PDA

View Full Version : Shannon Sharpe "knows" 3 teams want WR Marshall


SoDak Bronco
02-05-2010, 08:34 AM
Posted by Evan Silva on February 5, 2010 10:18 AM ET
Former Broncos tight end and 2010 Hall of Fame finalist Shannon Sharpe believes there's no way receiver Brandon Marshall will be back in Denver next season.


"I don't know how they mend this," said Sharpe. "Help me understand this: How can a guy catch 21 passes one week and then two weeks later he doesn't even play? Once you go there, once you break that communication, once you break that trust, I don't know how you get that back."


Sharpe takes it a step further, claiming he knows Marshall will have considerable value on the trade market, despite the receiver's laundry list of off-field woes.


"I know personally there are three teams out there who are going to make a move for Brandon Marshall," Sharpe said.


Sharpe didn't name his sources or say which teams are constructing a trade package.


Of late, Marshall has consistently indicated that he is willing to return to the Broncos, which can't hurt his value or the Broncos' potential trade compensation. But it's still hard to imagine any team being willing to surrender a first-round pick for the moody wideout, much less a first-rounder and a long-term contract.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/05/shannon-sharpe-knows-3-teams-want-wr-marshall/

Taco John
02-05-2010, 08:38 AM
Yeah, I'm having a real tough time imagining that teams would want to throw resources at a talent like Brandon Marshall. Game breaking, physical receivers just aren't given many chances in this league.

Rohirrim
02-05-2010, 08:40 AM
Yeah, I'm having a real tough time imagining that teams would want to throw resources at a talent like Brandon Marshall. Game breaking, physical receivers just aren't given many chances in this league.

You can't pretend that he doesn't carry some baggage. Personally, I hope he stays (if he's truly done with the off field bs), but I don't think any GM out there isn't going be a little wary.

backup qb
02-05-2010, 08:40 AM
Yeah, I'm having a real tough time imagining that teams would want to throw resources at a talent like Brandon Marshall. Game breaking, physical receivers just aren't given many chances in this league.

Amen Taco.

backup qb
02-05-2010, 08:41 AM
GM's will be wary, but they want to keep their jobs as well, which, in this league requires mega talented players. If a GM views Marshall as the piece to put them over the top and the compensation isn't ridiculous, then they will attempt to get him.

SoDak Bronco
02-05-2010, 08:42 AM
florio is a huge bronco hater..his web sites thoughts aren't really surprising.

TheDave
02-05-2010, 08:44 AM
God I hope he is right...

kamakazi_kal
02-05-2010, 09:06 AM
You can't pretend that he doesn't carry some baggage. Personally, I hope he stays (if he's truly done with the off field bs), but I don't think any GM out there isn't going be a little wary.

I think their are teams that will shy away from him mostly due to the draft pick cost ....... I also think this board cares more about his baggage then allot of GM's do.

broncofan7
02-05-2010, 09:10 AM
Well after the 2010 season we will be looking at trading Clady and the offensive deconstruction will be almost complete (Trade Cutler -check, Marshall--on the to do list for 2010 off-season....)

watermock
02-05-2010, 09:16 AM
I don't know how they mend this," said Sharpe. "Help me understand this: How can a guy catch 21 passes one week and then two weeks later he doesn't even play? Once you go there, once you break that communication, once you break that trust, I don't know how you get that back."



Where have I heard this before?

Pick Six
02-05-2010, 09:27 AM
Let him flounder in a place like Detroit, and then he'll see just what a good situation he had in Denver. He wants his money, but he also wants to win. Everything was fine when Denver started 6-0...

kamakazi_kal
02-05-2010, 09:30 AM
Let him flounder in a place like Detroit, and then he'll see just what a good situation he had in Denver. He wants his money, but he also wants to win. Everything was fine when Denver started 6-0...

I have to think that even if we had won the superbowl this year Marsh would still be looking for a payday ...... and rightly so.

dbfan21
02-05-2010, 09:35 AM
I'm kinda glad he's picking up interest. I hope it incites a bidding war that gives Denver draft picks, players, cash, hookers...well, maybe not hookers. That would lead to suspensions, but all the other stuff would be fantastic!

