PDA

View Full Version : DP: Marshall deserves new deal


BabyTO
06-18-2009, 03:15 AM
Krieger: Marshall deserves new deal
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
Posted: 06/18/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

It's rare that a big-league sports team shows as much enthusiasm for running off its star players as your all-new Denver Broncos.

First it was the star quarterback. Now, the star wide receiver.

On the bright side, that pretty much takes care of their star players.

Tell you what: Team Kumbaya better have a whole lotta karma going on this year because generally speaking, teams with star players do better than teams without them.

And Brandon Marshall is a star. But don't take my word for it. Listen to Chauncey Billups, who wanted to know what was up with the Broncos when I ran into him this week.

"They can't be letting Brandon Marshall go," he said. "Not after Cutler. No way."

Well, you never know, but Marshall packing up his belongings at Dove Valley and saying goodbye on his website don't seem like good signs.

Here's a news flash for the torch and pitchfork crowd: Like it or not, Marshall is underpaid. Big-time.

It has become fashionable to denigrate his remarkable receiving numbers with one qualification or another, so consider this: In the 63-year history of the Cleveland Browns, one of the teams now reportedly interested in Marshall, they never have had a receiver catch 100 passes in a season.

Not Ozzie Newsome. Not Kellen Winslow Jr. Not Braylon Edwards. Never.

Marshall caught 104 last season, third in the NFL, with a salary cap number of $526,824. Chump change by Not For Long standards. By my count, 33 members of the Broncos carried bigger numbers last season.

Sometime this season, his fourth, Marshall will reach the average career span of an NFL player. Thanks to a deserved Pro Bowl appearance, his pay increases to just more than $2 million this year, still nowhere near the salary neighborhood of the league's top receivers. Buffalo's Lee Evans signed a four-year, $37 million extension last year.

Not only that, with one year remaining on his rookie contract, Marshall's request for a new deal complies with the Broncos' traditional policy. This was former coach Mike Shanahan's argument when Clinton Portis demanded a new deal after the 2003 season. The Broncos, Shanahan said, renegotiate contracts only in their final year, not before. Unlike Portis at the time, Marshall is in his final year.

Of course, this is football, where contracts are not guaranteed, so even Shanahan's alleged policy had more holes than last season's defensive line. The Broncos renegotiate player contracts downward all the time. Here's how it works: "Take a pay cut or you're gone." The club objects only to renegotiating them upward.

So the notion that it is somehow morally objectionable for Marshall to demand market value after two sensational seasons in a notoriously short-lived profession is nothing more than propaganda from an organization looking to use its fan base to paint a player into a corner.

Somehow, Marshall's off-field issues have become a justification to cheat him out of a fair salary on the field. As Billups pointed out, any new Marshall contract is likely to contain lots of off-field behavior provisions. The Broncos or his next team can protect themselves against off-field issues while paying him fairly for on-field performance.

Sillier still is the contention that Marshall is being disloyal to the Broncos by rehabbing from hip surgery in Orlando, Fla., rather than at the Broncos' facility. Was Tom Brady disloyal to the Patriots when he rehabbed from knee surgery in California?

The fact is the Broncos' medical staff missed Marshall's hip injury, which caused him trouble last season. He admitted in November his toughness had been questioned within the organization. Why couldn't he practice if team doctors said he wasn't hurt?

It was only after his Pro Bowl season that Marshall consulted with doctors outside the organization and learned he needed hip surgery. Dr. Marc Philippon, who performed Alex Rodriguez's recent hip surgery, performed Marshall's at the end of March.

Put yourself in his shoes. Would you trust the Broncos to look after your interests at this point? When he said he was hurt, they denied it and impugned his toughness to get him to play. After he played through what turned out to be a significant injury, they refuse to pay him anything close to his market value.

You don't have to like Brandon Marshall. You don't have to admire him. But you have to admit that he is one of the few remaining stars on the Broncos' roster.

He has earned a new contract on the playing field. If the Broncos won't give it to him, he has every right to request a trade. And then, presumably, the new Broncos will be well on their way to what they want: a team without any offensive stars at all.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_12615670?source=rss

SouthStndJunkie
06-18-2009, 03:16 AM
Rack that take.

HILife
06-18-2009, 03:54 AM
Once again, everyone thinks they have all the answers when they really know nothing. It's already been stated that he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Now maybe the contract was to low, I don't know. One thing I do know is no one really know the full complete reason why he wants to leave and until he or the team says it no one will know.

BabyTO
06-18-2009, 04:03 AM
Once again, everyone thinks they have all the answers when they really know nothing. It's already been stated that he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Now maybe the contract was to low, I don't know. One thing I do know is no one really know the full complete reason why he wants to leave and until he or the team says it no one will know.

Is that official or just speculation? I don't think they actually did. His agent wasn't negotiating with them. Marshall was rehabbing. Then he showed up suddenly and after like 1-2 hours he left again.

FireFly
06-18-2009, 04:34 AM
Once again, everyone thinks they have all the answers when they really know nothing. It's already been stated that he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Now maybe the contract was to low, I don't know. One thing I do know is no one really know the full complete reason why he wants to leave and until he or the team says it no one will know.

I didn't know that they HAD offered him a new contract?

Even though I'm sure he wants one, I've never even heard it officially reported that he'd asked for a new contract? Only that he'd asked to be traded?

Nevertheless, I'm in the camp that believes he does deserve a new contract, a fairly big money contract! One that is also full of protection clauses and escalators. One that protects the Broncos as well as giving Brandon the chance at the pay day his on the field performance earns him.

Letting him walk at this point would be a disaster.

HILife
06-18-2009, 04:42 AM
Is that official or just speculation? I don't think they actually did. His agent wasn't negotiating with them. Marshall was rehabbing. Then he showed up suddenly and after like 1-2 hours he left again.

It was in one of earlier threads. Something about Adam Sheffler reporting that Bowlen offered a contract, but got turned down. The OP said it was on KOA radio.

HILife
06-18-2009, 04:45 AM
I didn't know that they HAD offered him a new contract?

Even though I'm sure he wants one, I've never even heard it officially reported that he'd asked for a new contract? Only that he'd asked to be traded?

Nevertheless, I'm in the camp that believes he does deserve a new contract, a fairly big money contract! One that is also full of protection clauses and escalators. One that protects the Broncos as well as giving Brandon the chance at the pay day his on the field performance earns him.

Letting him walk at this point would be a disaster.

It was in a earlier thread about Marshall. The OP said Adam Sheffler on KOA radio said he was offered one by Bowlen and turned it down.

I agree with you. He does deserve a new contract, but one that protects the team if he does something stupid again.

Ratboy
06-18-2009, 05:04 AM
Boom.

Lolad
06-18-2009, 05:05 AM
It was in a earlier thread about Marshall. The OP said Adam Sheffler on KOA radio said he was offered one by Bowlen and turned it down.

I agree with you. He does deserve a new contract, but one that protects the team if he does something stupid again.

No, he was NOT offered a new contract. It has been reported that Bowlen told him to play this year on his current contract. It's stupid!

