, do you?

 

Correct - that's the way the NFL contracts are structured - right or wrong.

So it is a business and should be handled accordinly. ok gotcha.

 

A geezer? Uh - no, but I'd say he's not living up to his end of a contract that he willfully and knowingly entered into, which is quite lame.

 

Oh wait. No it's not. It's a moral issue. Ok..gotcha.

 

I'm pretty sure you never even had an argument with me. Anyway, your saying that my points are invalid puts my mind at ease - if you're not intelligent enough to comprehend the simple concept of the contract, I wouldn't expect you to have any viable responses to my posts on this topic.

 

Ok, so it's a moral business. I really gotcha this time. I obviously don't understand a contract. Because, as far I as I know, he's allowed to sit out to show the franchise that he wants more money. Nae, that he's WORTH more money. Oh wow, the NYJ agreed with him. (bet that threw a monkey wrench in ol' Bill "The Architects" Bellichik's plans eh?)

But the same contract says said franchise (herin referred to as "The Dynasty") can cancel afore mentioned contract as The Dynasty sees fit. Or even offer said Superbowl MVP Player a trade if another franchise is willing to offer a fair and reasonable trade in exachange for his services. Which, as I heard last is a first round pick and perhaps ANOTHER first round pick. Yah, they had every intention of letting him go. And obviously he's not worth much to them. Only a few first rounders.

And a superbowl.

And some Yards after the catch

And a #1 WR

you get the idea

 

Actually, you probably don't.

Edited September 7, 2006 by LooGie

[LooGie]

Are you saying that it's cool for players to sit out the season whenever they think that they could get more money elsewhere at that moment in time? Anyone could shatter their hip at any point in time, which would ruin their ability to make additional money down the road. Is the risk higher for someone who is going into their FA season? Most definitely. Does this mean that it's ok for any player going into their FA season to just sit out to avoid injury and hope for a bigger payday next year? No - that's terribel and ridiculous precedent to be setting.

 

The concept of what peoples' "rights" are in connection with NFL contracts needs some work here.

 

So screw him if he wants more money up front?

 

The risk is higher for someone making less money than he's worth. If the money is right, the risk is worth it. We'd all let Mike Tyson punch us in the face with brass knuckles for a price. That's why these Gods among men play a game for our enjoyment. The money makes it worth it. The love the game? Sure. But the money makes it worth the risk.

[LooGie]

these examples couldn't be any more off-point. nice try though, kid - think harder.

 

funny. i was thinking the exact same thing when you made your examples. In fact, I made mine to show you how stupid your were. You're really amazing me with your lack of...everything.

[Balzac]

you never said it wasn't a business for the players. You jumped on a player for making it a business, and doing the only thing that he could to get more money. You made it seem like he was a personal commodity owned by the franchise and the fans and should shut his punk ass mouth and play a game for money, whatever the amount happens to be.

 

however, i notice in the next quote down, you go on to imply that it's not a business for the players. You really don't know where you stand in this argument, do you?

 

 

So it is a business and should be handled accordinly. ok gotcha.

 

 

 

Oh wait. No it's not. It's a moral issue. Ok..gotcha.

 

 

 

Ok, so it's a moral business. I really gotcha this time. I obviously don't understand a contract. Because, as far I as I know, he's allowed to sit out to show the franchise that he wants more money. Nae, that he's WORTH more money. Oh wow, the NYJ agreed with him. (bet that threw a monkey wrench in ol' Bill "The Architects" Bellichik's plans eh?)

But the same contract says said franchise (herin referred to as "The Dynasty") can cancel afore mentioned contract as The Dynasty sees fit. Or even offer said Superbowl MVP Player a trade if another franchise is willing to offer a fair and reasonable trade in exachange for his services. Which, as I heard last is a first round pick and perhaps ANOTHER first round pick. Yah, they had every intention of letting him go. And obviously he's not worth much to them. Only a few first rounders.

And a superbowl.

And some Yards after the catch

And a #1 WR

you get the idea

 

Actually, you probably don't.

 

 

Haha - excellent! You're all over the map, bro - you drunk or do you always have this hard a time comprehending the written word? Anyway, if I needed any further evidence that continuing this "debate" with you would be entirely useless, I need look no further. Thanks for saving me the time and headache, chief.

 

Wow.

[Balzac]

So screw him if he wants more money up front?

 

The risk is higher for someone making less money than he's worth. If the money is right, the risk is worth it. We'd all let Mike Tyson punch us in the face with brass knuckles for a price. That's why these Gods among men play a game for our enjoyment. The money makes it worth it. The love the game? Sure. But the money makes it worth the risk.

 

 

Theisman - is that you? You suck on MNF!

[LooGie]

Haha - excellent! You're all over the map, bro - you drunk or do you always have this hard a time comprehending the written word?

could be a bit of both...however my points remain valid. I think. You got me second guessing myself now.

[Caveman_Nick]

Really? Really??

 

I couldn't possibly disagree more. I would way rather my team have a 2nd round pick.

 

I really don't think Branch is getting such a bad rep. Do you have a negative opinion of Walker?

 

 

 

I never said I have a negative opinion of Branch. I understand what he is doing. Players hold out. I don't have a negative or positive opinion on that.

 

I think he's being difficult in this situation, though. He has been made quality offers but chooses to hold out instead of playing or accepting them.

 

As far as having the extra pick versus not caving to a player, I think an organization is better off sticking with their policies in dealing with players. Otherwise the number of players trying to renegotiate every year will increase.

[Caveman_Nick]

he's a two time superbowl MVP, and the ONLY WR in that offense that could put up high numbers. He didn't 1000 yards because Brady is Mr Spread-It-Around.

 

Put him anywhere else, and he'll be a top 10 wide out and we all know it.

 

I predicted early on that the Jets would come a knocking not just because they need a great wide out, but because Mangini obviously has ties with Branch and IF ANYONE WOULD KNOW IF BRANCH IS WORTH TOP 10 WIDE OUT MONEY, IT WOULD BE HIM! So apparently Mangini either reads the huddle forums and thought I had a good idea, OR, he knows Branch is capable of some really nice high numbers.

 

 

2 times, huh? Okay genius.

 

And Mangini couldn't possibly be making contract offers to Branch to stir up trouble on a team in his own division. I mean, an NFL coach would never do that...

[charty]

It's a great point that the Patriots should get whatever value they can out of Branch at this point, because teaching him a lesson and forcing him to sit is not worth losing out on a 2nd rounder from the Jets. That's a high 2nd rounder. Take the value. They're just being dumb if they don't.

 

As a fan, wouldn't you rather have pick 34 next year than the satisfaction of watching Branch sit out?

 

The Jets hold two second round picks, I am not sure, but I think one came from the Redskins. The Redskins 2nd rounder was the one reportedly offered, which wouldn't be as enticing as the Jet's draft spot.

 

The way the Pats are treating this, in terms of compensation, is like a restricted free agent.

Look at it as if Branch was a restricted free agent, which he is not, and he went out and got a nice deal for himself (like the deals offered by Seattle and the Jets). The Patriots would have the ability to match the offer, and if they didn't, they would receive compensation in the form of draft pick(s) based on the value of the contract received by Branch. I can't find any info on the calculation, but it would be more than a 2nd rounder. Based on the value of the contracts being offered, it would be more like a 1st and 3rd, or a 1st and 2nd.