Taco John
02-05-2010, 09:35 AM
You can't pretend that he doesn't carry some baggage. Personally, I hope he stays (if he's truly done with the off field bs), but I don't think any GM out there isn't going be a little wary.

Who is pretending? It doesn't matter what baggage he has. He's a physical wide receiver who has shown he can step up on game day. These types get chance after chance after chance in this league. It's ridiculous to say "it's hard to imagine" that anyone is going to have interest in Brandon Marshall.

Pick Six
02-05-2010, 09:35 AM
I have to think that even if we had won the superbowl this year Marsh would still be looking for a payday ...... and rightly so.

I admitted he wants to be paid. However, his attitude changed when we started losing, even though he was getting the lion's share of catches...

Taco John
02-05-2010, 09:36 AM
I admitted he wants to be paid. However, his attitude changed when we started losing, even though he was getting the lion's share of catches...

How so?

Hogan11
02-05-2010, 09:37 AM
Sharpe didn't name his sources or say which teams are constructing a trade package.

That's because he's just opining....he's blowing his usual smoke.

Pick Six
02-05-2010, 09:39 AM
How so?

If the reports of the team captains wanting McDaniels to sit Marshall are true, that signals a worsening attitude by Marshall. I guess I should have put "allegedly" with the change in attitude...

kamakazi_kal
02-05-2010, 09:40 AM
I admitted he wants to be paid. However, his attitude changed when we started losing, even though he was getting the lion's share of catches...

When did his attitude change and how can you tell on tv? He was getting the lion's share of the catches because he's our best offensive weapon.

Rohirrim
02-05-2010, 09:41 AM
Who is pretending? It doesn't matter what baggage he has. He's a physical wide receiver who has shown he can step up on game day. These types get chance after chance after chance in this league. It's ridiculous to say "it's hard to imagine" that anyone is going to have interest in Brandon Marshall.

He's already had chance after chance, right here in Denver. Face it, no matter what clause you write in his contract, he's one gf pop in the mouth away from an eight game suspension. Any GM who doesn't take that into account isn't doing his job.

kamakazi_kal
02-05-2010, 09:43 AM
If the reports of the team captains wanting McDaniels to sit Marshall are true, that signals a worsening attitude by Marshall. I guess I should have put "allegedly" with the change in attitude...

I love how everyone spins that story. Go back and read it again.

Marshall wasn't pointed out. That was pointed out just to stop this type of story making.The captians asked for accountability then the next dayMarsh showed up 15min late for treatment on his hammy.

TailgateNut
02-05-2010, 09:44 AM
Who is pretending? It doesn't matter what baggage he has. He's a physical wide receiver who has shown he can step up on game day. These types get chance after chance after chance in this league. It's ridiculous to say "it's hard to imagine" that anyone is going to have interest in Brandon Marshall.

...and has shown that he can dog it and fake it when he's PMSing, and who's to say that he will act like a pro or a child once he recieves his "paycheck".

watermock
02-05-2010, 09:45 AM
If I'm a GM, I give 50 million over 5 and a first.

Rohirrim
02-05-2010, 09:46 AM
...and has shown that he can dog it and fake it when he's PMSing, and who's to say that he will act like a pro or a child once he recieves his "paycheck".

That's the problem. Does he follow in the footsteps of Rod Smith, or Terrell Owens?

kamakazi_kal
02-05-2010, 09:47 AM
...and has shown that he can dog it and fake it when he's PMSing, and who's to say that he will act like a pro or a child once he recieves his "paycheck".

Well he gets fined by the team and that is something that can be covered in a contract.

I'm sure BM is as good as gone so a bunch of people will be able to celebrate their awesomeness sooner then later. Let's just hope McD don't blow the first rounder he gets for him......then losing Marsh would be ________

TailgateNut
02-05-2010, 09:48 AM
That's the problem. Does he follow in the footsteps of Rod Smith, or Terrell Owens?

T.O.!

Just my HO.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 09:49 AM
BM interview on NFL channel.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-super-bowl/09000d5d81632850/Brandon-Marshall-on-set

jhns
02-05-2010, 09:50 AM
I can pretty much guarantee he is gone. McDaniels seems to have a direct line to my brain and does the exact opposite of what I think is good for the team, every time. Maybe that's for the best. We will sure see over the next year or two. I am honestly starting to think I could be a better GM than anyone we have. That statement makes me very sad and it is why I worry for this team. I hope they prove me wrong.

watermock
02-05-2010, 09:50 AM
It's amusing and sad to see this offense be dismantled.

