PDA

View Full Version : Brandon Marshall: A Broncos last hurrah?


Hamrob
01-31-2010, 09:39 AM
I thought this was very interesting. It seems like other probowl players think it's odd that we would want to trade Marshall. Asomugha's comments are telling. Thoughts?


A Bronco's last hurrah?
Pro Bowl could be Marshall's final game in orange and blue
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Posted: 01/31/2010 01:00:00 AM MST


Brandon Marshall's 2009 stats 101 catches, 10 touchdowns worthy of Pro Bowl. ( Joe Amon, The Denver Post )FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. Today most likely is goodbye to All Things Brandon Marshall.

Have the Broncos ever had a player who brought so many things?

There were three 100-catch seasons, and numerous off-field incidents. Two Pro Bowl appearances and two games missed the first of 2008 and last of 2009 for disciplinary reasons.

He often flashed the world's greatest smile and suffered through the tribulations of trials. He had monstrous games of 21 catches, an NFL record, and 18. If only there was one catch in one postseason game.

There was one offseason contract holdout, and financial considerations will likely deliver the final kick out of town.

Unquestionably the most physically gifted receiver to ever wear the orange and blue uniform, Marshall's four seasons in Denver were marked with just about everything except doubt regarding his imminent departure.

"I'll put it like this: The way things have gone, I'd be surprised if he's back," Broncos cornerback Champ Bailey said. "I've seen it happen to the best of the best and the worst of the worst."

Marshall declined comment during Pro Bowl week, which means he may have said his final words as a Bronco. He will wear the team helmet while playing for the AFC in the Pro Bowl game tonight at Sun Life Stadium in Miami.

But the next time Marshall and the Broncos go to work for each other, their business is expected to appear on the transaction wire.

Rather than negotiate a multiyear contract with their No. 1 receiver of the past three seasons, the Broncos are expected to trade Marshall soon after the 2010 trading and free-agency season opens March 5.

"If Brandon leaves the division, the rest of us will be happy," Oakland Raiders star cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha said. "He's a great player."

Because Marshall is a restricted free agent, the Broncos are expected to go through the exercise of tendering him a contract. But that tender will only serve as a mechanism to execute a deal with another club. Baltimore, Miami, Seattle, Chicago, Cleveland (how about Marshall for Brady Quinn?) and maybe the New York Jets are among the teams that may benefit most from acquiring a top-shelf receiver.

"One thing we all realize as players is you could be here one day and gone tomorrow," Houston's star receiver Andre Johnson said. "Sometimes when it happens, especially to a player like Brandon, it surprises you a little bit. But at the same time we still understand the business side of this game."

Marshall's departure will be partly about business, and partly about the Broncos' relatively new viewpoint on the business of winning.

For many years, Broncos coach Mike Shanahan first sought talent, and worried about trouble as it came.

When Shanahan and general manager Ted Sundquist stole Marshall in the fourth round of the 2006 draft, the Broncos had themselves the quintessential untamed colt. Now that Josh McDaniels has been given all but free rein of the Broncos' franchise, a greater emphasis has been placed on systems and team-before-self players.

As the 2009 season progressed, there became a prevailing sense the team was losing patience with Marshall. He was suspended at the beginning of the season the final two preseason games for petulant behavior and disciplined again at the very end he was not allowed to dress for the final regular-season game against Kansas City after McDaniels felt Marshall improperly addressed a midweek hamstring injury.

In between, Marshall caught 101 passes in 15 games, 10 for touchdowns.

"I think they should pay the guy," Atlanta receiver Roddy White said. "I wouldn't trade a good player like that. He's a Pro Bowl player. He catches 100 balls a year. He scores touchdowns. You can't get rid of a guy like that. I know he had some setbacks early in his career, but he's ready to play football."

Marshall will keep playing football. It's just that after today, it most likely won't be while representing the Broncos. The team traded away Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler last year. It won't hesitate to deal its Pro Bowl receiver this year.

"That is something, to lose Jay and then Brandon in one year," Asomugha said. "That would be huge for Denver. But Josh is running the program there and he's got his ways of doing things. If that's the decision he's got to make, then you have to go with it."



Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14303459#ixzz0eDEngP9J

meangene
01-31-2010, 09:45 AM
Funny. I don't even think of him as a Bronco any longer. Aside from the fact that he is as good as gone, he is not the type of person I want representing my team no matter how much talent he has. That said, I hope he has a great game to up his trade value.

ludo21
01-31-2010, 09:47 AM
I would love to see Brandon back next year, but I doubt it will happen.

