What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Patriots act getting old? (1 Viewer)

crnerblitz

crnerblitz

Footballguy
As per the blogger...

Meanwhile, the Patriots have filed a grievance against their former receiver Deion Branch seeking approximately $730,000. The total is a combination of fines from Branch's holdout and a fifth of his original 1 million dollar signing bonus.

At what point do the players on this team decide that they have had enough of of Bill 'I am all powerful' Belichick? His summation of the talent that has surrounded him and paid the price for his superbowls over the last few years is nothing short of any other crazed strongman whom sacrifices everything and everyone in pursuit of his own ego trip. In the vein of all egomaniacs he professes a commitment to the team ideal, while hypocritically exploiting every opportunity to prove to the players that he is the Daddy and the reason they are where they are, Irrespective of the talent or facts surrounding the truth of the matter.

Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

End of rant from a former Patriots supporter.

Kevin

 
crnerblitz said:
As per the blogger...

Meanwhile, the Patriots have filed a grievance against their former receiver Deion Branch seeking approximately $730,000. The total is a combination of fines from Branch's holdout and a fifth of his original 1 million dollar signing bonus.

At what point do the players on this team decide that they have had enough of of Bill 'I am all powerful' Belichick? His summation of the talent that has surrounded him and paid the price for his superbowls over the last few years is nothing short of any other crazed strongman whom sacrifices everything and everyone in pursuit of his own ego trip. In the vein of all egomaniacs he professes a commitment to the team ideal, while hypocritically exploiting every opportunity to prove to the players that he is the Daddy and the reason they are where they are, Irrespective of the talent or facts surrounding the truth of the matter.

Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

End of rant from a former Patriots supporter.

Kevin
Click to expand...
LOL. Fair value...as in over paying for inferior talent? You want them to travel down the road Tenn and Balt went? Branch wasn't anything special, furthermore he was under contract and subject to a CBA that calls for the fines.Let's list the biggest cheapskates in the league relative to overpaying existing players...Philly, Tampa, Carolina, San Diego, Denver, New England, Pittsburgh. Who's been dominating the landscape of the league???

 
New England pays big money to players that they deem are worth it. Branch is very good, but he's not Seymour or Brady.

 
Deion Branch must be the most over-rated, overhyped player ever.....for someone that has never had 10 TDs or a 1000 yard season. Brady made Branch, just like Brady made Givens. Brady will be fine once Chad Jackson starts getting back on the field. OTOH Branch and Givens will never even get the stats they got in NE, which were average anyways.

 
BassNBrew said:
crnerblitz said:
As per the blogger...

Meanwhile, the Patriots have filed a grievance against their former receiver Deion Branch seeking approximately $730,000. The total is a combination of fines from Branch's holdout and a fifth of his original 1 million dollar signing bonus.

At what point do the players on this team decide that they have had enough of of Bill 'I am all powerful' Belichick? His summation of the talent that has surrounded him and paid the price for his superbowls over the last few years is nothing short of any other crazed strongman whom sacrifices everything and everyone in pursuit of his own ego trip. In the vein of all egomaniacs he professes a commitment to the team ideal, while hypocritically exploiting every opportunity to prove to the players that he is the Daddy and the reason they are where they are, Irrespective of the talent or facts surrounding the truth of the matter.

Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

End of rant from a former Patriots supporter.

Kevin
Click to expand...
LOL. Fair value...as in over paying for inferior talent? You want them to travel down the road Tenn and Balt went? Branch wasn't anything special, furthermore he was under contract and subject to a CBA that calls for the fines.Let's list the biggest cheapskates in the league relative to overpaying existing players...Philly, Tampa, Carolina, San Diego, Denver, New England, Pittsburgh. Who's been dominating the landscape of the league???
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
 
crnerblitz said:
Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book
Click to expand...
They wanted to pay him fair value, and made him an offer to that end. His idea of fair value was different from theirs, so he held out. That's his right as long as he pays the corresponding fines. I don't see any bad faith at all on the part of the Patriots.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the Patriots were wise not to pay silly money for Branch. He's replaceable. The rub is that they actually haven't done a good job of stocking the WR fridge with cheaper guys who can actually play, but they'll figure it out.

Just like Ted Washington, Lawyer Milloy, Willie McGinest, and (snob, sniff) Adam Vinatieri, they probably made a shrewd move. I just wish they'd spend this cap room they've so judiciously saved.

 
Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

As a Vike's homer, I'm wondering how and why you rate Ziggy as a cheapskate. Last year, he gave Daunte Fumblepepper a raise when Daunte was under contract for another 8 or 9 more years. This year, he signs his starting LT and LG to contracts of almost $100 million. Gets one of the best FAs available in Hutchinson. Signs Chestor Taylor, Dwight Smith, Ben Leber, Tank Williams, Koren Robinson to decent FA deals.

