PDA

View Full Version : Deion Branch to KC?


KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:24 PM
. I think it's hard, but not impossible, to think that wide receiver Deion Branch is going to be on any team but the Patriots a week from now. The Patriots gave Branch and his agent permission to seek a trade after Branch turned down a three-year, $18.75 million contract extension with New England. Now, you'd think there'd be a few teams that would want Branch at a little more than $6.25 million per year (after he plays out this season at $1.04 million, a year the Patriots refuse to forgive), and there would be. But there's the matter of compensation.

Branch is 27. He's averaged 54 catches a year in his first four years as a Patriot. He has solid hands, good but not blinding speed, and has formed a strong bond with Tom Brady. He's been very good in the big games, combining for 21 catches for 276 yards in his two Super Bowls. No other receiver in history, including the great Jerry Rice, has had two Super Bowls as productive as Branch's. Branch entered the league as a second-round pick (65th overall) in 2002. It's doubtful the Patriots would entertain any offer for Branch but one that would end up being, at the lowest, a high second-round pick.

So if you're a team in need of a wide receiver, would you pay Branch more than $7 million a year -- and would you surrender your first- or high-second-round pick in next year's draft -- at a time when Branch would be way behind the eight ball in learning your offense in time to be an impact player in 2006? I think it's unlikely, though I do think that because so many teams are cap-rich right now, some team just might. Here are the teams, with cap money available as of the close of NFL business on Friday, that would think of making a play for Branch:

Minnesota ($10.4 million under the cap): After losing Koren Robinson, this is a team with a good veteran quarterback, Brad Johnson, and no reliable wideout. I doubt Minnesota will do something as bold as paying Branch and surrendering a first-round pick, but you just don't know how desperate owner Zygi Wilf is feeling after the Robinson embarrassment.

Buffalo ($8.8 million under): The Pats aren't afraid to deal within the division, as they showed with Drew Bledsoe. But maybe the bomb Peerless Price caught from J.P. Losman the other night will make Marv Levy think he can get by with Lee Evans and flotsam at wideout.

Green Bay ($8.3 million under): Talk about a perfect replacement for Javon Walker, who has yet to be replaced in the north country.

Kansas City ($12 million under): Herman Edwards saw him twice a year for the last four years, and his starters now are the aging Eddie Kennison and Samie Parker. That's a lot of money to be burning a hole in Carl Peterson's pocket.

New York Jets ($7.0 million under): They've taken everything else that wasn't nailed down in Foxboro. Why not Brady's favorite receiver?

Seattle ($10.0 million under): If I were Mike Holmgren, I'd do it. Darrell Jackson gets hurt every 10 minutes, and you know you're picking near the end of the first round almost no matter what happens in January. Take the shot. Trade the first-round pick and sign Branch long-term.

San Francisco ($10.1 million under): The Niners need players at almost any position.

Cleveland ($8.5 million under): Romeo Crennel knows Branch and loves him. But he also just bought Joe Jurevicius in free agency, and a threesome of Braylon Edwards, Jurevicius and Dennis Northcutt hardly is a weak position group on a team in need of help elsewhere.

One final note, as one pro personnel man told me on Sunday night, with at least four wide receivers -- Georgia Tech's Calvin Johnson, USC's Dwayne Jarrett, Notre Dame's Jeff Samardzija and Ohio State's Ted Ginn -- likely to go in the first round next April, could a receiver-needy team scotch-tape its group together this year, then pick one of these guys (with a bigger upside, perhaps, than Branch) in 2007? In the end, I think Branch is going to be sitting there a week from now, having to make a deal with New England if he wants to play football in September.

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:25 PM
I did not know we were 12 million under. If that is the case should we go after Branch?

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 01:27 PM
i doubt it ... if they get Branch they better be ready to give Kennison a new contract as well.

2 new contracts for receivers ....... :shake:


i think Herm has other priorities than WR

defense and run the ball > WR

MyChiefConcern
08-28-2006, 01:28 PM
We need to spend the money on a fullback who can actually play football, before we need another WR.

Samie and Eddie look like they're going to be fine.

CoMoChief
08-28-2006, 01:28 PM
I say we call up Jeff George and offer him a 7 year deal with a huge signing bonus.



Still pisses me off we didnt land Rocky Benard.

ncognito
08-28-2006, 01:28 PM
I sure hope not. He's a solid WR for sure, but not worth the picks or contract.