It sucks because no matter the picks we get it wont be good enough for a player of his caliber, but I suppose its better than nothing.

Soul-Bronco
01-31-2010, 10:04 AM
of course none of those players talked about brandons repeated miss conduct and run ins with the law. . . . . . i guess thats all good, why would we ever want to trade that right?

Hamrob
01-31-2010, 10:07 AM
The article was interesting to me...because of the players who are qouted. I think folks around the league understand what type of talent he has. I thought Asomugha's comments about first letting Jay get away and now Marshall were telling. I mean he said if that's what the coach wants then that's the way it is...but you can tell, he was like...that's crazy. we got good value for Cutler...let's hope we get the same for Marshall. I think I'd put it all into defense. We can pick up a FA receiver.

If we could get McClain and Dan Williams in the first...wow!

meangene
01-31-2010, 10:27 AM
The article was interesting to me...because of the players who are qouted. I think folks around the league understand what type of talent he has. I thought Asomugha's comments about first letting Jay get away and now Marshall were telling. I mean he said if that's what the coach wants then that's the way it is...but you can tell, he was like...that's crazy. we got good value for Cutler...let's hope we get the same for Marshall. I think I'd put it all into defense. We can pick up a FA receiver.

If we could get McClain and Dan Williams in the first...wow!

Or McClain and Odrick!

Hamrob
01-31-2010, 10:30 AM
Or McClain and Odrick!I could live with that.:thumbs:

barryr
01-31-2010, 10:37 AM
Maybe McDaniels wants players who want to win first before acting like an idiot on and off the field, which Marshall has done way too often. Teams don't often win much with knuckleheads playing key roles on their teams.

Rohirrim
01-31-2010, 10:40 AM
I notice that nowhere in this article does it mention that Brandon is one offseason **** up away from a suspension. What good is a pro-bowler who you pay millions to who might want to practice, or might not, or might do something at any moment that removes him from eligibility for eight games or so?

Once again, the media hypes the lie that it is the Broncos trading away players for no good reason.

Man-Goblin
01-31-2010, 10:44 AM
Well, there's where the Brady Quinn rumor came from. Wonder if it has legs or if it's just completely irresponsible reporting by Klis....

steeledude
01-31-2010, 10:52 AM
The most retarded thing in that article, aside from people thinking it's OK to trade a guy like Marshall, is actually suggesting a trade of Marshall for Quinn. Why don't we just cut him and kick ourselves in the nuts instead. Klit is the stupidest of our stupid sports writers.

oubronco
01-31-2010, 10:58 AM
I think it will be a big mistake to trade Marshall, just fuggin pay him

bigbucks24
01-31-2010, 10:59 AM
of course none of those players talked about brandons repeated miss conduct and run ins with the law. . . . . . i guess thats all good, why would we ever want to trade that right?

Notice how they only quote current players? What else is Roddy White going to say except, "Pay the man. I don't care if he is a distraction to the team and has been suspended by the team and is close to suspension by the league. Pay all of us a ton of money." This article was spun the way they wanted the story to go.

Personally, I think Brandon has cost himself and the Bronco's a lot. He won't get the contract he could if he was a good guy, and the Bronco's won't get value for him. I think the Bronco fans will be deeply disappointed with what they get in return for Brandon.

Hamrob
01-31-2010, 12:00 PM
I notice that nowhere in this article does it mention that Brandon is one offseason **** up away from a suspension. What good is a pro-bowler who you pay millions to who might want to practice, or might not, or might do something at any moment that removes him from eligibility for eight games or so?

Once again, the media hypes the lie that it is the Broncos trading away players for no good reason.Come on man. What matters the most, is the production on the field. Marshall has 3 100 catch seasons in a row and is playing in his 2nd straight probowl after just his 4th year in the league.

Sure, he has problems, but he's not a jerk. I think for the most part his teammates like him and he gives it his all on the field.

He may be done here, but other teams will come calling. That's for sure.

Hamrob
01-31-2010, 12:01 PM
Notice how they only quote current players? What else is Roddy White going to say except, "Pay the man. I don't care if he is a distraction to the team and has been suspended by the team and is close to suspension by the league. Pay all of us a ton of money." This article was spun the way they wanted the story to go.