The only circumstance I can think of is not giving Brad Johnson a raise after Ziggy was already burned by Culpepper. Sure, a starting QB in the NFL should make more than what Johnson is making, but Johnson signed the deal, is 38 and only played half a season last year. After not knowing what he has or how long he'll last in a product that is Johnson, Ziggy shouldn't feel compelled to just throw him a couple of million dollars more to be a nice guy.

If you want to throw your guys under the bus, feel free. But you don't have to sabotage other organizations in the mean time. The Vikes have enough problems after the McCombs/Tice fiasco.

 
crnerblitz said:
As per the blogger...

Meanwhile, the Patriots have filed a grievance against their former receiver Deion Branch seeking approximately $730,000. The total is a combination of fines from Branch's holdout and a fifth of his original 1 million dollar signing bonus.

At what point do the players on this team decide that they have had enough of of Bill 'I am all powerful' Belichick? His summation of the talent that has surrounded him and paid the price for his superbowls over the last few years is nothing short of any other crazed strongman whom sacrifices everything and everyone in pursuit of his own ego trip. In the vein of all egomaniacs he professes a commitment to the team ideal, while hypocritically exploiting every opportunity to prove to the players that he is the Daddy and the reason they are where they are, Irrespective of the talent or facts surrounding the truth of the matter.

Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

End of rant from a former Patriots supporter.

Kevin
Click to expand...
Your missing the point entirely. It's not arrogance but salary cap discipline & a philosophy on where you spend your money. Tom Brady & Richard Seymour have huge contracts. They are perrenial Pro-Bowlers. Branch is a very good player but he is not at their level. Players always want their contracts ripped up when they over-perform the contracts. But do they give back $'s when they under-perform?

When all is said and done the Patriots spend to the cap like everyone else. The difference between the Patriots and other teams is the middle class of the roster. The Patriots have won (despite record #'s of injuries) because they choose to spread that money out resulting in a very deep, talented roster down to the 53rd man. They set a value on their players which allows them to maintain that depth. If you overpay for everyone that becomes a free agent you will not be able to do this. Look at Indy with 65% of their money spent on offense (and mostly on 3-4 players) and you will see why they will never win (not enough depth on the roster or on defense). I agree Branch was probably one of the guys you would want to keep but both sides have to agree on that value & @ 39M.....it doesn't make sense to the Patriots. They received 4 very good years of Branch for cheap $'s and turn around and trade him for a #1 pick which will help replenish the roster next year for a team that drafts very well. In turn they developed Branch into a good enough player that a team would give 39M to. Sounds like a fair deal to me.......

Remember they won a Super Bowl with Troy Brown/David Patten/Freddie Coleman as the wideouts................I guarantee they will be in the mix again. They are incredibly flexible in changing their schemes to match their personel. They were going to be a power running team this year anyways featuring the TE's. Once they get Gabriel & Jackson on the field to stretch the defenses, I think people will see that they can survive Branch (& Givens absence - another crazy contract @ 25M). Let's see how happy Givens is when he is enduring a 5-11 season in Ten & doesn't have a Tom Brady throwing him the ball on the money. Players are very competitive and want to win........in NE they may not get top $ but they will get a reasonable deal that will allow the franchise to compete every year.

Re: Fines

Just as the player was prepared to sit out until WK 10 to collect his year of service as is his right in the collective bargaining agreement, the Patriots have the right to fine Branch $14K/day for not showing up to work and recovering 1/5th of his signing bonus

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support.

The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.

If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.

 
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
So if the Patriots don't get back to the SB (when only 2 of 32 teams will get there) it disproves the philosophy? Not quite. I think a more resonable judge of a team is playoff appearances. I'll say the Patriots will be in the playoffs the majority of those 5 years (most likely 4 out of 5) & will be a tough opponent for anyone to play once they get there.That is the kind of consistency this phjilosophy buys...............
 
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yeah 3 Super Bowls really creates a huge "bias".
 
FMD said:
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
So if the Patriots don't get back to the SB (when only 2 of 32 teams will get there) it disproves the philosophy? Not quite. I think a more resonable judge of a team is playoff appearances. I'll say the Patriots will be in the playoffs the majority of those 5 years (most likely 4 out of 5) & will be a tough opponent for anyone to play once they get there.That is the kind of consistency this phjilosophy buys...............
Click to expand...
You beat me to it! Exactly right - Superbowl appearances sound like a nice barometer of success but 6% of the league make it annually - that's hardly a good place to set the bar. Playoff teams represent 37% annually.
 
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yeah 3 Super Bowls really creates a huge "bias".
Click to expand...
Like I said...what have you done lately? What will you do in the future?
 
pizzatyme said:
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yeah 3 Super Bowls really creates a huge "bias".
Click to expand...
Like I said...what have you done lately? What will you do in the future?
Click to expand...
So if the Patriots don't win it EVERY YEAR, then their philosophy doesn't work?
 
