The point is, he doesn't need, and probably doesn't even care to win. It's all about telling the rest of the league "Hey everyone, do you want a SB MVP? I will be available for $36M when the Pats finally give up on fighting me." He has established his mercenary cost. Now he is pushing NE to trade him now, while they can still do so. If they choose to hold onto him, they will either have to franchise him next year, and pay him more than the $6M average cost he is already looking at, or let him walk for free. At best, they can tag him twice. In that case, they have a disgruntled player on their hands, and he still walks in two years, for free. NE's best option at this point is to take the next couple weeks, look around, and then deal him for the best available offer. Quite simply, I would be shocked if Branch even dons a Pats uniform ever again.
He established his price by negotiating with Seahawks and Jets. I don't see filing a grievance he almost certainly will lose does for him, though. Get him more publicity?
I think you may have misunderstood what I meant. The negotiations with the Jets and Seahawks established his purchase price. However, the grievance establishes that he is openly available. It's a statement that he has no intention whatsoever to play for the Pats again. He's telling the 10-15 teams in the league who might be interested "Get out your checkbooks boys. If they don't trade me to grab some picks, I am yours for the bargain price of $36M!"
True. The grievance breaks ties with the Pats. But he can't go anywhere until 2007 anyway. The only way he plays for another team in 2006 is if the Pats trade him (because they certainly won't release him). If they don't trade him, he can either continue to sit out and only report in Week 10 (in order to get credited for a season), or he can report to camp and abide by his contract. He doesn't really have another choice here.
That's the other thing the grievance accomplishes. It tells the Pats, in no uncertain terms, Branch has zero desire to play there anymore. It is an attempt to force their hand and trade him now, rather than force him to sit out a couple of months, which I am sure he would, but doesn't want to, do.
Peter King brings up the best point in his article. Branch has not performed any better than McCareins or Coles in his four years in the NFL playing for the best QB in the game. If he does eventually come to the Jets for the kind of cash that is being talked about he had better become a 1400 yard, 14-15 YPC guy or the Jets will be wasting a lot of cash.
I'm not sure he would because he will lose a substantial amount of money. Since he wants to move on and he will be a FA it's in his interest to perform at a very high level. This all works for the Pats not Branch. They are either going to get highly compensated for him or get maximum effort from him. I hardly see how this hurts them in the least.
Does King point out that Branch was a one man show in the Super Bowl winning the MVP or did he conveniently forget that point?
I'm with you on that. I think if he loses his arbitrations - which the consensus seems to think he will - he'll be back with New England inside two weeks. His fines are over $500,000, and he's about to start losing game checks. He's got to go back eventually. Makes no sense at all to sit into November. He wouldn't be gaining bargaining leverage, and he'd only be losing more game checks. EDIT: This from Pat Kirwan seems to agree.
Look man, Timmy Smith was a one man show in a Super Bowl once too. Branch is simply a good possession receiver with only one completely healthy season under his belt. He's not worth the kind of money he wants to anyone BUT New England, who has a collection of fourth receivers otherwise. -X-
This morning, I heard an interesting slant on this from Michael Holley, the sportswriter who was given inside access for a book about the Patriots. He says that he has spoken with one of the few people who participated in the discussions for Deion Branch, and he confirms what King says, with one enormous caveat. While it's true that the Patriots did not explicitly ask for two first round picks, they did bring up two trade examples in the discussions: Keyshawn Johnson and Joey Galloway - both traded for two first round draft picks.
Get the heck outta here with Timmy Smith. Branch is real good. Half this board is borderline brain dead with the, " oh I wouldn't give more then a # 6," and the , "we don't need him," garbage. Branch is a star in the making. He doesn't have knock out numbers cause the Patriots don't operate like that, they spread things around. I'm not saying you give a #1 for him being that the Jets will probably be awful, but if you drafted a WR in the first round and he turned out to be Deion Branch, you'd be freakin thrilled.
Those two trades worked out so poorly that you'll never see anything of their kind again. Moreover, when Galloway was traded, he already had 3 1,000 yard seasons under his belt and was regarded as the league's most dangerous deep threat. Keyshawn Johnson was coming off back to back Pro Bowl seasons with over 80 catches for over 1,000 yards and was viewed as the missing piece on a bad offensive team. As has been pointed out on other boards, Galloway was far more accomplished than Deion Branch at the time of that trade. Branch is a nice possession receiver with no 1,000 yard seasons. -X-
The Patriots "spread things around" because Branch is not particularly great. The Bengals "spread things around" and it doesn't effect Chad Johnson's numbers. As I pointed out earlier, when Troy Brown was in his prime, they ran the SAME offense, and they did not spread it around. "Spreading it around" is a result of not having a solid number one. Look, I'm not saying Branch isn't a nice player, but he's not a premiere receiver. He's a fringe number one who could be something more, but "could" is the operative word. He's certainly not nearly as accomplished as you'd have us think. -X-
Yes, but you're arguing against THEIR mindset in trade negotiations, where they otherwise seemed to have little trade motivation. Reason and statistics don't translate well here. I have a question: Who here would trade their number one receiver to a division rival for no more than a second round pick? I can't even fathom that sort of trade, were the roles reversed.
WTF - He's a year younger than Johnson. Johnson has had 1k seasons every year after his rookie year. Hello?
Here's the other side of the argument: Branch can effectively play 16 games this year for $1 million dollars minus the fines he has incurred, then get franchised next year and play 16 games for the franchise tag value. The Pats would probably give back the fines if he came back now. Alternately he can play 6 games this year for zippo, then get franchised and play 16 games for the franchise tag value. In the first scenario he has 10 extra games in which to get injured, costing him his franchise tag payday next season. For that he gets compensated maybe up to a million dollars. In the second scenario he gets nothing but an accrued season, however it puts the ball in the Pat's court as to whether or not to franchise him the following season. It also protects Branch from the better part of his injury window next season. If I were Branch I'd see the low compensation this season as a poor incentive to play the first 10 games and take the injury risk. He knows that if he gets injured odds are the Pats will cut him before he gets to the franchise tag. I still think Branch has the upper hand overall, however he's got to make his choice and stick to it. This, by the way, is not remotely like the John Abraham situation. JAbe had earned quite a good contract prior to suddenly getting cold feet at the end of the 2004 season. Branch has had the typical 2nd rounder's deal so far and definitely has not banked what he needs to live after football.