Boogerboots
02-05-2010, 09:51 AM
One of those teams has to be the Giants. What have they done since Plaxico shot himself in the leg and shot the Giant's franchise in the foot at the same time?

I'm sure that they would bite at the chance to land Marshall with a combo of picks and maybe some helpful cogs on D that are on the roster.

bap454
02-05-2010, 09:53 AM
Even with all the baggage, I think at min. Marshall demands equal value that was attained by the Roy Williams and Braylon trades. Not sure exactlly what it was, I just remember it being way to much.

HEAV
02-05-2010, 09:54 AM
Who is pretending? It doesn't matter what baggage he has. He's a physical wide receiver who has shown he can step up on game day. These types get chance after chance after chance in this league. It's ridiculous to say "it's hard to imagine" that anyone is going to have interest in Brandon Marshall.

But yet it does matter when he is one F-up from being suspended for multiple games.

Teams that are close or need to get over the hump will give a look. But will they offer 1st round tender? Plus will they be able to come to terms with Marshall.

Mick Vick got interest from teams and played in 2009! There are teams willing to take a shot on talent, it's just how much they are willing to pay for that shot.

bowtown
02-05-2010, 09:55 AM
If I'm a GM, I give 50 million over 5 and a first.

Does that include a signing bonus?

TonyR
02-05-2010, 10:00 AM
There are teams willing to take a shot on talent, it's just how much they are willing to pay for that shot.

This is exactly the point people need to understand and stop being so obtuse about. Sure teams are "interested". But who's going to give up a 1st and a 3rd and then give Marshall a huge, guaranteed money contract in this current environment? I say the number approaches zero, but I suppose all it takes is one.

That and I call BS on Shannon's report of "knowing" 3 teams have interest. Please.

Beantown Bronco
02-05-2010, 10:15 AM
Sure teams are "interested". But who's going to give up a 1st and a 3rd and then give Marshall a huge, guaranteed money contract in this current environment? I say the number approaches zero, but I suppose all it takes is one.

Look back at the last 5 years of drafts and tell me how many people have taken players at their 1 and 3 picks that are worth more than Marshall today? And they've collected a lot more money than Brandon has so far for not much in the way of production.

The top 5 picks in this draft will all probably sign for more money than Brandon will if he re-negotiates his current deal.....all for doing nothing. So, by definition, there are at least 5 teams planning on spending that money already on unknowns. Throw in a measly 3rd rounder and get yourself a proven commodity. I don't see the problem.

TonyR
02-05-2010, 10:20 AM
I don't see the problem.

At a minimum Marshall is going to demand 6 years, $50 million, $18 million guaranteed. That's what Roddy White got. How many owners are going to commit to that with the upcoming labor strife, particularly involving a player with Marshall's character issues? If you don't "see the problem" you need to look a little closer. But again, like I said, it only takes one team to get the deal done.

Tombstone RJ
02-05-2010, 10:21 AM
Well after the 2010 season we will be looking at trading Clady and the offensive deconstruction will be almost complete (Trade Cutler -check, Marshall--on the to do list for 2010 off-season....)

:rofl:

Beantown Bronco
02-05-2010, 10:22 AM
At a minimum Marshall is going to demand 6 years, $50 million, $18 million guaranteed. That's what Roddy White got. How many owners are going to commit to that with the upcoming labor strife

Like I said, the owners of the teams picking in the top 5 are already committed to doing just that. Look at what the top 5 picks got last year. Do you disagree?

DrFate
02-05-2010, 10:22 AM
But who's going to give up a 1st and a 3rd and then give Marshall a huge, guaranteed money contract in this current environment? I say the number approaches zero, but I suppose all it takes is one.

Teams don't have to give up a 1st and a 3rd in a trade - only if they sign him as a restricted FA. If the team gets a deal it likes, it can pull the trigger regardless of compensation.