Maurile Tremblay said:
crnerblitz said:
Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book
Click to expand...
They wanted to pay him fair value, and made him an offer to that end. His idea of fair value was different from theirs, so he held out. That's his right as long as he pays the corresponding fines. I don't see any bad faith at all on the part of the Patriots.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
 
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yeah 3 Super Bowls really creates a huge "bias".
Click to expand...
Like I said...what have you done lately? What will you do in the future?
Click to expand...
So if the Patriots don't win it EVERY YEAR, then their philosophy doesn't work?
Click to expand...
No, but it also doesn't necessarily mean it does work when they do win a championship. There are several ways to skin a cat. This just happens to be one of them. I am really just tired of seeing many Pats fans degrade the Seahawks for paying Branch what they thought Branch was worth.Just because he hasn't had a 1000 yard season, doesn't make him an average WR. By most accounts, the Pats spread the ball around. Doesn't it make sense that this might have contributed to why Branch's stats aren't as lofty as others?This is the same reason why I think Brady's stats are lower and he is regarded as not as prolific of a passer as Manning(which I disagree with BTW).And, I never said they had to win EVERY year in the first place!
 
Jim Rome is Burning had a good segment about this last nite (I know I couldn't belive it either). But they were talking about how it's the Patriots system, and how they stick to it no matter what. Even when it pulls at the fans heartstrings.

 
pizzatyme said:
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
JetsWillWin said:
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yeah 3 Super Bowls really creates a huge "bias".
Click to expand...
Like I said...what have you done lately? What will you do in the future?
Click to expand...
So if the Patriots don't win it EVERY YEAR, then their philosophy doesn't work?
Click to expand...
No, but it also doesn't necessarily mean it does work when they do win a championship. There are several ways to skin a cat. This just happens to be one of them. I am really just tired of seeing many Pats fans degrade the Seahawks for paying Branch what they thought Branch was worth.Just because he hasn't had a 1000 yard season, doesn't make him an average WR. By most accounts, the Pats spread the ball around. Doesn't it make sense that this might have contributed to why Branch's stats aren't as lofty as others?This is the same reason why I think Brady's stats are lower and he is regarded as not as prolific of a passer as Manning(which I disagree with BTW).And, I never said they had to win EVERY year in the first place!
Click to expand...
I'm aware that there are many ways to "skin a cat" as far was running an NFL team goes. Fine.The Seahawks overpaid for Branch. Lots of people are saying this, and it's certainly not just Patriot fans. I think he's an above average/very good WR - not a guy who is worth a 1st round pick and $40 million. If anything, Patriot fans have seen Branch play the most.And no you didn't say they had to win "every" year but you did say "What have you done for me lately" like it's been a long drought or something.
 
Branch had a contract and didn't live up to it. He had a right to holdout, but there were consequences (i.e. fines) associated with that move. Hopefully Branch's agent was smart enough to build that into his contract with Seattle but I see nothing wrong with the Patriots wanting that money.

Where I think the Patriots made the mistake was giving Branch the go ahead to shop himself around for a trade. The Patriots were banking on Branch finding no takers and then accepting their offer. That tactic blew up in their face.

The Patriots will get Seattle's #1, which ain't bad, but it will likely be a very low #1 and they lose the services of their best WR, which could cost them a playoff run this year (way to early to predict right now). But overall I agree with philosophy of teams like the Patriots and Steelers: in the salary cap era it is better to let a player go rather than to overpay him.

Time will tell if it was a good move for the Seahawks or not. If he is the missing piece of the puzzle and they win the Super Bowl then it was a good move. If not, they paid a king's ransom for what might become known as an average receiver.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bill B. (and what appears to be a state of arrogance) annoys me as much as any coach in the league.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with too much of what the Patriots did in this situation. Branch was under contract. They had no obligation to negotiate a new contract with him, yet they did. Branch thought it was unfair. It was obviously a little lower than someone else was willing to give him, but I don't think it can really be considered an unfair offer. Branch is the one who failed to honor his contract. I have no problem with them going after the fines and bonus money.

 
Godsbrother said:
Branch had a contract and didn't live up to it. He had a right to holdout, but there were consequences (i.e. fines) associated with that move. Hopefully Branch's agent was smart enough to build that into his contract with Seattle but I see nothing wrong with the Patriots wanting that money.Where I think the Patriots made the mistake was giving Branch the go ahead to shop himself around for a trade. The Patriots were banking on Branch finding no takers and then accepting their offer. That tactic blew up in their face.The Patriots will get Seattle's #1, which ain't bad, but it will likely be a very low #1 and they lose the services of their best WR, which could cost them a playoff run this year (way to early to predict right now). But overall I agree with philosophy of teams like the Patriots and Steelers: in the salary cap era it is better to let a player go rather than to overpay him. Time will tell if it was a good move for the Seahawks or not. If he is the missing piece of the puzzle and then win the Super Bowl then it was a good move. If not, they paid a king's ransom for what might become an average receiver.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: This is the type of level headed post that should be out there.
 
BlueOnion said:
Patriots are the definition of what a team should be; this never gets old for me.
Click to expand...
From a how to effectively manage your salary cap to maximize wins perspective, yes. However, I don't like the precedent possibly being set that a team can recover a signing bonus from a player they traded, even if the player demanded a trade.
 