Ratboy
06-18-2009, 05:09 AM
Watch out in the near future. I would not be surprised if Bowlen pays Marshall within a week.

You just can't destroy an offense in 1 offseason and think you can come out with a better record then the previous year.

Brandon Marshall does need to get paid.

bronco_boi_5280
06-18-2009, 05:58 AM
Pay the man!

McDman
06-18-2009, 06:04 AM
Sure we can all agree that he should be paid, but is it really worth the risk of paying someone that is one incident away from an eight game suspension?

That doesn't even include the fact that he just had hip surgery and for al we know he is not 100% yet.

Let's not forget about his hand and the man dropped passes.

Ratboy
06-18-2009, 06:12 AM
Sure we can all agree that he should be paid, but is it really worth the risk of paying someone that is one incident away from an eight game suspension?

That doesn't even include the fact that he just had hip surgery and for al we know he is not 100% yet.

Let's not forget about his hand and the man dropped passes.

The man also caught 104 receptions with a bad hand? I know he said it was not 100%, but seriously? You act like he caught 80 balls and was thrown at 200 times.

Brandon Marshall is one of the best young receivers in the game and we're going to trade him away? He can catch, run, and block.

He should have been paid when he asked.

oubronco
06-18-2009, 06:13 AM
Once again, everyone thinks they have all the answers when they really know nothing. It's already been stated that he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Now maybe the contract was to low, I don't know. One thing I do know is no one really know the full complete reason why he wants to leave and until he or the team says it no one will know.

McDaniels

oubronco
06-18-2009, 06:14 AM
The man also caught 104 receptions with a bad hand? I know he said it was not 100%, but seriously? You act like he caught 80 balls and was thrown at 200 times.

Brandon Marshall is one of the best young receivers in the game and we're going to trade him away? He can catch, run, and block.

He should have been paid when he asked.

AMEN Brotha tell it to the crowd

chrisp
06-18-2009, 06:15 AM
I don't think that Marshall is wrong to ask for a new contract, or to hold out. Its personal contract business and that is down to the individual and the organisation to sort out whever way they can.

Thing is, the only thing that's been said publicly is that Marshall wants a trade. The rest is just speculation.

You see for me, if it really is all about money, then i don't have a problem with it. Players have a right to hold out, its the only leverage they have in such a situatuon. I want Brandon playing for us, but I respect the fact that he has a right to seek maximum market return on his labour.

The only slight shadow of doubt, is the question of whether or not there is more than just the contract issue that is behind his request for a trade. Has he fallen out with the new regime as Cutler did? If so, is he following Cutler's example? Personally I think that this more of a concern than the contract issue.

if it is just the contract issue, then I think we'll play hardball and he'll be back with the team eventually. If not this could turn ugly....

Paladin
06-18-2009, 06:16 AM
This is why the Broncos, like the Pats, have restricted the press/media access to the team and FO. Hysterical handwringers abound. Things get overblown in the "opinion" pieces that too many of the gullible hero-worshippers take as gospel truths. The uninformed masses get bent out of shape over details that may or may not be accuratly "reported".

But, wth. Carry on as I know the masses will......

TheElusiveKyleOrton
06-18-2009, 06:18 AM
Pay dees man hees money.

http://www.cobrabrigade.com/photos/teddy%20kgb.jpg

Broncoman13
06-18-2009, 06:19 AM
Man I'm torn on this one. BMarsh is fun to watch. Apa would agree with this all day long, in Camp/practice/games/whatever field he's on... he's a 100%er. Dude flat out brings it and he does what he needs to do to win games. Montrose and I were talking the other day. I remember the home '07 Raiders game vividly. Marshall put us on his shoulders and willed us to the win. Montrose's memory was the '07 game vs the Jags, where Marshall was juking, spinning, stiff arming and throwing would be tacklers off of him. He was a beast and wouldn't go down. So that got us talking about last year and his play seemingly dropped off. Remember the 18 catches in week two vs SD? How many yards after the catch did he have in that game? Last year was not the typical BMarsh and he still had great numbers. The hip also played a huge role. He was noticeably bothered by the injury and wasn't the same player. I remember thinking during the Dolphins game that he looked so slow that maybe he shouldn't be playing.

Then there is the off field stuff. That makes this hard. If I am the Broncos I acquiesce to the injury stuff. Brandon played injured last year and it wasn't the arm that slowed him down, it was a hip injury suffered playing football. So I would be willing to take on the injury risk b/c I have a player that has taken that risk for me. As for the off field stuff, the Broncos have the right and Brandon should be okay with clauses that protect the buyers if he is suspended for off field infractions. I think the best way to do this is a contract similar to TOs. Each year is worth $3 to $5m and each year he gets a roster bonus of $2m. Then some reachable incentives for yards, TDs, and other typical receiver stats. So, if he is playing the full season, catching 80-100 balls for 1200+ yards, scoring 10TDs, and going to the Pro-bowl he deserves Larry Fitzgerald type $$$. I think the incentives should allow him to make $9-10m a year... if he's playing like a top 5 receiver he deserves the money. If he's not, well then he'll just have to make due with his $5 or 6m per year.

Ratboy
06-18-2009, 06:19 AM
and for those who will say, "but.. we have Eddie Royal!"

How do you think Eddie Royal will fair with double coverage? We NEED a player like Brandon Marshall to allow a player like Eddie Royal to become even better.

Brandon and Eddie both bring a lot to the table. Brandon takes another defender, leaving one of the other receivers open.

We already lost a big part of our offensive production in Jay Cutler, now they may not pay Brandon Marshall?

This front office is a ****ing joke.

This will be the straw that breaks the camels back.

Enjoy getting so frustrated with the Broncos that you rather do lawn work on Sunday afternoon.

cutthemdown
06-18-2009, 06:25 AM
Broncos just screwed on Marshall because of how Marshall has acted and the things he has done.

He isn't honest all the time IMO and has a problem with beating women. The whole slipped on a Mcdonalds bag seemed like a huge lie and I think that also worries them.

The fact he is coming off surgery is also a huge concern.

For Broncos they have his rights still for a yr, then he will only be unrestricted FA next yr without a new CBA. Broncos holding some cards and I think they should play those.

But if brandon can get a team to give a first and a 3rd then you do it.

cutthemdown
06-18-2009, 06:26 AM
Also though it's not my money so I wouldn't care if they gave him a huge deal. There is a good chance Marshall gets healthy and goes on to have 5-6 great more yrs.

kamakazi_kal
06-18-2009, 06:29 AM
Also though it's not my money so I wouldn't care if they gave him a huge deal. There is a good chance Marshall gets healthy and goes on to have 5-6 great more yrs.

too bad it'll be in another uniform.

cutthemdown
06-18-2009, 06:39 AM
Also though it's not my money so I wouldn't care if they gave him a huge deal. There is a good chance Marshall gets healthy and goes on to have 5-6 great more yrs.

too bad it'll be in another uniform.

Well then there will be a good chance he get's suspended, hurt again, and Broncos picks they get play great.

Which is why I am done worrying about it. Players come and go so fast who knows who will be this yrs eddie royal.