Tombstone RJ
02-05-2010, 10:22 AM
I can pretty much guarantee he is gone. McDaniels seems to have a direct line to my brain and does the exact opposite of what I think is good for the team, every time. Maybe that's for the best. We will sure see over the next year or two. I am honestly starting to think I could be a better GM than anyone we have. That statement makes me very sad and it is why I worry for this team. I hope they prove me wrong.

I honestly think you don't have a friggen clue about football.

Popps
02-05-2010, 10:39 AM
Who is pretending? It doesn't matter what baggage he has. He's a physical wide receiver who has shown he can step up on game day. These types get chance after chance after chance in this league. It's ridiculous to say "it's hard to imagine" that anyone is going to have interest in Brandon Marshall.

Dude, it's the price tag... not him being "given a chance."

The comment was made in regards to Marshall being given a massive contract AND someone giving up multiple draft picks.

We all understand that idiot receivers have been traded or signed as free agents before. The comments people are making regarding someone trading for him involve the CBA and his potential restricted status.

Can you provide multiple examples of wide receivers with multiple suspensions and arrests being traded for a bounty of (one 1st at least) draft picks and given a massive salary?

TonyR
02-05-2010, 10:41 AM
Do you disagree?

I do to a degree, mainly because a) those players don't have the known character concerns, and b) this is a very strong draft. I do agree that there will be teams interested but I do have doubts that there will be teams lining up offering a 1st and a 3rd. To your point about high compensation for top 10 draft picks, it will be interesting to see how many teams play hard ball this year with the high picks. If these kids don't sign they could be looking at 2 years or more without any compensation if there is a lockout in 2011.

jhns
02-05-2010, 10:49 AM
I honestly think you don't have a friggen clue about football.

Which is why it is so sad...

Although, trading future firsts when you haven't even scouted the class is smart stuff. Giving away 25 year old pro bowl QBs so you can handcuff yourself to Orton is brilliant. Running off your hand picked d coordinator that improved the defense a ton in one year is always good for the team.

Oh well, at least he will be gone in a year or two and you all will be laughing at this stuff right along with me.

cousinal11
02-05-2010, 10:52 AM
One of those teams has to be the Giants. What have they done since Plaxico shot himself in the leg and shot the Giant's franchise in the foot at the same time?

I'm sure that they would bite at the chance to land Marshall with a combo of picks and maybe some helpful cogs on D that are on the roster.

I don't know. Nicks is going to be a beast and Smith and Manningham have showed they are more than capable.

TonyR
02-05-2010, 11:14 AM
I don't know.

Agree. I'd say the Giants have zero interest unless perhaps they're going to give us one of those guys in a deal.

Taco John
02-05-2010, 11:25 AM
If the reports of the team captains wanting McDaniels to sit Marshall are true, that signals a worsening attitude by Marshall. I guess I should have put "allegedly" with the change in attitude...

There were actually no specific reports of team captains wanting McDaniels to sit Marshall. You're connecting dots and using specifics that the reports dont support. The reports *did* say that the team captains asked Josh for accountability in the locker room. But it was a general request, and no specific players were mentioned.

Taco John
02-05-2010, 11:31 AM
But yet it does matter when he is one F-up from being suspended for multiple games.

That sort of thing is easy to price into a contract with bonuses. I think that there are plenty of GMs in this league that would be willing to take a chance on Brandon Marshall.


The writer of this piece said that it is "hard to imagine" getting a first rounder out of the guy. The best WR in this upcoming draft is Dez Bryant. If you're a GM, which receiver between the two would you rather spend your first round pick on? The all time game receptions leader in NFL history, or a kid who may or may not pan out at this level?

I can't believe that there isn't universal agreement that it's not "hard to imagine" getting a first rounder out of the guy. It's pretty damned easy to imagine it.

chex
02-05-2010, 11:31 AM
Yeah, I'm having a real tough time imagining that teams would want to throw resources at a talent like Brandon Marshall. Game breaking, physical receivers just aren't given many chances in this league.

Which is why Terrell Owens will be on his 5th different team next year since the end of the 2003 season. Sometimes the headaches aren't worth it. I don't recall too many on here clamoring for us to enter the Terrell Owens sweepstakes when he was shopping/being shopped. And he's a guy with 15,000 career receiving yards. In fact, I remember way back when, in the board's infancy, a thread was started about Shanahan bringing Owens in after he was wearing out his welcome in SF, and most responses were against it.