Personally, I think Brandon has cost himself and the Bronco's a lot. He won't get the contract he could if he was a good guy, and the Bronco's won't get value for him. I think the Bronco fans will be deeply disappointed with what they get in return for Brandon.Hey, I didn't want to see Cutler traded...but, I wasn't disapointed with what we got in exchange. I don't want to see Marshall go either, but I think we'll get a fair deal.

DenverBrit
01-31-2010, 12:19 PM
Bowlen might be happy to pay BM if it weren't for the 15 (+) police run-ins during the last 5 years.

He's one b****-slap away from an 8 game suspension which makes him a high risk for ANY team.

Yet, some will make this about McDaniels trading a pro-bowl player.

bigbucks24
01-31-2010, 01:00 PM
Hey, I didn't want to see Cutler traded...but, I wasn't disapointed with what we got in exchange. I don't want to see Marshall go either, but I think we'll get a fair deal.

But Cutler had more value because he didn't have the off field baggage that BMarsh does. Unfortunately, I think Brandon's antics (off field run in's with the law and on fields suspensions--twice this year) have devalued him. Cutler didn't have anything like that to lower his value. Had Brandon not had these strikes against him, you would get a king's ransom. Then again, if Brandon was a model citizen, you woldn't be trading him.

tsiguy96
01-31-2010, 02:34 PM
i dont think we let him go for less than a 1st and 3rd, the tender amount. just because marshall is "good as gone" doesnt mean we give him away for nothing. look at the cutler situation, if there is a market for a player, and a 3peat 100 catch seasons will drive that market very high, we will get what we want and more.

it doesnt matter hes "good as gone", supply and demand.

BroncoMan4ever
01-31-2010, 02:49 PM
But Cutler had more value because he didn't have the off field baggage that BMarsh does. Unfortunately, I think Brandon's antics (off field run in's with the law and on fields suspensions--twice this year) have devalued him. Cutler didn't have anything like that to lower his value. Had Brandon not had these strikes against him, you would get a king's ransom. Then again, if Brandon was a model citizen, you woldn't be trading him.

Cutler didn't have off field problems, but there were numerous on field questions about him as well as questions of character.

bad attitude on the field, tendency to mope on the field, not a great teammate, not a very good leader, not mentally strong, unable to deal with tough situations, can't handle a coach pushing him to get better, is a bit of a crybaby, as well as health issues.

Cutler didn't leave Denver without his fair share of baggage and was far from a model citizen when he left.

but just like Cutler, in Marshall's case, more often than not, talent and potential will outweigh any character issues or off field problems.

rastaman
01-31-2010, 02:49 PM
You could also raise the question that even if/had Marshall been a model citizen, would Bowlen-McD still try and under pay him in the philosophy of the NE Patriots. Whereas as the Broncos will be playing hard ball to expect Brandon to sign a cap friendly team first contract. Despite the fact McD has chosen to place Denver on full rebuilding status to mold the Broncos in his image. The question is why would Bmarsh have wanted to sign with the Broncos given the current circumstances.

Lastly, the situation and environment isn't exactly a healthy one. When you take into consideration the way Brandon and McD do not trust one another. One would never know when the drama will start all over again. One can only imagine the mind games both HC and player has enstored for each other for the 2010 season if a trade never materialize b/c the Broncos and McD got too greedy and demanded more than what teams were willing to give up in draft pick compensation.

BroncoMan4ever
01-31-2010, 02:54 PM
i dont think we let him go for less than a 1st and 3rd, the tender amount. just because marshall is "good as gone" doesnt mean we give him away for nothing. look at the cutler situation, if there is a market for a player, and a 3peat 100 catch seasons will drive that market very high, we will get what we want and more.

it doesnt matter hes "good as gone", supply and demand.

exactly. just because he doesn't want to be here doesn't mean we need to let him go that easily. teams are always on the lookout for a guy who is going to make their team better. and in a league where there are so few truly top flight receivers, teams will look into getting Marshall for what we want.

it was the same with Cutler. he didn't want to be here anymore, and we didn't want him here anymore, everyone in the league knew, but the fact remained he was still ours, and if anyone wanted him they were going to have to pay our asking price.

BroncoMan4ever
01-31-2010, 02:57 PM
You could also raise the question that even if/had Marshall been a model citizen, would Bowlen-McD still try and under pay him in the philosophy of the NE Patriots. Whereas as the Broncos will be playing hard ball to expect Brandon to sign a cap friendly team first contract. Despite the fact McD has chosen to place Denver on full rebuilding status to mold the Broncos in his image. The question is why would Bmarsh have wanted to sign with the Broncos given the current circumstances.