Lots of good discussion here. Here is more on my take. When a team trades a player under contract, isn't that contract including bonuses and fines entirely the property of the new team. Didn't a team that traded for a player recently go after his signing bonus, a signing bonus that was paid by his former team? My main point is that I would think the fines would be owed to Seattle because they were the ones whom held the rights of the contract.

Kevin

 
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
BlueOnion said:
Patriots are the definition of what a team should be; this never gets old for me.
Click to expand...
From a how to effectively manage your salary cap to maximize wins perspective, yes. However, I don't like the precedent possibly being set that a team can recover a signing bonus from a player they traded, even if the player demanded a trade.
Click to expand...
Then your issue is not with the team or owners, but with the NFLPA who agreed to the CBA. I am sure there was a trade-off between the two parties, but I am not privey to the other half of the trade-off. Maybe it has something to do with the 60% guaranteed players cut of all NFL revenues; which is something no other union in sports can boast about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
crnerblitz said:
Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book
Click to expand...
They wanted to pay him fair value, and made him an offer to that end. His idea of fair value was different from theirs, so he held out. That's his right as long as he pays the corresponding fines. I don't see any bad faith at all on the part of the Patriots.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Exactly. The Pats made two offers over the offseason to extend the contract, and were never countered. They were negotiating in bad faith? Less than fair value? They offered him $6 million a year. For a guy whose career highs were 5 TD's and 988 yards, I'd say that's well over fair value. But, Seattle valued him higher. The Pats disagreed, took a #1 for it, which I feel will be a top 25 pick this year, and parted ways. They are due the funds, becuase he held out of camp and disrupted their team. That's their right under the CBA, just as it was Branch's right under the CBA. He played his hand, they're playing theirs.

Is their act getting old? Standing on principle never gets old to those who believe in standing on principle.

 
crnerblitz said:
Lots of good discussion here. Here is more on my take. When a team trades a player under contract, isn't that contract including bonuses and fines entirely the property of the new team. Didn't a team that traded for a player recently go after his signing bonus, a signing bonus that was paid by his former team? My main point is that I would think the fines would be owed to Seattle because they were the ones whom held the rights of the contract. Kevin
Click to expand...
These fines were accrued in NE. They're owed NE. It's cut and dry. Branch has no chance in the grievance. He's out the money. He knew he was out the money by holding out. Each day you hold out of camp is a $14k fine. That's the rule. No careats.
 
Branch earned the fines, but part of the signing bonus? They got the services of decent NFL WR for 4 years very cheap by NFL standards(especially when you consdier they'll likely get at least the fine money back) and got a first round draft pick in return for a guy one year from free agency. But now they want some of his small signing bonus back as well?

NE made out like bandits already with Branch. Asking for part of the bonus back seems like overkill.

 
:rolleyes:

Good to hear that you are a former Patriots supporter.

Don't know where to start......how about the obvious?

The player was under contract. The player chose to sit out while under contract. The player, in accordance with the CBA rules, was subjecting himself to penalties for sitting out. Why should the team not collect on the fines owed? If someone owed you $2,000 (scaled down for an average guy's situation), would you just forget about it if the person who owed you the money moved? Didn't think so.

New England could have screwed Branch buy trading him to a team that won't be sniffing the playoffs for many years to come. He should gladly write the check to Kraft. Maybe while he is, it will sink in how much of a jackass he was in this whole thing.

 
For all that Branch may not ahve been worth the contract he signed with Seattle, their are real costs to the Paatriots letting him walk. The receiving corps is possibly the weakest in the league, and player morale has been sorely damaged. It's not to say that they made the wrong choice, but I think we can all agree that whatever the business model, the front office got itself into a pretty bad situation, and the only good thing that can be said about the result is that they at least got a late 1st-rounder for Branch.

 
The precedant apparently is the Kevin Greene situation from the last 90s. Don't know the details specifically but Greene held out from the Panthers, was traded to the Niners and Carolina tried to collect the fines and recover part of the signing bonus.

An arbitrator ruled (somewhat puzzlingly) that since Carolina never collected the fines while Greene was still under contract to them, they weren't entitled to collect the fines while he was under contract to another team. Somehow, the whole process was settled and I believe that Carolina ended up recouping about half the dough.

