i found this to be a well thought out analysis (regardless if i agree or not) in a different thread, worthy to be shared in this one:from this_is_not_VRR:I did the math and it doesn't add up.Some things to consider:1-Branch had 725 yards and 4 TD's last season in just 13 starts.2-Hasselbeck was only on the field throwing him the ball for 8.5 of those 13 starts.3-Branch didn't have the benefit of training camp last year so he,a) didn't know the offenseb) didn't get a chance to work on his chemistry with Hasselbeck4-Branch was playing out of position. He was stuck playing the "X" position, which is on the weak side of the formation (non-tight-end side) and normally reserved for bigger, stronger receivers in the West Coast offense.Now fast forward to this year:1-Branch is finally comfortable with the playbook.2-Branch and Hasselbeck have been putting in long hours working on their chemistry (both players stayed in Seattle during the off-season).3-Jackson is gone and Branch is moving to the "Z" position, an outside spot on the tight-end side that will allow him to better utilize his speed and quickness.4-The Seahawks offense figures to be much more high powered than it was last year when everything that could go wrong, did go wrong.If that doesn't convince you that Branch will put up excellent numbers this season, perhaps these quotes will:QUOTE"I expect his TDs to go way up," Seahawks quarterback Matt Hasselbeck said."You'd watch one of our practices and it was almost unfair, Darrell Jackson was catching almost every ball," Hasselbeck said. "It's how the [West Coast] system was designed and you look back at those who played there in Green Bay and San Francisco: Robert Brooks, Sterling Sharpe, Antonio Freeman, Jerry Rice. I think there are certain plays Mike Holmgren likes to call because it reminds him of good plays when he was coaching in Green Bay and San Francisco. He loves to say, 'Z-in.' He doesn't love to say 'X-in' as much."QUOTEOffensive coordinator Gil Haskell said that it's unfair to expect any player to catch a lot of passes based purely on his position. He pointed out that, while Jackson caught a lot of balls as the flanker, there have also been also plenty of receptions that went to slot receiver Bobby Engram and Seattle's split ends.But Haskell did admit that a receiver with Branch's talent can really thrive as a flanker in the West Coast system."In this position, if you're good, you'll catch a lot," Haskell said. "With the 49ers, Jerry Rice caught a lot of passes. Sterling Sharpe in Green Bay. When I was with the Panthers, Muhsin Muhammad had a great year. QUOTE"It's important to (have) a go-to receiver or a leading receiver," coach Mike Holmgren said. " Typically, our flanker sees the ball a little bit more. Deion's been fine in practice, and I'm hopeful that he'll be that guy."QUOTEYou couldn't wipe the smile off of Branch's face when talking about how much more comfortable he is now because he totally understands the Seattle playbook and had a full off-season with Hasselbeck under his belt. And the rapport was on display during practice as the pair hooked up on several pretty plays. But what was most impressive was how the duo stayed after practice to work for half an hour.I fully expect Branch to finish the season with 6-9 TD's and close to 1,200 rec. yards. You're dinging Branch unfairly. He didn't know the offense, and he was playing out of position last year. You can't expect a tiny guy like Branch to thrive playing at the X spot when it's a position that requires a big, strong guy. Hackett will man that spot now, and Branch will move to the Z position where he belongs.I'd also argue that you're dwelling too much on his career numbers in New England and not taking into account how encouraging his numbers last year in Seattle actually were. 725 yards and four TD's in just 13 starts last year is better than it sounds when you consider that he didn't know the playbook, Hasselbeck was injured, they had no time to work on their chemistry, and he was playing out of position...So keeping all of those significant things in mind, why is that you're only penciling him in for ~800 yards and 5 TD's?And while your perception of Branch may be as just a very good #2 type of guy, the reality of the situation is that Branch is stepping into a role in Holmgren's west coast offense that ALWAYS produces the #1 WR. As Hasselbeck said in that earlier quote, it's almost unfair how much Holmgren's offense favors the Z WR.And just to clarify, I think very highly of Hackett. His upside is off of the charts,and he's clearly the better red zone/big play threat. That said, he's not even going to come close to catching Branch in terms of receptions or yards. And while everyone seems to be dismissing Burleson, I will say this--the battle between Hackett and Burleson is a lot closer than people think. Hackett's not going to lose the job to Burleson, but Burleson has done enough to warrant a lot more playing time than he had last year, and that extra playing time will cut into Hackett's production more than it will anyone else. Alos, Holmgren has been stressing all summer that the only thing that he knows for sure is that "Deion Branch will be the starting flanker and that Bobby Engram will play."Bottom line: Branch is a sure thing.