Moreno may be a stud and make you forget all about Marshall and Cutler for a bit.

I like Marshall but he is a risky player to give a big huge contract to before you have to. Broncos holding all the cards.

Man-Goblin
06-18-2009, 06:39 AM
Not only that, with one year remaining on his rookie contract, Marshall's request for a new deal complies with the Broncos' traditional policy. This was former coach Mike Shanahan's argument when Clinton Portis demanded a new deal after the 2003 season. The Broncos, Shanahan said, renegotiate contracts only in their final year, not before. Unlike Portis at the time, Marshall is in his final year.


Different leadership now, so this argument doesn't really hold water. However, the most recent example of of a player getting an extension in his final year would be D.J. Williams, who got his extension on September 7th after attending the offseason program. If Marshall showed up, was patient, and showed he was a happy camper, it's likely that he would see a new contract (also, see Casey Wiegmann).

Of course, this is football, where contracts are not guaranteed, so even Shanahan's alleged policy had more holes than last season's defensive line. The Broncos renegotiate player contracts downward all the time. Here's how it works: "Take a pay cut or you're gone." The club objects only to renegotiating them upward.


This is simply false. The only guy I can remember taking a pay cut to remain with the Broncos was John Lynch last year, and he ended up being gone anyway. Most of the renegotiations, from what I remember, were for cap reasons, moving guaranteed money around, and whatnot.

I'm not saying that Marshall doesn't deserve a new contract. In fact, I would probably prefer it at this point, as long as it is protected. Perhaps they have discussed the proposition of a contract with behavioral clauses in it, and that is what pissed Marshall off. Perhaps he wants more years than the Broncos want to give. Or, perhaps the hip is in worse shape than we know. I just know something seems fishy to me in this whole deal, and I don't think we're getting the whole story.

Broncoman13
06-18-2009, 06:40 AM
Pay dees man hees money.

http://www.cobrabrigade.com/photos/teddy%20kgb.jpg

Kind of the direction I'm leaning as well. You think it's possible to do something that gives the Broncos protection as well. Say a 6 year contract that can be worth $50m but the bonus money typically given up front is spread over 3 years for example? Year one he gets $5m in bonuses and annual salaries of $4 or 5m. Year three he gets a bonus of $7m and annual salaries of $5 or 6m. Year five he gets a bonus of $8m (actually, I'd guess the deal would be reworked at this point, especially if he stays clean and productive). Then work in some reasonable incentive bonuses as well. So, you have essentially three, two year contracts. If he screws up next off season we lose a prorated portion of his signing bonus (cap wise) and it's essentially $2.5m on the books that we can get back physically b/c of his suspension. That to me would give the Broncos some protections and Brandon Marshall would go from making $2m in his first year to making $10m this year and $15m over the next two years... plus any incentives that are added to the contract.

Beantown Bronco
06-18-2009, 06:46 AM
Not only that, with one year remaining on his rookie contract, Marshall's request for a new deal complies with the Broncos' traditional policy. This was former coach Mike Shanahan's argument when Clinton Portis demanded a new deal after the 2003 season. The Broncos, Shanahan said, renegotiate contracts only in their final year, not before. Unlike Portis at the time, Marshall is in his final year.[/B]


I wonder if the guy made this up or simply misquoted Shanny, because it's simply not true. Rod Smith renegotiated with 3 years remaining on one of his deals right around that same time (2002) and TD also renegotiated with multiple years left. I'm sure there were others, but those are the only two I recently looked up and saw the hard evidence.

skpac1001
06-18-2009, 06:46 AM
Seems to me that if your trying to sell the Broncos on giving Marshall a long term extension worth lots of money, you wouldn't want to keep harping on how short NFL careers can be and how Marshall is already past the average NFL career, particularly since his availability to play in the future is probably his main question mark.

Popcorn Sutton
06-18-2009, 07:19 AM
It was in a earlier thread about Marshall. The OP said Adam Sheffler on KOA radio said he was offered one by Bowlen and turned it down.

I agree with you. He does deserve a new contract, but one that protects the team if he does something stupid again.

I think this is a bit off. I find Gary Millers take very interesting and perhaps a bit more believable which is that Pat told Brandon that if he stays out of trouble and performs well on the field he'll get his new contract next season.

Video is on cbs4: http://cbs4denver.com/broncos

Rod Smith also speaks out on the second video and as always he is a consummate professional. I wish Rod could get in Brandon's head.

Cito Pelon
06-18-2009, 07:19 AM
Krieger: Marshall deserves new deal
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
Posted: 06/18/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

It's rare that a big-league sports team shows as much enthusiasm for running off its star players as your all-new Denver Broncos.

. . . . . . . . .
He has earned a new contract on the playing field. If the Broncos won't give it to him, he has every right to request a trade. And then, presumably, the new Broncos will be well on their way to what they want: a team without any offensive stars at all.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_12615670?source=rss

What a load of road apples. This rivals the total crap some of the posters here spew out.

HEAV
06-18-2009, 07:26 AM
Risk vs Reward.

I feel the risk is heavier than the reward.

Cito Pelon
06-18-2009, 07:33 AM
I didn't know that they HAD offered him a new contract?

Even though I'm sure he wants one, I've never even heard it officially reported that he'd asked for a new contract? Only that he'd asked to be traded?

Nevertheless, I'm in the camp that believes he does deserve a new contract, a fairly big money contract! One that is also full of protection clauses and escalators. One that protects the Broncos as well as giving Brandon the chance at the pay day his on the field performance earns him.

Letting him walk at this point would be a disaster.

I don't buy that at all. Disaster? No. If the trade is decent, that's fine with me. Dude does have some bigtime caveats about him.

I'd like to see him still on the team, but if he doesn't want to be here then there's no point in keeping him around. But the deal will have to be right.

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 07:41 AM
Here's a news flash for the torch and pitchfork crowd: Like it or not, Marshall is underpaid. Big-time.



Irrelevant. Even if it is true, which I won't grant for the time being, his power play and jeopardy of costing the organization 8 games if he messes up again is the issue, not his performance on the field.


Marshall caught 104 last season, third in the NFL, with a salary cap number of $526,824. Chump change by Not For Long standards. By my count, 33 members of the Broncos carried bigger numbers last season.


Considering he's still under contract, why would a team deliberatly screw themselves cap-wise when they don't have to? It's akin to me sending twice my tax burden to Congress and telling them to go hog wild.

Not only that, with one year remaining on his rookie contract, Marshall's request for a new deal complies with the Broncos' traditional policy. This was former coach Mike Shanahan's argument when Clinton Portis demanded a new deal after the 2003 season. The Broncos, Shanahan said, renegotiate contracts only in their final year, not before. Unlike Portis at the time, Marshall is in his final year.


Tradition? You're kidding me, right? Shanahan is gone--there is a NEW tradition in town. This 'tradition', in and of itself does not justify extending Marshall on his terms, sorry. In Iran, 'tradition' is to strangle women for being raped--is tradition a good enough reason to keep that rule in place?