The only, and I mean ONLY difference in attitude here, is that McDaniels is the coach dealing with this; ergo, he needs to put up with Brandon's nonsense and have him undermine the team with his BS or else he's dismantling the team. I wonder how happy you'll be TJ if we give him mega dollars because you want us to, and he goes and gets himself suspended for 8 games. And who gives a **** if the team covers themselves in a contract, you'll be without the services of your top offensive player for half a season.

Just because some GM or owner is willing to step up doesn't make them smarter; just a risk taker.

Taco John
02-05-2010, 11:35 AM
I remember hearing roughly the same stuff from the same people about receiving good value for Jay Cutler. For some reason, they didn't think we'd be able to get a good haul for him either.

Taco John
02-05-2010, 11:37 AM
I don't recall too many on here clamoring for us to enter the Terrell Owens sweepstakes when he was shopping/being shopped.



Did you have everybody on ignore or something? There were a lot of people who were more than ok with this idea when it came up. We were desperate for an impact receiver at that point.

chex
02-05-2010, 11:39 AM
Did you have everybody on ignore or something? There were a lot of people who were more than ok with this idea when it came up. We were desperate for an impact receiver at that point.

Back in 2001/02? I don't recall an outpouring of support for it. Not at all.

Tombstone RJ
02-05-2010, 11:46 AM
Which is why it is so sad...

Although, trading future firsts when you haven't even scouted the class is smart stuff. Giving away 25 year old pro bowl QBs so you can handcuff yourself to Orton is brilliant. Running off your hand picked d coordinator that improved the defense a ton in one year is always good for the team.

Oh well, at least he will be gone in a year or two and you all will be laughing at this stuff right along with me.

"haven't even scouted the class" is total crap. McD simply targeted the players he wanted and due to time constraints, he focused on a narrower group of players. He's already stated that he'll have more time to evaluate this year's draft class.

Where do you get this "handcuff" crap from? If anything, McD has more flexibility now when it comes to filling the QB position than he would have had if he still had to deal with baby jay.

"Running off" his defensive coordinator? All indications are that it was a mutual decision for Nolan to leave. Both McD and Nolan know that their chemistry was just not as good as it should be and they both agreed to part ways. If anything, this shows maturity on both parties part.

chex
02-05-2010, 11:52 AM
"haven't even scouted the class" is total crap. McD simply targeted the players he wanted and due to time constraints, he focused on a narrower group of players. He's already stated that he'll have more time to evaluate this year's draft class.

Where do you get this "handcuff" crap from? If anything, McD has more flexibility now when it comes to filling the QB position than he would have had if he still had to deal with baby jay.

"Running off" his defensive coordinator? All indications are that it was a mutual decision for Nolan to leave. Both McD and Nolan know that their chemistry was just not as good as it should be and they both agreed to part ways. If anything, this shows maturity on both parties part.

Thank you for stating this. Some idiot posted the idea that McDaniels only had 100 players scouted, and the other dopes ran with it. I don’t know why people would even get upset anyway. Apparently all you need around here to be a draft “expert” is a draft mag, ESPN mock drafts, and access to youtube.

jhns
02-05-2010, 11:59 AM
"haven't even scouted the class" is total crap. McD simply targeted the players he wanted and due to time constraints, he focused on a narrower group of players. He's already stated that he'll have more time to evaluate this year's draft class.

Where do you get this "handcuff" crap from? If anything, McD has more flexibility now when it comes to filling the QB position than he would have had if he still had to deal with baby jay.

"Running off" his defensive coordinator? All indications are that it was a mutual decision for Nolan to leave. Both McD and Nolan know that their chemistry was just not as good as it should be and they both agreed to part ways. If anything, this shows maturity on both parties part.

OK, they mutually split. That means McDaniels didn't want the D coordinator, that improved the defensnse, to be the defensive coordinator. I get Nolan didn't want to be here either. That is my point.

Handcuff as in there are no better options at this point. We are stuck with Orton at QB right now. That or everyone here is wrong about the draft and I will gladly change my opinion when McDaniels decides to start a good rookie.