Lastly, the situation and environment isn't exactly a healthy one. When you take into consideration the way Brandon and McD do not trust one another. One would never know when the drama will start all over again. One can only imagine the mind games both HC and player has enstored for each other for the 2010 season if a trade never materialize b/c the Broncos and McD got too greedy and demanded more than what teams were willing to give up in draft pick compensation.

if Marshall had been a model citizen he would have gotten a new deal 2 years ago after his 1st 100 catch season.

the fact that he hasn't gotten paid by us, is no fault of McDaniels or anyone associated with the franchise, it is all on Marshall.

tsiguy96
01-31-2010, 03:06 PM
exactly. just because he doesn't want to be here doesn't mean we need to let him go that easily. teams are always on the lookout for a guy who is going to make their team better. and in a league where there are so few truly top flight receivers, teams will look into getting Marshall for what we want.

it was the same with Cutler. he didn't want to be here anymore, and we didn't want him here anymore, everyone in the league knew, but the fact remained he was still ours, and if anyone wanted him they were going to have to pay our asking price.

yep, so hopefully they get a bidding war, a 1st and 2nd isnt out of the question.

TheDave
01-31-2010, 03:08 PM
Come on man. What matters the most, is the production on the field. Marshall has 3 100 catch seasons in a row and is playing in his 2nd straight probowl after just his 4th year in the league.

Sure, he has problems, but he's not a jerk. I think for the most part his teammates like him and he gives it his all on the field.

He may be done here, but other teams will come calling. That's for sure.

If someone who beats women "is not a jerk" then I don't know what is.

As for the rest of the post, I think a lot of people here are setting themselves up for a massive disapointment. Everyone in the league knows this guy and McKidd are oil and water. Trust me, with a draft this deep people are going to be VERY stingy with their 1st round picks.

tsiguy96
01-31-2010, 03:10 PM
If someone who beats women "is not a jerk" then I don't know what is.

As for the rest of the post, I think a lot of people here are setting themselves up for a massive disapointment. Everyone in the league knows this guy and McKidd are oil and water. Trust me, with a draft this deep people are going to be VERY stingy with their 1st round picks.

which begs the question would people take a 2nd or 3rd this year and a 1st next year for him?

TheDave
01-31-2010, 03:24 PM
which begs the question would people take a 2nd or 3rd this year and a 1st next year for him?

I doubt McKidd will... without BMarsh and without a viable replacement I doubt he is coaching here in 2011.

Without Brandon, I'd guess our record would have been sub 6-10 this year. After this years collapse I'm not sure he would survive a 6-10 follow up season.

NFLBRONCO
01-31-2010, 03:58 PM
I doubt McKidd will... without BMarsh and without a viable replacement I doubt he is coaching here in 2011.

Without Brandon, I'd guess our record would have been sub 6-10 this year. After this years collapse I'm not sure he would survive a 6-10 follow up season.

If it would happen like that for 11 #1 it would prove to me McD has longer then next year to prove himself in Bowlens eyes.

TheDave
01-31-2010, 04:01 PM
If it would happen like that for 11 #1 it would prove to me McD has longer then next year to prove himself in Bowlens eyes.

I agree with that, but I think McKidds self preservation insticts will kick in if any 2011 offer comes in.

Mecklomaniac
01-31-2010, 05:43 PM
yep, so hopefully they get a bidding war, a 1st and 2nd isnt out of the question.


Even at 1st and 2nd you are trading a known pro-bowl receiver for unknown prospects.

Would you trade Marshall for two players like Ayers and Fonzie Smith, or Knowshon and Richard Quinn?

HooptyHoops
01-31-2010, 05:55 PM
Even at 1st and 2nd you are trading a known pro-bowl receiver for unknown prospects.

Would you trade Marshall for two players like Ayers and Fonzie Smith, or Knowshon and Richard Quinn?

Totally agree...I love the draft as much as anybody, but I think its crazy trading a player like Marshall for some unknown draft-picks! Absolutely CRAZY!!

TonyR
01-31-2010, 05:56 PM
Marshall "would love" to finish his career in Denver
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 31, 2010 8:25 PM ET

Sunday could be Brandon Marshall's last game with a Broncos helmet on, but he says he wouldn't mind staying.

"I think we're past that," Marshall said on ESPN during the telecast. "I love the city of Denver. I started there and would love to finish there. I'm down here enjoying the Pro Bowl."