Count Zarth
08-28-2006, 01:29 PM
There's no way we're 12 million under the cap.

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:29 PM
i doubt it ... if they get Branch they better be ready to give Kennison a new contract as well.

2 new contracts for receivers ....... :shake:


i think Herm has other priorities than WR

defense and run the ball > WR


I think we have already addressed those two areas

Larry Johnson, Ty Law, Hali, and Pollard ring a bell.


If we have the moneyu we should go after him. He is young

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 01:31 PM
I think we have already addressed those two areas

Larry Johnson, Ty Law, Hali, and Pollard ring a bell.


If we have the moneyu we should go after him. He is young
so you think our running game and defense are set?

Guru
08-28-2006, 01:32 PM
The Patriots are not letting Branch go. Why is this coming up again.

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:33 PM
so you think our running game and defense are set?


Yes.

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:35 PM
so you think our running game and defense are set?

Why do you think our running game is not set? You ar ethe first person that I know has said that.

Our d has the people if there was a concern it would be the D tackles


We have Hali and Allen on the ends

We have Mitchell, Fox, Johnson and Bell.

We have Surtain, Law, Pollard and Page *Wesley and Knight

htismaqe
08-28-2006, 01:37 PM
so you think our running game and defense are set?

Set? Yep.

Good? That remains to be seen.

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 01:38 PM
Yes.
kyle turley against a power rusher?

Sampson against a speed pass rusher?

our 2 slow safeties providing deep help along the sideline?

ronnie cruz at fullback?

Defensive tackles?



you have more confidence in these things than alot of people.

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 01:40 PM
Set? Yep.

Good? That remains to be seen.
heh ...


i guess since we are talking about adding players to improve that Good = set is a given.


if we are going to upgrade anything i would think that Herm would try and upgrade offensive or defensive tackle. :shrug:

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 01:42 PM
kyle turley against a power rusher?

Sampson against a speed pass rusher?

our 2 slow safeties providing deep help along the sideline?

ronnie cruz at fullback?

Defensive tackles?



you have more confidence in these things that alot of people.


No. not really


Those two will do ifne.

Pollard and Page will be starting by mid season

Cruz? T Rich only was in on 25 percent of the plays last year.

BucEyedPea
08-28-2006, 01:46 PM
I have a feeling Branch may not get what he' thinks he's worth on the market. That plus how well the Pats are playing in pre-season without him, may also open his eyes a little more and the window of opportunity is short.

Patriots are in the driver's seat if you ask me. They don't have to trade him or accept a first if they don't want. On the other hand if they get s/g too good to refuse, they just may spring for it instead of keeping a disgruntled player.

I think Branch's agent may wind up burnin' him.

chop
08-28-2006, 01:47 PM
If it was just a money thing then I wouldn't mind having Branch but it isn't. They want a high draft pick for him and I don't think he is worth the pick. Of course if the pick was going to be used for a Siavii type player then I say go for it.

htismaqe
08-28-2006, 01:48 PM
heh ...

i guess since we are talking about adding players to improve that Good = set is a given.

if we are going to upgrade anything i would think that Herm would try and upgrade offensive or defensive tackle. :shrug:

Personally, I don't think we have a problem at OT. We have last year's starter returning at RT and Turley has done EXTREMELY well given the circumstance.

At DT, there's simply nobody available that's better than what we have.

Branch is a clear upgrade at WR, something that really isn't available at offensive or defensive tackle.

ChiefsCountry
08-28-2006, 01:54 PM
Personally, I don't think we have a problem at OT. We have last year's starter returning at RT and Turley has done EXTREMELY well given the circumstance.

At DT, there's simply nobody available that's better than what we have.

Branch is a clear upgrade at WR, something that really isn't available at offensive or defensive tackle.

That is exactly what I think as well.

Get Branch this year and show Kennison the door next.

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 02:00 PM
Personally, I don't think we have a problem at OT. We have last year's starter returning at RT and Turley has done EXTREMELY well given the circumstance.

At DT, there's simply nobody available that's better than what we have.

Branch is a clear upgrade at WR, something that really isn't available at offensive or defensive tackle.
hope your right








jabberwocky

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 02:02 PM
That is exactly what I think as well.

Get Branch this year and show Kennison the door next.


Why show him the door?

Basileus777
08-28-2006, 02:03 PM
i doubt it ... if they get Branch they better be ready to give Kennison a new contract as well.