So the notion that it is somehow morally objectionable for Marshall to demand market value after two sensational seasons in a notoriously short-lived profession is nothing more than propaganda from an organization looking to use its fan base to paint a player into a corner.


Marshall has the right to demand anything he wants. The Broncos have the right to deny him based on economic issues and character issues. The Broncos demand that their players be good citizens but Marshall doesn't seem to want to adhere to this. Tit for tat, pal. Look, the Broncos have shown that they are willing to re-up guys that deserve it, but almost always on THEIR timetable. Just because Marshall screams for a new deal, doesn't mean he'll get one NOW. He still may get one, but it's got to be on the organization's timetable.


Sillier still is the contention that Marshall is being disloyal to the Broncos by rehabbing from hip surgery in Orlando, Fla., rather than at the Broncos' facility. Was Tom Brady disloyal to the Patriots when he rehabbed from knee surgery in California?


Valid point. But I don't see McD or Bowlen or Xanders making this claim, so it's a strawman and irrelevant to Marshall getting a new deal or not. Until you hear the organization say this is a reason for not extending him, you're just making crap up.

Put yourself in his shoes. Would you trust the Broncos to look after your interests at this point? When he said he was hurt, they denied it and impugned his toughness to get him to play. After he played through what turned out to be a significant injury, they refuse to pay him anything close to his market value.


Trust? Please. The organization trusted Marshall to stay out of trouble and be honest with them. He didn't and lied to them about some stupid McD's bag causing his arm injury. If anyone deserves not to be trusted, it's Marshall. He's made awful life decisions and now wants to demand an extension on his own timetable? Beat it, punk.

He has earned a new contract on the playing field. If the Broncos won't give it to him, he has every right to request a trade. And then, presumably, the new Broncos will be well on their way to what they want: a team without any offensive stars at all.


Not getting what you want, when you want it, does not give you the right to ask for a trade. Sorry, it just doesn't. You're under contract, so abide by it. There is still no evidence that the Broncos will not extend this guy--they haven't publicly said they won't, so why assume this? Maybe there is a better time to do it that will benefit the organization more. Oh, and by the way, offensive stars come and go. Teams that win superbowls do not. We want the latter, not necessarily the former. That is all.

vancejohnson82
06-18-2009, 08:01 AM
ahhhhh, once again a writer who forgets to mention a few things, like:

- Marshall's legal history which puts him one incident away from suspension
- he's coming off hip surgery and the Broncos havent even seen him run a pattern yet, who's to say how the rehab is going
- Marshall ASKED to be traded....he is on record saying its time for a change...he was offered a contract, and didnt want it

It's really nice to compare him to Tom Brady and Clinton Portis...but each sitaution was completely different.

Nice try, but this is a lame ass "Oh my God, deadline is coming up" article

completely half assed attempt to explain the situation

gyldenlove
06-18-2009, 08:01 AM
I love how people are so gung-ho about players honoring their contract, but you never hear a pip about contracts when we cut players, it is not like Boss Bailey had a contract, or Dre Bly, or Alridge.

Why should a player honor his contract when he has seen the team take a huge piss all over the contracts of several players.

TheDave
06-18-2009, 08:02 AM
If he hadn't been arrested 10+ times over 3 years... If he wasn't one more mis-step away from an 8 game suspension...If he hadn't almost amputated his arm last year... If he wasn't currently rehabbing from hip surgery...

Unfortunately all of those play into the decision to extend him...

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 08:04 AM
I love how people are so gung-ho about players honoring their contract, but you never hear a pip about contracts when we cut players, it is not like Boss Bailey had a contract, or Dre Bly, or Alridge.

Why should a player honor his contract when he has seen the team take a huge piss all over the contracts of several players.

The contract that they sign has a provision that allows the organization to cut/terminate them for performance deemed substandard, as does the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The player signs knowing full well that this is a term of the contract they are signing.

orangemonkey
06-18-2009, 08:05 AM
The comments that a new city and a new scenery would be good are a big clue that it's more than just money/new contract. Personally, if I was a young elite receiver with a rocky past, I would prefer to catch balls from an elite passer than a bottom of the league one. I would also prefer to get my life back on track with an organization and FO that have their act together unlike the Broncos.






I don't think that Marshall is wrong to ask for a new contract, or to hold out. Its personal contract business and that is down to the individual and the organisation to sort out whever way they can.

Thing is, the only thing that's been said publicly is that Marshall wants a trade. The rest is just speculation.

You see for me, if it really is all about money, then i don't have a problem with it. Players have a right to hold out, its the only leverage they have in such a situatuon. I want Brandon playing for us, but I respect the fact that he has a right to seek maximum market return on his labour.

The only slight shadow of doubt, is the question of whether or not there is more than just the contract issue that is behind his request for a trade. Has he fallen out with the new regime as Cutler did? If so, is he following Cutler's example? Personally I think that this more of a concern than the contract issue.

if it is just the contract issue, then I think we'll play hardball and he'll be back with the team eventually. If not this could turn ugly....

azbroncfan
06-18-2009, 08:06 AM
Pay the man with a bunch or behavior and thug clauses in it.

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 08:13 AM
The comments that a new city and a new scenery would be good are a big clue that it's more than just money/new contract. Personally, if I was a young elite receiver with a rocky past, I would prefer to catch balls from an elite passer than a bottom of the league one. I would also prefer to get my life back on track with an organization and FO that have their act together unlike the Broncos.

Can you please tell me what about the FO points to not having their act together, please? They got into a spat with their starting qb and determined that he'd be a detriment to the team because he would not fit in and felt entitled to certain things the organization wasn't willing to provide. The FO had a very good draft. They signed FA's galore that would add to the character of the team AND perform well. Other than the Cutler thing, what points to the FO not knowing what they're doing?

As for wanting to play with a major league qb, Marshall has not publicly intimated that Orton's not good enough for him. If you recall, Plaxico Burress slagged Eli Manning in training camp right before he led them to the Super Bowl title. With your position, the Giants should've dumped Eli because their star WR didn't believe in him. Considering Marshall's never caught a single pass from Orton, he'd only be talking out of his arse. I think it's more an ego thing--Marshall cares about Marshall, not whether or not his team wins or teammates succeed.

TonyR
06-18-2009, 08:17 AM
Here we go again. How many times does this need to be explained? Yes, Brandon Marshall absolutely is "underpaid" and deserves a raise. But he shouldn't be given a new contract until he's healthy enough to get on the field and his current legal issues are resolved. You don't give a new contract, particularly one containing guaranteed $, to a player who may not be available to play because of an existing injury or legal issue. And a team that would give such a player a new contract would be stupid.

The only way I could possibly fault the Broncos here is if they're telling BM that they won't give him a new deal until after the season. If he can get his shiz together before the season, or during it, he should get a new deal at that time. But now is clearly not that time.

outdoor_miner
06-18-2009, 08:22 AM
He has earned a new contract on the playing field. If the Broncos won't give it to him, he has every right to request a trade. And then, presumably, the new Broncos will be well on their way to what they want: a team without any offensive stars at all.

Why do so many people, including Krieger, act like they know how much he wants? What if he and his agent are demanding that he be paid like the #1 receiver in football? Do you just automatically cave in and give him everything he wants?