Whether Marshall totally means what he says or not is irrelevant. His fate is up to the Broncos.

It seems like Marshall has learned that popping off to the press will do him no good, so he's either going to stay mum or kill them with kindness. Heck, maybe he is maturing. (Probably not, but he could create a little sympathy among the Denver faithful.)

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/31/marshall-would-love-to-finish-his-career-in-denver/

tsiguy96
01-31-2010, 06:07 PM
Marshall "would love" to finish his career in Denver
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 31, 2010 8:25 PM ET

Sunday could be Brandon Marshall's last game with a Broncos helmet on, but he says he wouldn't mind staying.

"I think we're past that," Marshall said on ESPN during the telecast. "I love the city of Denver. I started there and would love to finish there. I'm down here enjoying the Pro Bowl."

Whether Marshall totally means what he says or not is irrelevant. His fate is up to the Broncos.

It seems like Marshall has learned that popping off to the press will do him no good, so he's either going to stay mum or kill them with kindness. Heck, maybe he is maturing. (Probably not, but he could create a little sympathy among the Denver faithful.)

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/31/marshall-would-love-to-finish-his-career-in-denver/


if they show the video on nfl.com, it was a weird conversation and im not sure i believe it completely. then again, marshall doesnt have anything against the broncos, he just wants paid, and has said it before.

tsiguy96
01-31-2010, 06:09 PM
twitter stuff

Peter King:
Marshall "would love" to finish his career in Denver...You make us all chortle, Brandon.Love your version of the truth.
SI_PeterKing (http://twitter.com/SI_PeterKing)
RT @fb_outsiders (http://twitter.com/fb_outsiders): @SI_PeterKing (http://twitter.com/SI_PeterKing) He wants to finish his career there ... and play for a bunch of other teams between then and now ... Touche.

baja
01-31-2010, 06:21 PM
we will get a 1st and 3rd for marshall bet it

kamakazi_kal
01-31-2010, 06:24 PM
we will get a 1st and 3rd for marshall bet it

ha ha ha and the 1st will be slow ..... the 3rd will be short. Hilarious!

baja
01-31-2010, 06:29 PM
Ya think?

baja
01-31-2010, 06:30 PM
sitting in a condo on the beach in San Diego. Cold and a very high tide water coming over the boardwalk

kamakazi_kal
01-31-2010, 06:37 PM
sitting in a condo on the beach in San Diego. Cold and a very high tide water coming over the boardwalk

surf was good today in ventura bet it was money that far south.

baja
01-31-2010, 06:39 PM
surf was good today in ventura bet it was money that far south.

Not really, waves too unorgenized but every once and awhile there was a beautiful set.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-31-2010, 08:31 PM
I doubt McKidd will... without BMarsh and without a viable replacement I doubt he is coaching here in 2011.

Without Brandon, I'd guess our record would have been sub 6-10 this year. After this years collapse I'm not sure he would survive a 6-10 follow up season.

McD's job is in danger when Bowlen no longer has to pay Shanny, and that's 2012. Bowlen isn't firing McD after next year so he can pay 3 coaches in '11.

baja
01-31-2010, 08:33 PM
he is off the hook for shanny's money

NFLBRONCO
01-31-2010, 08:39 PM
he is off the hook for shanny's money

Nope Bowlen still has to pay 3.5 mil this year and next. Better then 7 mil each year.

Punisher
01-31-2010, 08:41 PM
Why not just sign him back what the **** what the **** what the **** **** **** **** **** just sign him back for god shake please god why god what the **** god, why does my team want to suck and lick dickholes why why why

Taco John
01-31-2010, 08:41 PM
he is off the hook for shanny's money

No he's not. Bowlen is subsidizing Shanahan to coach in DC for the next two years.

baja
01-31-2010, 08:49 PM
No he's not. Bowlen is subsidizing Shanahan to coach in DC for the next two years.

details.

TheDave
01-31-2010, 09:51 PM
details.

for some reason Bowlen still owes him $3.5 mil per year.

oubronco
02-01-2010, 06:12 AM
if they show the video on nfl.com, it was a weird conversation and im not sure i believe it completely. then again, marshall doesnt have anything against the broncos, he just wants paid, and has said it before.

Oh Good Grief everytime he says something you guys are all over it with the expressions and tone shyt

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 06:35 AM
Without Brandon, I'd guess our record would have been sub 6-10 this year.