Why? If we got Branch, Kennison would lose all his leverage and would have no chance of getting paid. Plus with Branch he would be the #2 wr and his current contact pays him like a #2.

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 02:15 PM
Why? If we got Branch, Kennison would lose all his leverage and would have no chance of getting paid. Plus with Branch he would be the #2 wr and his current contact pays him like a #2.
you actually think Kennison is gonna see it that way?

Logical
08-28-2006, 02:16 PM
No other receiver in history, including the great Jerry Rice, has had two Super Bowls as productive as Branch's.


Are you sure about that?
1994 SB vs San Diego 10 catches 149 yards 3 TDs
1988 SB vs Cinci 11 catches 215 yards 1 TD MVP of SB
1989 SB vs 7 catches 148 yards and 3 TDs

I would say that has Rice far surpassing Branch if you combine 94 and 88 for catches, 94/88 for yards, 94/89 for yards, or 88 and 89 for yards. Not to mention TDs where Rice absolutely kills Branch.

ChiefsCountry
08-28-2006, 02:18 PM
Why show him the door?

He wants big money, that and another year Parker should develop fine especially if we had Branch.

Cochise
08-28-2006, 02:19 PM
$12 million under? What website is this from?

Chief Chief
08-28-2006, 02:27 PM
Branch had big numbers in the SBs because he was going against the Philadelphia secondary of Lito Sheppard, Sheldon Brown, Michael Lewis, and Brian Dawkins, and the Carolina secondary of Deon Grant, Mike Minter, Reggie Howard, and Ricky Manning (not exactly 'household' names). NE passed the ball more times than they ran it, probably because their #1 RBs averaged less than 85 yards in both games.

Branch is a strong #2 WR but doesn't have all of the skills of a solid #1 WR. He's not worth $7M/season plus the loss of a #1 draft pick next year.

PastorMikH
08-28-2006, 02:34 PM
We need to spend the money on a fullback who can actually play football, before we need another WR.

Samie and Eddie look like they're going to be fine.



The one we had went to someone else cheap. I think it would be sad to have to pay someone else more than Carl was willing to pay T-Rich.

PastorMikH
08-28-2006, 02:36 PM
No way I'd give up a first or second round pick for him. Now that we have a HC that showed us this year that he can actually draft, I'd prefer he keep the picks.

Cochise
08-28-2006, 02:39 PM
Branch had big numbers in the SBs because he was going against the Philadelphia secondary of Lito Sheppard, Sheldon Brown, Michael Lewis, and Brian Dawkins, and the Carolina secondary of Deon Grant, Mike Minter, Reggie Howard, and Ricky Manning (not exactly 'household' names). NE passed the ball more times than they ran it, probably because their #1 RBs averaged less than 85 yards in both games.

Branch is a strong #2 WR but doesn't have all of the skills of a solid #1 WR. He's not worth $7M/season plus the loss of a #1 draft pick next year.

So you don't think the Eagles' secondary is any good? Two of those guys went to the pro bowl last year. And Brown is no slouch either.

Just because they aren't household names to you doesn't mean they suck. :stupid:

Basileus777
08-28-2006, 02:42 PM
Branch had big numbers in the SBs because he was going against the Philadelphia secondary of Lito Sheppard, Sheldon Brown, Michael Lewis, and Brian Dawkins, and the Carolina secondary of Deon Grant, Mike Minter, Reggie Howard, and Ricky Manning (not exactly 'household' names). NE passed the ball more times than they ran it, probably because their #1 RBs averaged less than 85 yards in both games.

Branch is a strong #2 WR but doesn't have all of the skills of a solid #1 WR. He's not worth $7M/season plus the loss of a #1 draft pick next year.

Are you implying that a secondary with three pro-bowlers and one other good player (the eagles) was weak?

Chief Faithful
08-28-2006, 02:43 PM
.

Kansas City ($12 million under): Herman Edwards saw him twice a year for the last four years, and his starters now are the aging Eddie Kennison and Samie Parker. That's a lot of money to be burning a hole in Carl Peterson's pocket.


I think it is funny that my not adding an adjective before "Samie Parker" the writer effectively call Parker aging.

Why is Branch out of favor in New England? Is this another example of building a team on a tight budget? I like Branch and would love to see him in the Red & Gold.