I agree he is seriously underpaid for his on the field performance. I do not have a problem with him trying to get a raise (although, I question his timing and methodology). Football is the one sport where teams have more power than the players from a contractual standpoint. Hopefully, this whole situation is a series of "negotiating tactics", and this will all work out. But to claim that the Broncos should "just pay him" is totally ignorant to the fact that we don't know what the Broncos are offering and what Marshall is asking for.

outdoor_miner
06-18-2009, 08:33 AM
If I am the Broncos I acquiesce to the injury stuff. Brandon played injured last year and it wasn't the arm that slowed him down, it was a hip injury suffered playing football. So I would be willing to take on the injury risk b/c I have a player that has taken that risk for me.

I totally agree with this... Brandon was asked by the Broncos (I know it was Shanahan, but Bowlen's still the owner) to play through his hip injury. If Brandon's claim is true that the medical staff mis-diagnosed his hip problems, then he has a legitimate complaint.

It does complicate things, though. If his hip injury is worse than what has been reported, you can't throw huge money at a guy who may never be the same. On the other hand, it is the Broncos fault that he is in this position. This is why I don't have a problem with guys attempting to get paid in the NFL. The risk of injury is so high... It doesn't mean I think the Broncos should just automatically pay him. But I do understand Marshall's side of things.

SoDak Bronco
06-18-2009, 08:40 AM
Either we pay him or someone else will..Risk is worth the reward, he will be signed to a long term extension before this season is over.

TonyR
06-18-2009, 08:42 AM
Either we pay him or someone else will..Risk is worth the reward, he will be signed to a long term extension before this season is over.

Well, nobody else can pay him unless the Broncos trade him or cut him. The Broncos can potentially get the reward without as much risk by waiting until his injury and legal issues are resolved before paying him. Brandon can choose not to show up but it will hit him in the wallet.

orangemonkey
06-18-2009, 08:53 AM
Can you please tell me what about the FO points to not having their act together, please? They got into a spat with their starting qb and determined that he'd be a detriment to the team because he would not fit in and felt entitled to certain things the organization wasn't willing to provide. The FO had a very good draft. They signed FA's galore that would add to the character of the team AND perform well. Other than the Cutler thing, what points to the FO not knowing what they're doing?

As for wanting to play with a major league qb, Marshall has not publicly intimated that Orton's not good enough for him. If you recall, Plaxico Burress slagged Eli Manning in training camp right before he led them to the Super Bowl title. With your position, the Giants should've dumped Eli because their star WR didn't believe in him. Considering Marshall's never caught a single pass from Orton, he'd only be talking out of his arse. I think it's more an ego thing--Marshall cares about Marshall, not whether or not his team wins or teammates succeed.

"Other than the Cutler thing." That is enough for me. Clearly not enough for you and others but plenty enough for me to feel that the FO and owner are steering a wrecked ship. The regular season will be the proving ground.

Here's where we disagree:
-You seem to minimize how Cutler was handled. My opinion was that it was a disaster for the franchise and partly to blame for the Marshall saga.
-"The FO had a very good draft." I think we had a mediocre draft.
-You're making assumptions that Orton is equal to Eli. No way, I agree with this. Eli is in the top half with a Super Bowl, Orton is in the bottom half with squat.

richpjr
06-18-2009, 08:59 AM
I think the Broncos would be nuts to sign Marshall to a long term contract at this time. Nobody knows how bad his hip is, aside from he had to have surgery and can't practice right now. His off the field incidents continue to happen even after he has already been suspended for being an idiot and is supposed to be on his best behavior now (the fact that his girlfriend won't testify against him is the only reason the latest charges were dropped - it doesn't change the fact that it happened).

The Broncos could certainly put in some kind of behavior clause in a new contract, but that still isn't good enough. This might protect the team financially, but with another stupid incident that gets him an 8 game suspension leaves the team in a massive hole with no way to fill it in the middle of a season. The risk-reward argument is very tricky here. There are not many 100+ receivers in the league, but counting on a injured, volatile person like Marshall is very risky. If a team were able to get some substantial draft picks for him, they'd be nuts not to look long and hard at it.

McDman
06-18-2009, 08:59 AM
The man also caught 104 receptions with a bad hand? I know he said it was not 100%, but seriously? You act like he caught 80 balls and was thrown at 200 times.

Brandon Marshall is one of the best young receivers in the game and we're going to trade him away? He can catch, run, and block.

He should have been paid when he asked.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be paid. I'm saying I can see why we don't want to pay him. He is a liability, not only for his hip but his ridiculous pac-man like behavior off the field.

I have no doubt in my mind if he had not had any of these incidents off the field he would be a much richer man right now.

It may be too risky to pay a guy who is one call away from a half season suspension.

McDman
06-18-2009, 09:02 AM
I also think he was kind of screwed with his medical treatment last year. I think McD needs to change things up and just overhaul the whole medical staff.

We've just had to many injuries as of late.

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 09:02 AM
"Other than the Cutler thing." That is enough for me. Clearly not enough for you and others but plenty enough for me to feel that the FO and owner are steering a wrecked ship. The regular season will be the proving ground.

Here's where we disagree:
-You seem to minimize how Cutler was handled. My opinion was that it was a disaster for the franchise and partly to blame for the Marshall saga.
-"The FO had a very good draft." I think we had a mediocre draft.
-You're making assumptions that Orton is equal to Eli. No way, I agree with this. Eli is in the top half with a Super Bowl, Orton is in the bottom half with squat.

So when Joe Montana went to the SF FO and told them that either he starts or he wants to be traded, this was a flaw in the 49er FO? Why? When Favre took all of Green Bay for a ride and asked to be traded, it was the FO's fault exclusively?

You seem to minimize how Cutler was handled. My opinion was that it was a disaster for the franchise and partly to blame for the Marshall saga.


It depends on what you mean by 'minimize'. Look, you don't know the goings on of that whole mess, and neither do i. All we know is what's been put out there by multiple parties. Given that these are often contradictory, someone or everyone is lying about some part in it. Without all the proper info, we can't judge whose fault it was. All we know is the end result--cutler was traded for picks. This isn't the first time a budding star will be traded--hell, we did it when shanny was here with Portis.

The FO had a very good draft." I think we had a mediocre draft.


Once again, you're entitled to your opinion, but until this draft class gets 3 years under its belt, we probably won't know for sure. The talent we got really can't be argued, as the media has given them all good grades. The criticism comes in the 'value' of the picks, given where they were picked. If a guy can play, he can play, regardless of whether he's #31 or #41, so I see value as an incomplete grade right now.

You're making assumptions that Orton is equal to Eli.