No way. 7-9 at worst.

If you really look at what he did this season, there's only one game (Pats) that probably would've been a loss instead of a win because of his contributions. Aside from that game, his best performances came in games that they either lost outright or won by 20+ pts.

Sub 6-10? That means that at least one of these games would all of a sudden turn into a loss.

Cincy? 4 catches for 27 yds
Cleveland? 3 catches for 34 yds
Oakland? 5 catches for 67 yds and a TD (won by 20)
SD? 5 catches for 49 yds
NY? 6 catches for 86 yds (won by 20)
KC? 7 catches for 94 yds and 1 TD (won by 31)

SouthStndJunkie
02-01-2010, 06:44 AM
No way. 7-9 at worst.

If you really look at what he did this season, there's only one game (Pats) that probably would've been a loss instead of a win because of his contributions. Aside from that game, his best performances came in games that they either lost outright or won by 20+ pts.

Sub 6-10? That means that at least one of these games would all of a sudden turn into a loss.

Cincy? 4 catches for 27 yds
Cleveland? 3 catches for 34 yds
Oakland? 5 catches for 67 yds and a TD (won by 20)
SD? 5 catches for 49 yds
NY? 6 catches for 86 yds (won by 20)
KC? 7 catches for 94 yds and 1 TD (won by 31)

What about the Dallas game and his incredible 51 yard catch and run for the TD to give Denver the lead with 1:46 left in the 4th quarter?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bPINVd9zBko&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bPINVd9zBko&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 06:51 AM
What about the Dallas game and his incredible 51 yard catch and run for the TD to give Denver the lead with 1:46 left in the 4th quarter?


The game was tied with 2 minutes to go. Up until that point, Marshall did NOTHING. They drove the ball to the 50 with plenty of time on the clock before that play. All they needed was one more first down to get in field goal range. There was no reason to believe they weren't going to get it, based on what was happening in that drive to that point. Is it certain? No, of course not. But the odds were certainly in the Broncos favor.

Obviously, it's debatable, but I just have a problem with someone saying that without that play they lose. In fact, they almost lost that game BECAUSE of that play. Why? Nobody remembers it, but it gave Dallas enough time to march to our one yard line and give them a legit shot at a TD of their own before time expired.

Either way, even if you concede that Dallas game, it still doesn't make his "sub 6-10" prediction possible, now does it? And that's my whole point.

jhns
02-01-2010, 06:52 AM
No way. 7-9 at worst.

If you really look at what he did this season, there's only one game (Pats) that probably would've been a loss instead of a win because of his contributions. Aside from that game, his best performances came in games that they either lost outright or won by 20+ pts.

Sub 6-10? That means that at least one of these games would all of a sudden turn into a loss.

Cincy? 4 catches for 27 yds
Cleveland? 3 catches for 34 yds
Oakland? 5 catches for 67 yds and a TD (won by 20)
SD? 5 catches for 49 yds
NY? 6 catches for 86 yds (won by 20)
KC? 7 catches for 94 yds and 1 TD (won by 31)

I can name two games we lose without Brandon. Dallas and Cincy. Without Cincy triple teaming Marshall and Orton locking onto him, there is no deflection to an alone Stokley. Dallas shouldn't need an explanation. That isn't even counting the Pats. It also isn't saying anything about how all defenses focused their game plans around containing Marshall. That is what opens it up for other guys to do well. I don't think we have another receiver that could excel as a number one for an entire year.

Bigdawg26
02-01-2010, 06:55 AM
Well playing devil's advocate if the bengals and pats defense could catch then Denver wouldn't have the won the game. The bengals dropped two picks in the last to plays, and the pats linebackers dropped about 3 picks in the last half of that game.

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 07:01 AM
I can name two games we lose without Brandon. Dallas and Cincy. Without Cincy triple teaming Marshall and Orton locking onto him, there is no deflection to an alone Stokley.

Nope. Marshall had 27 drops in that Cincy game and his head wasn't in it from the start. Sorry, if anything, another quality receiver wins that game long before the "miracle drive."

Dallas shouldn't need an explanation.

Sorry. I explained this one above. Swap him out of that game and we still win that game. It probably would've ended differently, but it would've been a win regardless.

That isn't even counting the Pats.

Huh? I counted them.

It also isn't saying anything about how all defenses focused their game plans around containing Marshall. That is what opens it up for other guys to do well.

Yup. All those other WRs and RBs on the Broncos that put up flashy numbers this year makes this all too obvious. Please. His effect there was overrated.