You just said it, he didn't even scout the class. He only had time to focus on a few. He admitted this. We are a rebuilding team that traded a future first for a position that wasn't a big need. This team had/has a ton of way bigger needs. I don't think you should ever trade future firsts when you are rebuilding. That is especially true when you haven't had proper time to evaluate the talent and you are getting a position that isn't needed.

Don't worry though. You all will agree with me when McDaniels is gone. I get you have to homer out now, I don't hold it against you.

jhns
02-05-2010, 12:02 PM
Thank you for stating this. Some idiot posted the idea that McDaniels only had 100 players scouted, and the other dopes ran with it. I don’t know why people would even get upset anyway. Apparently all you need around here to be a draft “expert” is a draft mag, ESPN mock drafts, and access to youtube.

I don't know about the 100 players but it was McDaniels that said he had a short list to chose from. I will look for the article now.

_Oro_
02-05-2010, 12:10 PM
Mcdaniels said himself during the 2nd day draft presser that they didn't want a board with 200 names on it. So I guess people got 100 since 100 is less than 200. Here's the excerpt from MHR:

On strategy during draft

"I think we were aggressive, if you want to use that term. We didn't have that many players on our board once we were done with the evaluation, and that was the goal. ‘Let's get the players on the board that we want on our team. Let's not have 200 names up there if we don't want 200 guys on our roster.' So, we had a board that was thinned out. (General Manager) Brian (Xanders), and the scouts and the coaches did a great job evaluating the players they had in their areas. And, by the end of the process, our board was thin. We knew we wanted to come away with players on our board and we did, we didn't go to the back board for anybody. At some certain points in the draft, I think you ask yourself ‘If we wait, is he going to be there?' And there were a few times where we felt like there's no way. If we wait, we're not going to be able to attain a player that we'd like to get. We weighed the value of what we were trading to try to go ahead and get the players that we were looking to get. And we have a totally full draft next year, one through seven. So, we didn't give away any rounds next year. We had a couple extra (this year) and we used those to move and get the players in this year's draft."

Furthermore, 7 of 10 picks were from people he brought in. Your only allowed
to bring 30 people so in that sense his board was roughly 30 people.

On familiarity with drafted players

"We took advantage; we used almost all of the allotment we are permitted as far as bringing players in. I think the number is 30 that you're permitted. We brought in close to 30. Like I said, seven of ten have been here before. They know their way around, they've seen the facility. They've met me and the coaching staff. We targeted players; we weren't trying to throw a bunch of smokescreens in the process. We wanted to bring in players we had a sincere interest in and we felt could help our team. We're fortunate that we felt comfortable with them, we watched them on tape, we brought them here, and we saw them at the combine. We have a mini relationship started already with many of them."

Anyway I think it's a good strategy. There's a reason you have to go interview in person at almost any job in the real world.

watermock
02-05-2010, 01:04 PM
"haven't even scouted the class" is total crap. McD simply targeted the players he wanted and due to time constraints, he focused on a narrower group of players. He's already stated that he'll have more time to evaluate this year's draft class.

Where do you get this "handcuff" crap from? If anything, McD has more flexibility now when it comes to filling the QB position than he would have had if he still had to deal with baby jay.

"Running off" his defensive coordinator? All indications are that it was a mutual decision for Nolan to leave. Both McD and Nolan know that their chemistry was just not as good as it should be and they both agreed to part ways. If anything, this shows maturity on both parties part.

What apologetic crap.

Your a biatch that says, "Let's be friends."

watermock
02-05-2010, 01:08 PM
Wow. Losing 5 coaches in 1 year is sure mature coaching.

BroncoMan4ever
02-05-2010, 01:11 PM
i am going to say

Baltimore(bull**** about drafting a guy, they want an elite receiver)
Dallas
Washington
CHicago(too bad they have no picks to offer)
Cleveland
Jets
Seattle

right now have all at least had minor discussions about trading for him.

i know Sharpe is right and quite possibly putting the number of willing teams lower than it should be.

yerner
02-05-2010, 01:21 PM
What about Pittsburgh? Marshall would be a beast there.

Popps
02-05-2010, 01:54 PM
What about Pittsburgh? Marshall would be a beast there.