Orton v Manning is irrelevant. The point is that Manning's WR openly ripped him and, by the position you've outlined, he should've been benched or cut since Plax--a proven performer--didn't feel Manning was good enough. Marshall has not caught a single ball from Orton, so I'd find this opinion--if it were what he believed--to be foolish. Orton is a Chicago Bear qb. Name a single Bear qb who has lit it up. The Bear philosophy is running the ball and playing defense. Give Orton a chance in a pro-style offense before assessing just how bad he is.

broncofan2438
06-18-2009, 09:08 AM
Pay the man so we can get on with our season and can make things happen

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 09:10 AM
Pay the man so we can get on with our season and can make things happen


What if Marshall's hip has a setback and we end up with a WR who has to sit for an umber of games and/or just doesn't come back from the injury/surgery as strong? How can he make things happen from a jail cell or a couch? Still wanna pay him?

BabyTO
06-18-2009, 09:16 AM
What if all our players get hit by a lightning bolt during training camp? Let's just release all of them, that way there's no risk for us.

Rabb
06-18-2009, 09:25 AM
a Marine instructor once addressed "what if" questions for the class

"what if worms had machine guns?"

"then the birds wouldn't **** with them"

Brandon has been chock full of what ifs for 3 years now

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 09:29 AM
What if all our players get hit by a lightning bolt during training camp? Let's just release all of them, that way there's no risk for us.

Well, hopefully we'd have extended each and every one of 'em! :welcome:

You missed the point. A guy who is rehabbing from surgery and who has not even been cleared to play is not who you'd want to extend right now. This is about economics and return on investment. Marhsall's cackling and posturing is not productive in getting him a new deal, IMO. Just rehab, recover, contribute and you'll get a new deal, Brandon.

DenverBrit
06-18-2009, 09:33 AM
Rookie contracts are always a crap shoot. Marshall was a fourth round pick for a reason, he was paid good fourth round money and given a great opportunity.

In the meantime, Marshall has spent way too much time in the back of police cruisers for battery and DUI arrests.
He's been suspended and faces another possible suspension after his next battery trial in Aug, which could well be an eight game suspension.
He's injured himself severely and lied about it to everyone who wasn't there to witness it.
He's recovering from hip surgery and there's no way to know yet if he'll play at the same pro-bowl level, which is the justification for a new contract.
With all that going on in Marshall's life, he decides to hold out.

No one is denying he has great talent and deserves a new deal.
But he needs to get into camp and show he's over the injury and able to perform, he needs also to contract around his personal conduct; he's shown he is unable to control his anger and still beats the women in his life.

Contract negotiations have probably stalled because of the need to hold him accountable for his off field conduct.
A new deal wouldn't be an issue if Marshall was simply outperforming his contract and hadn't had 13 police incidents in the last 5 years.
13!! how many incidents are too many?

Yet, somehow, with all the evidence in front of them, some still want to blame McPoopyPants.

Drama Queens. ;D

TonyR
06-18-2009, 09:33 AM
What if all our players get hit by a lightning bolt during training camp? Let's just release all of them, that way there's no risk for us.

Now this is just beyond stupid. BM's current injury and legal issues are known and existing. Your hypothetical lightning bolt is a potential risk that could cause an issue. So you're comparing a known issue with a potential issue. One does not even remotely equate to the other.

Rabb
06-18-2009, 09:39 AM
Now this is just beyond stupid. BM's current injury and legal issues are known and existing. Your hypothetical lightning bolt is a potential risk that could cause an issue. So you're comparing a known issue with a potential issue. One does not even remotely equate to the other.

agreed to a point, but Marshall IS a potential issue

one more strike and he is looking at 8 games...he has displayed a pattern that doesn't really give me a warm and fuzzy about it

I am not concerned about the injuries, he hasn't missed any game time from that...I am more concerned with the absolute potential (I think the poster's point) that he is going to get into trouble again and lose time from it

BabyTO
06-18-2009, 09:49 AM
Well, hopefully we'd have extended each and every one of 'em! :welcome:

You missed the point. A guy who is rehabbing from surgery and who has not even been cleared to play is not who you'd want to extend right now. This is about economics and return on investment. Marhsall's cackling and posturing is not productive in getting him a new deal, IMO. Just rehab, recover, contribute and you'll get a new deal, Brandon.

His hip is not an issue, unless you want to make it an issue. And i just read this on rotoworld:
Disgruntled Broncos WR Brandon Marshall ran a lap with the kids at his youth football camp and showed no visible limp.

The guy has not missed a single game in 3 years due to an injury for Christs sake. I agree with the off the field behavior thing, it's an argument. But this hip injury argument is ridiculous. We put him in that situation to begin with, we ignored it last year so that he would continue to play. You can't use it as an argument not to pay the guy all of a sudden. That's exactly why he wants out, that's why Cutler wanted out, because players get treated like **** here.

vancejohnson82
06-18-2009, 10:00 AM
to overlook the hip injury would be a monumental mistake by management

how about this? Brandon shows up for camp, shows us that the hip isnt a problem, stays out of trouble and we give him his money?

but no, lets just run laps with my kids and sit at home playing Xbox to get money

TonyR
06-18-2009, 10:02 AM
His hip is not an issue...

If his hip isn't an issue then he should be on the field participating and proving it. I agree with you to a certain extent that the injury alone shouldn't halt contract negotiations, but coupled with the legal issues I think it's very legit. Two issues that could keep "the player" off the field are certainly a problem from the team's perspective.

Br0nc0Buster
06-18-2009, 10:03 AM
I wouldnt have a problem giving him a nice contract before the season starts assuming the hip checks out

granted his off field stuff is a concern, but I would be willing to roll the dice

the smart thing is to just wait for him to come back and make sure his hip isnt gonna be some sort of lingering issue.

TonyR
06-18-2009, 12:56 PM
This very well may have been posted previously but I just saw it for the first time today. A rare decent read from Burger Bill.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afcwest/0-3-2350/Why-Denver-shouldn-t-trade-Marshall.html?username=afcwest&archiveId=3&bId=0&entryId=2350&sort=oldest

gyldenlove
06-18-2009, 01:02 PM
I keep hearing from the Mcdaniels apologists how everybody and their kids blame Mcdaniels for this, but I have yet to see anyone seriously point the finger at Mcdaniels. It seems to me that people are blaming Marshall and Bowlen.

Smiling Assassin27
06-18-2009, 01:06 PM
I keep hearing from the Mcdaniels apologists how everybody and their kids blame Mcdaniels for this, but I have yet to see anyone seriously point the finger at Mcdaniels. It seems to me that people are blaming Marshall and Bowlen.

Gyld, it's a sarcastic play on some of the doozies that have been posted about McD in other threads that question his motivation, his ego, and his overall intelligence based on events occurring that are out of his control. This situation has nothing to do with McD, that I can see. He wants Brandon there, but can only deal with players that are actually there to be coached.

DenverBrit
06-18-2009, 01:09 PM
Denver doesn't want to tie itself to Marshall with a huge contract until he can prove his trouble is behind him and he can stay healthy. Most teams probably would take that stance.

Even Burger Bill can see the issue clearly.

outdoor_miner
06-18-2009, 01:32 PM
I keep hearing from the Mcdaniels apologists how everybody and their kids blame Mcdaniels for this, but I have yet to see anyone seriously point the finger at Mcdaniels. It seems to me that people are blaming Marshall and Bowlen.

Are you kidding? Read this thread...