I don't think we have another receiver that could excel as a number one for an entire year.

Which is why they would pick one or two potential replacements up in the offseason.

jhns
02-01-2010, 07:06 AM
Nope. Marshall had 27 drops in that Cincy game and his head wasn't in it from the start. Sorry, if anything, another quality receiver wins that game long before the "miracle drive."



Sorry. I explained this one above. Swap him out of that game and we still win that game. It probably would've ended differently, but it would've been a win regardless.



Huh? I counted them.



Yup. All those other WRs and RBs on the Broncos that put up flashy numbers this year makes this all too obvious. Please. His effect there was overrated.



Which is why they would pick one or two potential replacements up in the offseason.

Yeah, we were killing Dallas on offense before Marshall did his thing... Riiiight.

Sorry, we lose Cincy without the miracle play. The miracle play only happens with Marshall there.

I get that you counted them. I hadn't yet. Then I did, after already having two others.

Riiiight, Marshalls presense does nothing for everyone else. Them putting 2-3 guys on him does nothing but make everyone elses job harder.. LOL OK.....

Nice, so it is just as easy as that to replace a top receiver? Good, let's see them get it done.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-01-2010, 07:10 AM
Oh Good Grief everytime he says something you guys are all over it with the expressions and tone shyt

You're right, nobody ever does that to McDaniels.

YAWN

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 07:23 AM
Yeah, we were killing Dallas on offense before Marshall did his thing... Riiiight.

The only reason they didn't score more was because of turnovers and failed 4th down conversions. If you really look at the full game log, you'll see that from the mid 2nd quarter till the end of the game, they moved the ball quite well. ZERO three and outs and an average of 35-40 yds gained each possession. They sucked in the first quarter, but made adjustments that clearly worked.

They had the ball at midfield with first down and 2 minutes to go in the game. Why do people assume that we would lose that game at that point? It's not like they were losing the game with less than a minute left, were facing 3rd or 4th down, and needed that one play to win it.

Sorry, we lose Cincy without the miracle play. The miracle play only happens with Marshall there.

Congrats for your inability to understand why Marshall's poor play was instrumental in us even needing to make that play to win. How soon we forget that the pulse of this board after that game was that he was purposely throwing it because he was upset with McD.

Nice, so it is just as easy as that to replace a top receiver? Good, let's see them get it done.

Well, the sample size we have so far is small (one game - week 17), but it's all we have so far. And I'd say by looking at that one game, that they have the ability to coach and come up with a game plan without him when given the opportunity.

jhns
02-01-2010, 07:31 AM
Congrats for your inability to understand why Marshall's poor play was instrumental in us even needing to make that play to win. How soon we forget that the pulse of this board after that game was that he was purposely throwing it because he was upset with McD.


Nah, I never came close to saying something like this. Also, it had nothing to do with how Marshall was playing. It had everything to do with the QB play. I bet I even said the exact same thing then.

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 07:39 AM
Nah, I never came close to saying something like this.

Reading comprehension....it's not for everyone. THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT.

Also, it had nothing to do with how Marshall was playing. It had everything to do with the QB play.

Yup, cause dropped passes that hit receivers in the hands are clearly the fault of the QB.

I bet I even said the exact same thing then.

Nobody would ever take that bet. You have made your vendetta and bias against Orton from day one crystal clear.

jhns
02-01-2010, 07:46 AM
Reading comprehension....it's not for everyone. THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT.



Yup, cause dropped passes that hit receivers in the hands are clearly the fault of the QB.



Nobody would ever take that bet. You have made your vendetta and bias against Orton from day one crystal clear.

Well why do I care what the board thinks? You guys are all a bunch of conspiracy nuts. Like I said, I never thought that for a second.

No, we probably shouldn't expect these guys to catch all of those horribly thrown balls. At least Marshall learned to adjust to them eventually. Royal doesn't have the reach to extend and get them, it is why he fell off.

Yes, mt bias should be crystal clear. I would like the team to have a chance.

TailgateNut
02-01-2010, 07:54 AM
Reading comprehension....it's not for everyone. THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT.



Yup, cause dropped passes that hit receivers in the hands are clearly the fault of the QB.



Nobody would ever take that bet. You have made your vendetta and bias against Orton from day one crystal clear.


Arguing with that RETARD is bad for your health.