 
Z-Dog said:
For all that Branch may not ahve been worth the contract he signed with Seattle, their are real costs to the Paatriots letting him walk. The receiving corps is possibly the weakest in the league, and player morale has been sorely damaged. It's not to say that they made the wrong choice, but I think we can all agree that whatever the business model, the front office got itself into a pretty bad situation, and the only good thing that can be said about the result is that they at least got a late 1st-rounder for Branch.
Click to expand...
Player morale in these situations is often WAY overstated. See Milloy, Lawyer.
 
pizzatyme said:
Just what we need, another post where someone questions the philosophy of the Pats and 50 posters who bash him with the biased support. The philosophy of the Pats worked for a few years. The "Business Model" that is employed is still a work in progress. Let's see how it plays out over the next 5 years.If the Pats make it back to the SB, then I will be first in line to support it. Until then, let's take a wait and see attitude.
Click to expand...
A few years? They've won 3 of 5 SB's, and went on the road last year, with 5 of 8 of the opening day secondary on IR, and gave Denver a good game, a game they could have won. The O-line was riddled with injuries. The offensive backfield was riddled, and you want to question the model? It's employed in Pittsburgh, they won the SB. It's used in Denver, they have 2 of the last 9. TB and Baltimore use it. That's 8 of the last 9, St. Louis has the other. They are the only team in the cap eara that didn't follow the model. I'd say the model works. This is one case where it played out in the media more. Milloy and Law played out in the media more as well, but for the most part, it 's pretty quiet, behind the scenes. The Pats look for players who want to win first, and try to get them there. That's generally why it's not too much of a problem to begin with. They're team guys. Troy Brown could be making twice what he's making, but he wanted to play in NE. He declined many deals a couple of years ago to come back and be the #3 or #4 WR and special teamer. I am a huge Troy Brown fan, and many times compared Branch to him. Branch is quicker and faster, but the same type of player, made better in the system. I don't think Branch is as good as Randel El. Of course I'm always happy to see other teams overpay. As for the Jets grievance from the Pats. Don't know the evidence on that, but obviously there is something. See how that plays out. This is a game, but it's also a business. To win at the game, you have to manage the business. That's why the Raiders are the worst team in the league. They've lost sight of that fact. So had the Chargers for a few years, though they're on track. So had the Saints. Bad business decisions hurt your team for years. Ask Dan Snyder about that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Besides the obvious results BB has put up there's another reason most Patriot fans totally support how the organization conducts it's business. They've seen business conducted other ways and watched it implode.

*The Pats under Pete Carroll were notorious for trying to keep players happy and went out of their way to give out bad contracts. Besides giving Bledsoe, Milloy and Law silly deals players like Lane and Rucci were given beyond foolish contracts. This tactic got the Pats in salary cap trouble. On the field there was zero accountability for bad performances. The end result was a team that looked like it was on the doorstep of some big things after their Super Bowl loss was slowly but surely run into the ground.

*The Celtics played the let's keep the players we love for too long game at the end of the Bird/Chief/McHale era. The Celtic teams of the mid 80's were as good as you get and the players were loved by the fans. Due to that the C's kept guys like Chief and McHale as their foundation even as their skills eroded. Combine that with the bad luck of Lenny Bias and some piss poor drafting and a once proud franchise hit the skids and really hasn't come back since.

*For years the Red Sox overpaid for talent and let the players run the show. For years the Sox couldn't get over the hump. Obviously a lot of that changed in 04 but for many years prior fans saw a formula that made a team good but never great.

So, until the results dictate otherwise why would any Patriot fan think this act is getting old. Pro sports is a results based business and this act has won three titles and four division crowns in five years. While last year didn't end the way Patriot fans hoped I'd love to see another example of team that had the injuries and loss of coaching staff they did that was able to get similar results. I know Philly didn't in 05 and Carolina didn't in 04 when they got the injury bug in a bad way.

All this doesn't mean that the Pats way of business couldn't eventually backfire. Anything's possible and times do change. Yet, right now their is zero evidence to show that's the path they are heading down. Like it or not these cold, heartless decisions are how you maintain a high level of play in today's NFL. It's one of the reasons the Pats haven't fallen on the hard times some other champions/very good teams during the salary cap era have.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bad_Mo said:
New England could have screwed Branch buy trading him to a team that won't be sniffing the playoffs for many years to come. He should gladly write the check to Kraft. Maybe while he is, it will sink in how much of a jackass he was in this whole thing.
Click to expand...
Well then he's a JA that just signed a $40m contract. What would Kraft have done if Branch had a career ending injury this season while playin for the Pats? Nothing of course, it's business. Branch owes the fines and will likely pay them soon enough. But I can't blame Branch for any of his actions. He and his agent were obviously correct in their estimates of his value. I don't consider him worth near what Seattle gave him, but he got his contract. His actions got him the contract he wanted, you might not like it but his ploy worked. And in a world where there are 10s of millions of dollars at stake, most of the players don't really care if some people don't like their actions when it works. I don't blame them.
 
Z-Dog said:
The receiving corps is possibly the weakest in the league, and player morale has been sorely damaged.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think we've upgraded our receivers with Branch/Givens leaving and getting Jackson/Gabriel. We're bigger, faster and more physical. Let's get them on the field and involved before we decide. I could be wrong, but our receiving corp is made by the QB and the system, and has been for 5 years. I've heard that they're the worst in the league every year, and yet they've come up w/ 3 rings. We've also still got Troy Brown. K. Faulk can catch the ball out of the backfield. Caldwell is a WR4, and they can't seem to make up their minds about Smith/Childress. It's not AZ, but it's as good as any they've had in any of the SB years. As for player morale. I heard the same argument the year Lawyer Milloy left. It's a hit, absolutely. But, the reality is that they had no choice but to let him go, and I'm sure that BB laid that out in the locker room. The player gossip has been coming from the Branch camp only, just like it did from the Milloy camp only. The BB camp is famous for being tight lipped about negotiations. Now that the issue is settled, the players will hear managements reasons for doing what they did, and the issue will be put to rest, and they will move forward. Remember what happened the year Milloy was cut? A 31-0 shellacking in Buffalo, and a SB run. I'm not predicting any such thing, but they'll get it together, and play with the heart of a winning organization, I have no doubt.
 