Pittsburgh doesn't tend to put up with the Marshall-types. They're running the kind of organization McDaniels is striving to run.

strafen
02-05-2010, 02:10 PM
Pittsburgh doesn't tend to put up with the Marshall-types. They're running the kind of organization McDaniels is struggling to run.

Fixed it for you...

SureShot
02-05-2010, 02:13 PM
I think Baltimore has to make this happen. Make one last run with Ed Reed and Ray Lewis.

TheDave
02-05-2010, 02:22 PM
Pittsburgh doesn't tend to put up with the Marshall-types. They're running the kind of organization McDaniels is striving to run.

If that's the case then hopefully Harrison, Rothlesberger, and Holmes will be available this offseason...

Every team has their problem children, not just Shanny led teams.

watermock
02-05-2010, 02:34 PM
Which is why Terrell Owens will be on his 5th different team next year since the end of the 2003 season. Sometimes the headaches aren't worth it. I don't recall too many on here clamoring for us to enter the Terrell Owens sweepstakes when he was shopping/being shopped. And he's a guy with 15,000 career receiving yards. In fact, I remember way back when, in the board's infancy, a thread was started about Shanahan bringing Owens in after he was wearing out his welcome in SF, and most responses were against it.

The only, and I mean ONLY difference in attitude here, is that McDaniels is the coach dealing with this; ergo, he needs to put up with Brandon's nonsense and have him undermine the team with his BS or else he's dismantling the team. I wonder how happy you'll be TJ if we give him mega dollars because you want us to, and he goes and gets himself suspended for 8 games. And who gives a **** if the team covers themselves in a contract, you'll be without the services of your top offensive player for half a season.

Just because some GM or owner is willing to step up doesn't make them smarter; just a risk taker.

Bullshiat.

watermock
02-05-2010, 02:51 PM
Pittsburgh doesn't tend to put up with the Marshall-types. They're running the kind of organization McDaniels is striving to run.

Who cares!

Who is going to our #1 reciver??

Jesus. We dont have an elite QB, who the hell is Orton going to throw to> Quinn? Gaffney?Royal? Graham? Moreno?

Those 4 couldn't get out of the own stool.

rbackfactory80
02-05-2010, 02:54 PM
He obviously knows the Ravens with his connections there. Next would be the Redskins, he knows Mike and the money they have. The third team is the Bears I would bet. Cutler wants his security blanket back.

cousinal11
02-05-2010, 02:54 PM
i am going to say

Baltimore(bull**** about drafting a guy, they want an elite receiver)
Dallas
Washington
CHicago(too bad they have no picks to offer)
Cleveland
Jets
Seattle

right now have all at least had minor discussions about trading for him.

i know Sharpe is right and quite possibly putting the number of willing teams lower than it should be.

I'd add Tampa to the list.

Paladin
02-05-2010, 03:46 PM
Tampa would be good. Their first for Marshall and a third......

Then trade that first to Seattle for their two firsts.....

Popps
02-05-2010, 03:50 PM
Fixed it for you...

Nah.

8-8 and the roster turnover is right on pace with what Mike Shanahan did when he came in.

Right on schedule. We'll see if it gets there. I know you're hoping against hope that it doesn't.

Popps
02-05-2010, 03:52 PM
Who is going to our #1 reciver??


I suppose we'll have to locate one... perhaps with the compensation we receive for Marshall. Generally, the draft and free agency is where you do that kind of thing.

NYBronco
02-05-2010, 04:00 PM
Thank you Shannon Sharpe for helping to open the flood gates on teams that are on the fence to trade for Marshall's unmatched talent. "Knowing" there are three teams out there will certainly get others thinking they will need to be more proactive in securing a very talented WR.

Shhh... no more discussion about about Marshall's issues that have placed him in this most undesirable position.

DBroncos4life
02-05-2010, 04:08 PM
Pittsburgh doesn't tend to put up with the Marshall-types. They're running the kind of organization McDaniels is striving to run.

They wouldn't be playing with a QB accused of rape would they?

TheDave
02-05-2010, 04:12 PM
They wouldn't be playing with a QB accused of rape would they?

and a couple of women beaters in Harrison and Santonio holmes

elsid13
02-05-2010, 04:22 PM
and a couple of women beaters in Harrison and Santonio holmes

Or a star WR that wonder if his QB is tough enough to play in the NFL?