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=81290&highlight=marshall

Page 15 in particular has some really good Josh blaming going on...

Northman
06-18-2009, 01:52 PM
Does Marshall deserve a new contract of some kind? Absolutely. But, it needs to have some stipulations and clauses to protect the team since he has a poor history of staying out of trouble. Maybe Bowlen already offered him one and he turned it down i dont know. Either way, dont pay him unless you (as a team) have an out in case he gets into more trouble.

Northman
06-18-2009, 03:08 PM
to overlook the hip injury would be a monumental mistake by management

how about this? Brandon shows up for camp, shows us that the hip isnt a problem, stays out of trouble and we give him his money?



You would think people could wrap their heads around that concept but alas....Ha!

Bronx33
06-18-2009, 03:21 PM
I keep hearing from the Mcdaniels apologists how everybody and their kids blame Mcdaniels for this, but I have yet to see anyone seriously point the finger at Mcdaniels. It seems to me that people are blaming Marshall and Bowlen.


Brandon needs a new agent the one he has now is an idiot his agent has givin him poor advice.

rastaman
06-18-2009, 03:55 PM
Broncos just screwed on Marshall because of how Marshall has acted and the things he has done.

He isn't honest all the time IMO and has a problem with beating women. The whole slipped on a Mcdonalds bag seemed like a huge lie and I think that also worries them.

The fact he is coming off surgery is also a huge concern.

For Broncos they have his rights still for a yr, then he will only be unrestricted FA next yr without a new CBA. Broncos holding some cards and I think they should play those.

But if brandon can get a team to give a first and a 3rd then you do it.

Can the Broncos ask for a first and a 3rd should Marshall's stats take a drop after the 09 season and he fails to make the Pro bowl? Or would the likelihood of getting a 1st and 3rd for him now based off his last two seasons?

rastaman
06-18-2009, 03:56 PM
Brandon needs a new agent the one he has now is an idiot his agent has givin him poor advice.

He needs "Cutlers" Agent!

Bronx33
06-18-2009, 03:58 PM
He needs "Cutlers" Agent!


If he had cutlers agent brandon would be in training camp.:thumbsup:

rastaman
06-18-2009, 04:07 PM
If he had cutlers agent brandon would be in training camp.:thumbsup:

Ummmmmmmm.....I don't think forcing BMarsh into camp and not trading him in 09 benefits Denver at all, especially if he doesn't want to be a Bronco anymore. The likelihood is higher of McD benching BMarsh is greater than BMarsh putting up Pro Bowl stats.

Benching BMarsh will invite double coverage on Royal....so his stats will also suffer. But more importantly, Denver won't be able to ask a 1st and 3rd for Brandon in 2010 or 2011!!!

DBroncos4life
06-18-2009, 04:18 PM
I keep hearing from the Mcdaniels apologists how everybody and their kids blame Mcdaniels for this, but I have yet to see anyone seriously point the finger at Mcdaniels. It seems to me that people are blaming Marshall and Bowlen.

Its crappy that our FO keeps getting tossed into the spot light for things like this. Had it not been for Cutler's trade and that mess I doubt this Marshall problem would be all over the media the way it is now. I think most posters believe he should get paid and the Broncos need to protect themselves from future off field problems and injury concerns. This wouldn't be a fast process for any FO to handle.

barryr
06-18-2009, 04:23 PM
The only way Marshall "derserves" a contract is if it is loaded with incentives and escape clauses in case he does something stupid again to get suspended.

fdf
06-18-2009, 04:26 PM
I think most posters believe he should get paid and the Broncos need to protect themselves from future off field problems and injury concerns. This wouldn't be a fast process for any FO to handle.

But Brandon would have to agree that the broncos get protected. I suspect that's the sticking point. He wants top guaranteed money. If he didn't, this issue would have been resolved quietly a long time ago.

DBroncos4life
06-18-2009, 04:29 PM
But Brandon would have to agree that the broncos get protected. I suspect that's the sticking point. He wants top guaranteed money. If he didn't, this issue would have been resolved quietly a long time ago.

He will get that clause anywhere he goes, maybe he just really doesn't want to play for Denver. Its something that we will have to come to grips with.

Northman
06-18-2009, 04:34 PM
Ummmmmmmm.....I don't think forcing BMarsh into camp and not trading him in 09 benefits Denver at all, especially if he doesn't want to be a Bronco anymore. The likelihood is higher of McD benching BMarsh is greater than BMarsh putting up Pro Bowl stats.

Benching BMarsh will invite double coverage on Royal....so his stats will also suffer. But more importantly, Denver won't be able to ask a 1st and 3rd for Brandon in 2010 or 2011!!!

Lol,

What makes you think that McD would bench Bmarsh? The guy just said "see you in camp". The only way the Bmarsh doesnt play is if Bmarsh chooses not to show up to camp and the actual games. And considering the guy doesnt have a lot of money to begin with means he can ill-afford to sit on his ass. He has no leverage whatsoever. Throw in the fact that if he doesnt play the concern for his hip and everything else is still questionable. Trust me, if Denver keeps Brandon the guy will play because he just cant afford not too.

Bronx33
06-18-2009, 05:07 PM
Lol,

What makes you think that McD would bench Bmarsh? The guy just said "see you in camp". The only way the Bmarsh doesnt play is if Bmarsh chooses not to show up to camp and the actual games. And considering the guy doesnt have a lot of money to begin with means he can ill-afford to sit on his ass. He has no leverage whatsoever. Throw in the fact that if he doesnt play the concern for his hip and everything else is still questionable. Trust me, if Denver keeps Brandon the guy will play because he just cant afford not too.


Exactly his agent is an idiot and so is brandon for letting his agent put him in this position this little stratigic blunder could cost brandon dearly.

Bronx33
06-18-2009, 05:11 PM
Ummmmmmmm.....I don't think forcing BMarsh into camp and not trading him in 09 benefits Denver at all, especially if he doesn't want to be a Bronco anymore. The likelihood is higher of McD benching BMarsh is greater than BMarsh putting up Pro Bowl stats.

Benching BMarsh will invite double coverage on Royal....so his stats will also suffer. But more importantly, Denver won't be able to ask a 1st and 3rd for Brandon in 2010 or 2011!!!


HUH BENCH?


Probowl stats and 1 strike away from long vacation believe or not brandons troubles off the field are officially haunting him.


no shyt he himself is affecting his fair market value....

watermock
06-18-2009, 06:32 PM
The circus never ends at Dove Valley.

Popps
06-18-2009, 06:46 PM
Exactly his agent is an idiot and so is brandon for letting his agent put him in this position this little stratigic blunder could cost brandon dearly.

Yea, it's hard to imagine the Broncos rewarding Marshall for this behavior, at this stage.

watermock
06-18-2009, 07:12 PM
If his hip isn't an issue then he should be on the field participating and proving it. I agree with you to a certain extent that the injury alone shouldn't halt contract negotiations, but coupled with the legal issues I think it's very legit. Two issues that could keep "the player" off the field are certainly a problem from the team's perspective.

Wow, now he's The Player", like Jay was "The Player", and both were expected to "show up for camp".