Link posted above

Three days after his mediocre performance in a 19-17 squeaker over the Buffalo Bills, the Patriots quarterback acknowledged his worries about whether Deion Branch would return distracted him from preparing for the game.

"Last week I spent a lot of energy thinking about it and, at the end of the week, it really wasted a lot of my time and a lot of my energy," Brady said Wednesday. "It was a big mental drain and I think it affected the way I played.".................

..................Brady watched other major contributors to the team leave in the offseason through free agency - kicker Adam Vinatieri, linebacker Willie McGinest and wide receiver David Givens.

Branch "meant a lot to me as a person and as a player. He meant a lot to this organization," Brady said. "I don't think I've become desensitized to it. I think it's tough every time.

"If it were up to me, none of these guys would have left."
Click to expand...
Didn't Brady take a contract offer from the Patriots that was significantly less than what he could have gotten elsewhere, because he wanted to leave the Patriots more money to pay other players on the team? Are the Patriots up against the salary cap and unable to do so?
 
pigskin pimp said:
Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.
Click to expand...
As a Vike's homer, I'm wondering how and why you rate Ziggy as a cheapskate. Last year, he gave Daunte Fumblepepper a raise when Daunte was under contract for another 8 or 9 more years. This year, he signs his starting LT and LG to contracts of almost $100 million. Gets one of the best FAs available in Hutchinson. Signs Chestor Taylor, Dwight Smith, Ben Leber, Tank Williams, Koren Robinson to decent FA deals.The only circumstance I can think of is not giving Brad Johnson a raise after Ziggy was already burned by Culpepper. Sure, a starting QB in the NFL should make more than what Johnson is making, but Johnson signed the deal, is 38 and only played half a season last year. After not knowing what he has or how long he'll last in a product that is Johnson, Ziggy shouldn't feel compelled to just throw him a couple of million dollars more to be a nice guy.If you want to throw your guys under the bus, feel free. But you don't have to sabotage other organizations in the mean time. The Vikes have enough problems after the McCombs/Tice fiasco.
Click to expand...
Kind of wondering what he is talking about with Zygi myself. He has seemed to be very generous this offseason to me.Besides the players that you mentioned, Zygi has stuck a ton of money into the organization itself with renovations to facilities and new coaches. I believe that Minnesota has one of if not the largest coaching staff at 22 coaches.If it is about Brad Johnson, I would expect a new deal at some point this season if he starts out well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that the one place the Patriots may get nailed at, is they are filing the grievance against the Jets for tampering. Their reason is that they said that the Jets only had the right to negotiate a contract and not discuss what they would offer the Patriots in a trade. The Patriots said that it hurt their chances to keep Branch by undercutting their ability to offer Branch a similar contract.

I'm not sure what the status is of Branch's grievances against the Patriots. My guess is that they're dropped. But Branch was arguing that the Patriots had bargained in bad faith and never intended to trade Branch. From the Patriots' reasoning about their tampering charge against the Jets, it would seem that there's a pretty good chance that it's true. The Patriots never intended to trade Branch at all, they just wanted him to go set the market for himself. I don't think that the Patriots believed that anyone would pay that much for him though and it all ended up blowing up in their face.

I seriously doubt that they win their grievance against the Jets. I do think that they have a chance to win their grievance against Branch though. If the CBA says that they can still get their fines after the player changes teams, it seems pretty cut and dry to me.

 
Wadsworth said:
Branch earned the fines, but part of the signing bonus? They got the services of decent NFL WR for 4 years very cheap by NFL standards(especially when you consdier they'll likely get at least the fine money back) and got a first round draft pick in return for a guy one year from free agency. But now they want some of his small signing bonus back as well? NE made out like bandits already with Branch. Asking for part of the bonus back seems like overkill.
Click to expand...
Asking for the bonus back is spite. Should Houston ask for part of Morency's bonus now that he is a Packer?As far as I am aware the Pats could have kept Branch (no arbitration forced them to trade him). So the situations are analogous
 