2KBack
02-01-2010, 07:57 AM
Well playing devil's advocate if the bengals and pats defense could catch then Denver wouldn't have the won the game. The bengals dropped two picks in the last to plays, and the pats linebackers dropped about 3 picks in the last half of that game.

your saying that 3 out of Ortons 13 incompletions on a day where he completed 73% of his passes were dropped picks? I'm afraid i don't remember it that way. That was probably Ortons best game of the season. you know the one where McD says that Orton didn't miss a read all game long.

oubronco
02-01-2010, 08:10 AM
No way. 7-9 at worst.

If you really look at what he did this season, there's only one game (Pats) that probably would've been a loss instead of a win because of his contributions. Aside from that game, his best performances came in games that they either lost outright or won by 20+ pts.

Sub 6-10? That means that at least one of these games would all of a sudden turn into a loss.

Cincy? 4 catches for 27 yds
Cleveland? 3 catches for 34 yds
Oakland? 5 catches for 67 yds and a TD (won by 20)
SD? 5 catches for 49 yds
NY? 6 catches for 86 yds (won by 20)
KC? 7 catches for 94 yds and 1 TD (won by 31)

Comeon Bean you are kidding right? Marshall was the offense

oubronco
02-01-2010, 08:11 AM
The game was tied with 2 minutes to go. Up until that point, Marshall did NOTHING. They drove the ball to the 50 with plenty of time on the clock before that play. All they needed was one more first down to get in field goal range. There was no reason to believe they weren't going to get it, based on what was happening in that drive to that point. Is it certain? No, of course not. But the odds were certainly in the Broncos favor.

Obviously, it's debatable, but I just have a problem with someone saying that without that play they lose. In fact, they almost lost that game BECAUSE of that play. Why? Nobody remembers it, but it gave Dallas enough time to march to our one yard line and give them a legit shot at a TD of their own before time expired.
Either way, even if you concede that Dallas game, it still doesn't make his "sub 6-10" prediction possible, now does it? And that's my whole point.


Are you serious? That was Marshall's fault Hilarious!

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 08:16 AM
Comeon Bean you are kidding right? Marshall was the offense

Not consistently, no. He padded his stats in a handful of games that were either losses or blowouts, but he wasn't the consistent threat this year in the close games that several people are making him out to be.

oubronco
02-01-2010, 08:19 AM
Not consistently, no. He padded his stats in a handful of games that were either losses or blowouts, but he wasn't the consistent threat this year in the close games that several people are making him out to be.

there is no way in hell we would've won 8 games without Marshall

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 08:21 AM
Are you serious? That was Marshall's fault Hilarious!

Exhibit B on why reading comp isn't for everyone.

Here was my point, slowly for those in the cheap seats:

Some are saying the Cowboys game is a loss without Marshall? Why? Because of the 51 yd TD? Anyone making that argument is ignoring that the game was tied at that point. If he doesn't make that first down catch, they don't all of a sudden LOSE points, do they? They simply move on to 2nd down and go from there. And they also chew up more clock and make it less likely that the Cowboys get the ball back with enough time to march right down to the 2 yard line.

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 08:22 AM
there is no way in hell we would've won 8 games without Marshall

Well, if you read above, my argument was essentially 7.

jhns
02-01-2010, 08:24 AM
Arguing with that RETARD is bad for your health.

Shut up do-do head!

2nd grade insults are fun.

oubronco
02-01-2010, 08:26 AM
Well, if you read above, my argument was essentially 7.

essentially they just need to pay the muthafugga

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2010, 08:31 AM
essentially they just need to pay the muthafugga

Depends on how much he wants. I'm not of the mind that a guy that gets you one more win each regular season is worth "top 2-3 WR money" if that is in fact what he and his agent are demanding. I'd probably offer him a Roddy White-type deal: six-year, $48 million contract with $18.6 million guaranteed.

oubronco
02-01-2010, 08:39 AM
Depends on how much he wants. I'm not of the mind that a guy that gets you one more win each regular season is worth "top 2-3 WR money" if that is in fact what he and his agent are demanding. I'd probably offer him a Roddy White-type deal: six-year, $48 million contract with $18.6 million guaranteed.

They should put in clauses for fuggups but he will get top dollar, be it here or somewhere else but I would much rather it be here

Putting hope on draft picks versus proven product isn't smart in my books

WolfpackGuy
02-01-2010, 08:41 AM
Putting hope on draft picks versus proven product isn't smart in my books

Are you kidding?

After all those studs the Broncos had from last year's draft?