Neither did, buit for different reasons.

Remeber when it was all about Jay and Bus wanting a new contract? (name 2 star players on the same team so underpaid).

But it's OK to pay Champ ith his nuts hanging by a thread 17 million in '10?

Of course BM would have behavior issues in his contract(like DeFurher wouln't dock him anyway).

It's just who gets the money right? Goodell or Denver.

I guess it comes down to once again, miscommunication. BM said goodbye, and Mcdummy said "see you in camp".

Like Cutler, I'm betting on the former.

~Crash~
06-18-2009, 07:19 PM
I wouldnt have a problem giving him a nice contract before the season starts assuming the hip checks out

granted his off field stuff is a concern, but I would be willing to roll the dice

the smart thing is to just wait for him to come back and make sure his hip isnt gonna be some sort of lingering issue.

he can shoot up and mask a problem . just like boss did .

watermock
06-18-2009, 07:32 PM
Originally Posted by Bronx33
Exactly his agent is an idiot and so is brandon for letting his agent put him in this position this little stratigic blunder could cost brandon dearly.


Just like Cutler, right?

The fact is, BM could got to cou rt to void his contract due to negligence of the medical staff, and very might well win, give the history of tears on the club.

Cutler had 3 years remaining, BM 1. Under our ex's rule, he was due for a look at least. I imaginge his offer was so tainted with performance clauses and legal mumbojumbo, it was rejected out of hand, which is exactly I suspect Mcdummy wanted anyway.

BTW, why is the coach and Owner always geting involved? Where is X-Man?

watermock
06-18-2009, 07:36 PM
he can shoot up and mask a problem . just like boss did .

Huh? MRI's don't mask injury. Painkillers mask pain. Jesus.

Don't ask me to defend the Boss signing either. I wanted Shaun Rodgers and Vilma years ago, the first go around.

Boss as sucking up to Champ, who is injured untill I see him play again at a high level.17M in '10. GTFO.

Beantown Bronco
06-19-2009, 06:17 AM
But more importantly, Denver won't be able to ask a 1st and 3rd for Brandon in 2010 or 2011!!!

1. They have a MUCH better chance of asking for that next year, when Brandon is potentially healthy and his legal issues have the potential of being behind him, than they do now. Nobody is going to give that up now for a guy that can't pass a physical and has a criminal charge looming.

2. He'll be a RFA next season, so as long as they give him the high tender of $2.7 million or so, that's EXACTLY what they'll be asking for and getting if anyone signs him away.

3. I seem to recall hearing the same things around here about Cutler not too long ago. "Cutler is hurting his trade value by being an idiot and acting like a child, yada, yada, yada. No way we even get two firsts for him" I kept insisting that it wouldn't matter and it didn't. So long as there is a significant enough market for a guy, he'll secure good compensation in return.

oubronco
06-19-2009, 06:21 AM
The circus never ends at Dove Valley.

when the clowns take over what do you expect

TonyR
06-19-2009, 06:25 AM
3. I seem to recall hearing the same things around here about Cutler not too long ago. "Cutler is hurting his trade value by being an idiot and acting like a child, yada, yada, yada. No way we even get two firsts for him" I kept insisting that it wouldn't matter and it didn't. So long as there is a significant enough market for a guy, he'll secure good compensation in return.

Good post BB, but I disagree a little bit with the 3rd point. I think the BM situation is different from JC in that 1) he's a WR vs. a potential franchise QB, 2) he has a laundry list of legal incidents and issues, and 3) he has injury concerns. I do think BM will hurt his value if he doesn't play well this year. Under the scenario of him staying in Denver w/o a new contract it's in his best interest to both play and play well this season.

TonyR
06-19-2009, 06:26 AM
when the clowns take over what do you expect

What do the so called "clowns" have to do with the BM situation? What are you suggesting they do or do differently?

oubronco
06-19-2009, 06:28 AM
I wasn't talking to you

rastaman
06-19-2009, 12:54 PM
Good post BB, but I disagree a little bit with the 3rd point. I think the BM situation is different from JC in that 1) he's a WR vs. a potential franchise QB, 2) he has a laundry list of legal incidents and issues, and 3) he has injury concerns. I do think BM will hurt his value if he doesn't play well this year. Under the scenario of him staying in Denver w/o a new contract it's in his best interest to both play and play well this season.

There are other issues you haven't mentioned, ignored or failed to consider. Without a new contract, BMarsh would be foolish to play with reckless abandon as he has in 07 and 08.

Brandon playing reckless increases his chances of more injuries "which will hurt his value in FA. So Brandon would be smart to play to protect his body by going down with arm tackles and stepping out of bounds when he can.

Also, the jury is still out whether or how much BMarsh's stats will decline b/c of Orton as his QB! Should Brandon's stats decline, this also means he doesn't make the Pro Bowl as well in 09. So you can see Marshall has other causes that could play into his trade and contract value declining.

Many NFL teams will be lining up and licking their chops to steal BMarsh from the Broncos a year or two from now. Brandon needs to just stay HEALTHY and not foolishly give up his body and risk injuries by allowing himself to be tackled by 2 or 3 players, for an Organization who does not value what he brings to the Broncos.

oubronco
06-19-2009, 01:03 PM
exactly everyone wants him to give all he has and risk injury further on an incentive laden deal but what if he puts up great numbers should he get #1 reciever in the league money?

the front office won't show him that kind of money so why should he play balls to the wall and risk further injury

TonyR
06-19-2009, 01:12 PM
Without a new contract, BMarsh would be foolish to play with reckless abandon as he has in 07 and 08.

Many NFL teams will be lining up and licking their chops to steal BMarsh from the Broncos a year or two from now.

I never suggested he should play with "reckless abandon".

Nobody can "steal" him after this season. We can tender him and lock him up for another year, that or receive very good compensation. But it won't come to that if he gets a new deal before then.

And what's your point? What are you suggesting the Broncos should do?

TonyR
06-19-2009, 01:16 PM
...the front office won't show him that kind of money so why should he play balls to the wall and risk further injury

They're not showing him the money because of his injury and legal issues. When those are resolved I'm sure they'll try to extend him. How many times does this need to be clarified for you? And frankly I don't give a shiz whether you're talking to me or not. Somebody has to straighten you out.

oubronco
06-19-2009, 01:18 PM
They're not showing him the money because of his injury and legal issues. When those are resolved I'm sure they'll try to extend him. How many times does this need to be clarified for you? And frankly I don't give a shiz whether you're talking to me or not. Somebody has to straighten you out.

so your saying that he hasn't proved himself yet?

Br0nc0Buster
06-19-2009, 01:31 PM
so your saying that he hasn't proved himself yet?

He has proven he is an elite talent
He has also proven he is just as likely to get arrested as he is to catch a touchdown pass

Plus we dont know the extent of his hip injury

All legitimate concerns before making someone one of the highest paid players in the league

Br0nc0Buster
06-19-2009, 01:32 PM
he can shoot up and mask a problem . just like boss did .

good point
but couldnt the medical staff be able to check it out
assuming he would let them, and they are not completely incompetent