PMENFAN said:
Z-Dog said:
The receiving corps is possibly the weakest in the league, and player morale has been sorely damaged.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think we've upgraded our receivers with Branch/Givens leaving and getting Jackson/Gabriel.
Click to expand...
Maybe in future years (I hope so because of the note below), but not this year. You can't possibly expect 2 players currently battling injuries who also have not had much playing/practicing time in the system to be better than 2 players that played in the system for years.Note: I have both Gabriel and Jackson on my keeper league roster - but I'm not playing for this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wadsworth said:
Bad_Mo said:
New England could have screwed Branch buy trading him to a team that won't be sniffing the playoffs for many years to come. He should gladly write the check to Kraft. Maybe while he is, it will sink in how much of a jackass he was in this whole thing.
Click to expand...
Well then he's a JA that just signed a $40m contract. What would Kraft have done if Branch had a career ending injury this season while playin for the Pats? Nothing of course, it's business. Branch owes the fines and will likely pay them soon enough. But I can't blame Branch for any of his actions. He and his agent were obviously correct in their estimates of his value. I don't consider him worth near what Seattle gave him, but he got his contract. His actions got him the contract he wanted, you might not like it but his ploy worked. And in a world where there are 10s of millions of dollars at stake, most of the players don't really care if some people don't like their actions when it works. I don't blame them.
Click to expand...
You must be confused about the class of the organization, because after Robert Edwards tore up his knee playing sand football at the rookie game for the pro bowl festivities, the Pats paid him his full salary while he rehabbed his surgically repaired leg that it was a virtual certanty he would never be able to play football on again. IIRC, it was two seasons that he was out of football for. So, to say that the Pats would have let him go is ridiculous. They are a first class organization. Look at what they did for Rosie Colvin. They guy had a hip injury in his second game after they signed him as a FA. He missed his first season. He was very average, and very overpaid his next year, should have been cut, but they kept him, because they knew he was good, but hurt. He was better the next season, but still not 100%. Only at the end of last season was he coming on strong. He is back at 100% this season, adn their call in dealing with this player over the last 3 years has been rewarded with the explosive player they got when they signed him. My point is that your comments on the Branch hypothetical is ignorant on how they run the organization. They run the organization with class and dignity. They do not turn their back on the players who have been hurt, even if it's not a football injury. They have turned their backs on players who have turned their backs on the organization. That's business. But, to throw up a hypothetical that flies in the face of past actions is just wrong.

 
crnerblitz said:
As per the blogger...

Meanwhile, the Patriots have filed a grievance against their former receiver Deion Branch seeking approximately $730,000. The total is a combination of fines from Branch's holdout and a fifth of his original 1 million dollar signing bonus.

At what point do the players on this team decide that they have had enough of of Bill 'I am all powerful' Belichick? His summation of the talent that has surrounded him and paid the price for his superbowls over the last few years is nothing short of any other crazed strongman whom sacrifices everything and everyone in pursuit of his own ego trip winning. In the vein of all egomaniacs he professes a commitment to the team ideal, while hypocritically exploiting every opportunity to prove to the players that he is the Daddy and the reason they are where they are, Irrespective of the talent or facts surrounding the truth of the matter.

Trading away a player because you don’t want to pay him fair value for his services and then trying to recoup 'fines' imposed because of your own bad faith relationship in dealing with said player puts you several notches below Ziggy Wilf in my book. And in case i rubbed any Viking fans the wrong way over the Wilf reference, I apologize in advance, for your cheapskate owner that is.

End of rant from a former Patriots supporter.

Kevin
Click to expand...
fixed.
 
Boston said:
Besides the obvious results BB has put up there's another reason most Patriot fans totally support how the organization conducts it's business. They've seen business conducted other ways and watched it implode.

*The Pats under Pete Carroll were notorious for trying to keep players happy and went out of their way to give out bad contracts. Besides giving Bledsoe, Milloy and Law silly deals players like Lane and Rucci were given beyond foolish contracts. This tactic got the Pats in salary cap trouble. On the field there was zero accountability for bad performances. The end result was a team that looked like it was on the doorstep of some big things after their Super Bowl loss was slowly but surely run into the ground.

*The Celtics played the let's keep the players we love for too long game at the end of the Bird/Chief/McHale era. The Celtic teams of the mid 80's were as good as you get and the players were loved by the fans. Due to that the C's kept guys like Chief and McHale as their foundation even as their skills eroded. Combine that with the bad luck of Lenny Bias and some piss poor drafting and a once proud franchise hit the skids and really hasn't come back since.

*For years the Red Sox overpaid for talent and let the players run the show. For years the Sox couldn't get over the hump. Obviously a lot of that changed in 04 but for many years prior fans saw a formula that made a team good but never great.

So, until the results dictate otherwise why would any Patriot fan think this act is getting old. Pro sports is a results based business and this act has won three titles and four division crowns in five years. While last year didn't end the way Patriot fans hoped I'd love to see another example of team that had the injuries and loss of coaching staff they did that was able to get similar results. I know Philly didn't in 05 and Carolina didn't in 04 when they got the injury bug in a bad way.