Considering Kennison is wanting more money it may be hard to bring in Branch and not re-negotiate Kennison's contract.

hawkchief
08-28-2006, 03:00 PM
With the obvious "downgrade" of the O line this season, a top-flight receiver to go along with Eddie could really take some big-time pressure off of everyone on offense, especially Turley, Trent & LJ. I can't justify a #1 for Branch, but for a #2, it gets pretty interesting.

KingPriest2
08-28-2006, 03:09 PM
He wants big money, that and another year Parker should develop fine especially if we had Branch.


Not really. He wants to be paid in which he deserves. Kennison is doing fine . But if we had 3 good WRs that would be great maybe 2 years downthe road not next year.

Rausch
08-28-2006, 03:13 PM
Why? If we got Branch, Kennison would lose all his leverage and would have no chance of getting paid. Plus with Branch he would be the #2 wr and his current contact pays him like a #2.

Kennison is coming off a 1,000 yard season and is among the league leaders in YPC over the last 4 years.

Did you have a bowl full of stupid for breakfast?...

JBucc
08-28-2006, 03:17 PM
Kennison for Branch straight up. They can throw in Richard Seymour if they want.

Amnorix
08-28-2006, 03:20 PM
I think it is funny that my not adding an adjective before "Samie Parker" the writer effectively call Parker aging.

Why is Branch out of favor in New England? Is this another example of building a team on a tight budget? I like Branch and would love to see him in the Red & Gold.

Considering Kennison is wanting more money it may be hard to bring in Branch and not re-negotiate Kennison's contract.


He's not out of favor. He's holding out for more money, and we can't agree on a new contract. That's mainly because the Pats are stubborn as hell in sticking to the values they assign to players.

And it's also partly because with Brady, we don't need elite receivers. We won the first Super Bowl in '01 with Troy Brown, another starter (not sure who it was -- David Patten mebbe) and Fred "Boom Boom" Coleman as the #2.

The Pats just don't operate by throwing big money at most positions.

Basileus777
08-28-2006, 03:32 PM
Kennison is coming off a 1,000 yard season and is among the league leaders in YPC over the last 4 years.

Did you have a bowl full of stupid for breakfast?...

What is Kennison going to do? Hold out? He has no leverage, we would be fine playing with Branch and Parker, and no team is going to want to trade for an old wideout that wants more money.

Rausch
08-28-2006, 03:35 PM
What is Kennison going to do? Hold out? He has no leverage, we would be fine playing with Branch and Parker, and no team is going to want to trade for an old wideout that wants more money.

Parker is NOT on par with EK. Parker is NOT the better WR.

If anyone should be replaced it's Parker...

Basileus777
08-28-2006, 03:40 PM
Parker is NOT on par with EK. Parker is NOT the better WR.

If anyone should be replaced it's Parker...

I agree with you on this. But I don't see that giving EK enough leverage to get another contract.

Rausch
08-28-2006, 03:43 PM
I agree with you on this. But I don't see that giving EK enough leverage to get another contract.

I don't care about his contract, I'm just commenting on the idea of replacing/trading/cutting our best WR...

Anyong Bluth
08-28-2006, 03:47 PM
Someone said it before, while I doubt they are 12 mil under the cap, if they spend any money on anything, it will be a DT that gets dumped after cuts.

If they are that far under the cap, I'd wish we would have kept T.Rich- even though his payout was way over the top and Carl was no where in the wrong in not matching it based on FB pay scales.

Mr. Laz
08-28-2006, 06:13 PM
i think we should contact Branch and negotiate a huge, huge contract ........ i mean agree to give him a bigger contract then Marvin harrison etc.

a franchise wide receivers contract (50 million)



and then have everything breakdown and fall apart when we can't "get New England to agree to a fair trade"


ROFL ROFL


give branch a taste then have the pats yank it away.


he'd hold out all year LMAO

NJ Chief Fan
08-28-2006, 08:42 PM
no to branch, i dont want no midget WR unless his name is steve smith, we should of worked on getting stallworth



DAMMIT CARL! :cuss:

Mecca
08-28-2006, 09:45 PM
Someone said it before, while I doubt they are 12 mil under the cap, if they spend any money on anything, it will be a DT that gets dumped after cuts.

If they are that far under the cap, I'd wish we would have kept T.Rich- even though his payout was way over the top and Carl was no where in the wrong in not matching it based on FB pay scales.

There won't be any DT's get cut that will get anymore than the league min........teams don't randomly cut good lineman. So even if they do that it would have 0 impact on if they could get Branch or not.