From www.profootballtalk.com POSTED 3:55 p.m. EDT; September 2, 2006 by Len Lasagna Oakland Raiders have traded WR Doug Gabriel to the New England Patriots. The compensation for Gabriel has not been announced yet. The Patriots, with starting WR Deion Branch in a protracted holdout, were in the market for a receiver.
He's actually Len Pasquarelli from ESPN, which PFT makes fun of all the time for his lack of credibility (he will write positive stuff about players who are clients of his agent friends) and his weight.
either; - the pats lower their asking price for branch or - branch won't suit up for them until week 10. just my op. cheers ~
I am kind of confused. Since we couldn't originally make a deal, does that completely disqualify us from getting Branch? Or do we still have a chance to rearrange the deal and pick him up?
If Pats decide to trade Branch, of course he is going to Seattle. NO WAY will the Pats keep him in the division and have to play him at least 2 times a year for the next 5 years or so....
That is true, and it's obvious that they'd rather trade Branch to Seattle than us if the price was about the same, but Branch is also a wide receiver. Bledsoe was a quarterback. The impact that a quarterback can make is a lot bigger than the impact a receiver can make.
I doubt they're that concerned trading within the division. After all, they sure didn't mind letting Ty Law, Drew Bledsoe, and Lawyer Milloy go to AFC East teams.
If the pats are gonna deal branch they cant be going around asking for 2 1st rounders. Hes a good player but hes not Jerry Rice 2 1st rounders for him is just crazy.
What this says to me, and I could be totally wrong here (wouldn't be the first time) is that the Pats have faced it that they have painted themselves into a corner here. Once the grievance was filed, it really put the nail in the coffin. How do you keep him around while saving face at this point? Does Belli really want to put up with a guy who put his team through this? Also, for a team that hates to spend the loot, Branch has now proven he can get a premium contract elsewhere, he has no reason to sign with NE, resulting in them getting nothing for him. Playing the Franchise Tag card is just asking for a player to kill you. IMO, the Pats have to trade him. Whether it is to the Jets, Seahawks, or even another buyer at this point, I can't see Branch being in a Pats uniform ever again.
Pats will either get the compensation they want or they keep his rights. If they take a 2nd rd pick it'll be the Jets pick, not the one they got from Washington. I don't think they are worried about his influence in the lockerroom. They'd take him back just as they would have taken Ty Law back. They know they need him at this point, unless they get another decent WR this week. Branch will likely hold out until week 10. Next year they tag him. If he refuses to sign the tender, he sits out, maybe for the year (no fines this time, since he isn't under contract then). Even then, he still belongs to the Pats when he returns in 2008.
I hear what you are saying, but I just think this situation played out a lot different than the Pats had figured it would. I think they probably figured their demand for 2 #1's was going to make the situation impossible for Branch to get a contract negotiated. Then the Jets and 'Hawks jumped on the opportunity. Now Branch has a number by which to measure his own value in negotiations with the Pats, and I just don't believe NE will pony up $36M to him. The grievance serves only one purpose. It isn't to beat the Pats, it's just to show the rest of the league that, yes, Branch is available whenever his contract expires. He is obviously not interested in staying with NE, so they may as well trade him while he still can garner something, rather than hang on to a player who is not going to be happy where he is, and will walk at the first opportunity anyway. Sure, they could franchise him, but why? To trade him for more value later is the only option. You can only tag a guy twice now. Tagging him is going to make him even further disgruntled, and do they really want to pay him like a top 5 WR? What do guys like Chad Johnson make? I don't know the numbers right now, but I am sure it has to be in the $6M/year range or higher. It just wouldn't make sense for the organization.
Doesn't the new collective bargaining agreement prohibit tagging a player for more than one year? If so then Branch's options are to sit out until game 11 this season, then play a full season tagged next year and then become a UFA for 2007. I could be wrong but that's how I think it plays. If New England wants value they need to trade him now.