All this doesn't mean that the Pats way of business couldn't eventually backfire. Anything's possible and times do change. Yet, right now their is zero evidence to show that's the path they are heading down. Like it or not these cold, heartless decisions are how you maintain a high level of play in today's NFL. It's one of the reasons the Pats haven't fallen on the hard times YET some other champions/very good teams during the salary cap era have.
Click to expand...
Fixed, IMO
 
fatness said:
Link posted above

Three days after his mediocre performance in a 19-17 squeaker over the Buffalo Bills, the Patriots quarterback acknowledged his worries about whether Deion Branch would return distracted him from preparing for the game.

"Last week I spent a lot of energy thinking about it and, at the end of the week, it really wasted a lot of my time and a lot of my energy," Brady said Wednesday. "It was a big mental drain and I think it affected the way I played.".................

..................Brady watched other major contributors to the team leave in the offseason through free agency - kicker Adam Vinatieri, linebacker Willie McGinest and wide receiver David Givens.

Branch "meant a lot to me as a person and as a player. He meant a lot to this organization," Brady said. "I don't think I've become desensitized to it. I think it's tough every time.

"If it were up to me, none of these guys would have left."
Click to expand...
Didn't Brady take a contract offer from the Patriots that was significantly less than what he could have gotten elsewhere, because he wanted to leave the Patriots more money to pay other players on the team? Are the Patriots up against the salary cap and unable to do so?
Click to expand...
This year's salary cap situation is the biggest area of exposure that BB/Pioli have. Prior to this year the Pats have always spent right to the cap. That's why the "cheap" label many try to throw out is just uninformed. While the Pats may not throw the money out on too many studs they've always had a very healthy middle class which is why they've been so deep in prior years. Also, Kraft is making money hand over fists and in the years prior to BB actually overpaid too many players.As a Pats fan I'm not happy with the fact they have so much cap space. Now, in fairness I understand about 6 mil was budgeted towards Branch this year. If that had happened that would still leaves about 6-8 mil open. Looking at this team if they sprinkled that amount around their roster it would have the potential to put them over the top this year. In years past the Pats have got a lot of bang for that type of money.

Since the Pats don't take a piss without a plan past history would indicate they have sound, business reason why this space isn't being used. It has nothing to do with being cheap. So, while this situation does bother me they have earned the benefit of the doubt that there's a sound business reason for doing this. Whether it's because they need it to extend other players like Koppen and Samuel or because they will adjust other contracts so next offseason is one they will be active in free agency like they were in 03 I do not know. I've also heard stories that they Seymour's money will actually hit pretty big this year but I have not seen that confirmed.

Since the Pats are so tightlipped the reason for this cap space is unknown. So, as events unfold it may make more and more sense. Yet, if the Pats have a mediocre year due to injuries and there's a ton of cap space sitting there at the end of the year and than they don't make big moves next offseason I do believe fans will not be happy. I think that is one scenario where the fans would definetly start to get restless. Yet, untill that happens you'll see the "in Bill we trust" mindset continue because so far it has done nothing but produce positive results.

 
KnowledgeReignsSupreme said:
BlueOnion said:
Patriots are the definition of what a team should be; this never gets old for me.
Click to expand...
From a how to effectively manage your salary cap to maximize wins perspective, yes. However, I don't like the precedent possibly being set that a team can recover a signing bonus from a player they traded, even if the player demanded a trade.
Click to expand...
With Branch being traded there is no hope that they will recover any signing bonus. The fines should be another matter, maybe the Pats are including the signing bonus so a settlement can be reached on the fines.
 
fatness said:
Link posted above

Three days after his mediocre performance in a 19-17 squeaker over the Buffalo Bills, the Patriots quarterback acknowledged his worries about whether Deion Branch would return distracted him from preparing for the game.

"Last week I spent a lot of energy thinking about it and, at the end of the week, it really wasted a lot of my time and a lot of my energy," Brady said Wednesday. "It was a big mental drain and I think it affected the way I played.".................

..................Brady watched other major contributors to the team leave in the offseason through free agency - kicker Adam Vinatieri, linebacker Willie McGinest and wide receiver David Givens.

Branch "meant a lot to me as a person and as a player. He meant a lot to this organization," Brady said. "I don't think I've become desensitized to it. I think it's tough every time.

"If it were up to me, none of these guys would have left."
Click to expand...
Didn't Brady take a contract offer from the Patriots that was significantly less than what he could have gotten elsewhere, because he wanted to leave the Patriots more money to pay other players on the team? Are the Patriots up against the salary cap and unable to do so?
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe the Pats are 10-15 million under the cap. This site is a fantastic resource.I think that this is the most interesting aspect of this story that noone is talking about. The Pats have breathing room under the cap and probably could have afforded to give Branch a better deal than they offered. Of course, you can argue all day long whether or not he would have been worth it...we shall see how things work out for Seattle.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
6 possible 1st round QBs in the '24 NFL Draft...they ain't all gonna make it
Replies
47
Views
2K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
EBF
Top 26 Rookies 2021
2 3
Replies
108
Views
15K
jdoggydogg
jdoggydogg
Faust
Dynasty & Redraft: TE Devin Asiasi, Patriots
2
Replies
72
Views
5K
Grahamburn
Grahamburn

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top