Taco John
02-05-2010, 04:22 PM
Back in 2001/02? I don't recall an outpouring of support for it. Not at all.

I wasn't talking about 2001. I was talking about - what - 2006? There was a lot of buzz about the potential of getting TO then. Of course, it wasn't universal. But WR was a pain point and there were plenty of people who thought TO could be the answers to Plummer's woes.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 04:43 PM
There's been a lot of 'radio' talk lately about teams that have won the SB without a highly paid, star receiver.

Their point was that it is not necessarily a good idea to tie up the big bucks in a receiver.

Is it?

HEAV
02-05-2010, 05:06 PM
[QUOTE=Taco John;2742713]The best WR in this upcoming draft is Dez Bryant. If you're a GM, which receiver between the two would you rather spend your first round pick on?[QUOTE]

It depends on the type of team you currently have. If the team is close to winning a championship and is going to make a run for it in 2010 then I'd go for Marshall.

But if my team is still in transition and not ready to make a run, then I'm taking Dez Bryant and building for 2012

broncos-rock
02-05-2010, 05:07 PM
There's been a lot of 'radio' talk lately about teams that have won the SB without a highly paid, star receiver.

Their point was that it is not necessarily a good idea to tie up the big bucks in a receiver.

Is it?

I said this in another thread and was virtually laughed at but if you think about it its very true. Even the game that BM set the reception record in we didnt win. The prima-dona wide outs have not been making any bit of difference in the playoffs. You can definitely win with the guys we have on the roster not including BM.

oubronco
02-05-2010, 05:08 PM
There's been a lot of 'radio' talk lately about teams that have won the SB without a highly paid, star receiver.

Their point was that it is not necessarily a good idea to tie up the big bucks in a receiver.

Is it?

It's better to have a star QB

strafen
02-05-2010, 05:14 PM
There's been a lot of 'radio' talk lately about teams that have won the SB without a highly paid, star receiver.

Their point was that it is not necessarily a good idea to tie up the big bucks in a receiver.

Is it?Another attempt to excuse McDaniels if he decides to trade Marshall

maher_tyler
02-05-2010, 05:26 PM
If we don't re-sign him, what are the options of the FA WR's out there??

broncos-rock
02-05-2010, 05:30 PM
it's better to have a star qb

^5

BroncoMan4ever
02-05-2010, 05:30 PM
I'd add Tampa to the list.

i seriously considered adding Tampa, but seeing as they have the number 3 pick and no way in hell will they give up number 3 overall for a receiver, i decided to leave them off. same situation with the Rams.

SportinOne
02-05-2010, 05:38 PM
Good lord, Dallas took TO and he was known as the biggest cancer in NFL history at the time. I wouldn't be surprised if Jones was squirming in his office chair trying to find some way to land Marshall.

Someone out there wants him bad enough to overlook his off field issues. Hopefully, if we HAVE to trade him, we come out like bandits.

TonyR
02-05-2010, 05:57 PM
Baltimore(bull**** about drafting a guy, they want an elite receiver)
Dallas
Washington
CHicago(too bad they have no picks to offer)
Cleveland
Jets
Seattle


All possible but I also have doubts about most of them. Baltimore is very possible but I'm not sure Ozzie will want to give up high draft picks for a character concern. Dallas? They already paid big for Roy Williams, and Miles Austin was really good this year and has a big pay day coming down the road. If the rumors are true that Shanahan grew tired of Marshall last year that rules the Skins out. Chicago, as you said, doesn't have the comp. Cleveland and Seattle probably have too many needs to give up a lot for a WR. The Jets, along with the Ravens, are probably among the more likely scenarios. Teams that are ready to compete and have a need.

broncswin
02-05-2010, 06:04 PM
Well he gets fined by the team and that is something that can be covered in a contract.

I'm sure BM is as good as gone so a bunch of people will be able to celebrate their awesomeness sooner then later. Let's just hope McD don't blow the first rounder he gets for him......then losing Marsh would be ________

Kazi, I for one do not want to see him go...I know he is all but gone, but there will be no celebration, unless somehow we got a proven talent in their prime for him....not gonna happen...I have talked about what we could or should try to get for him though...does this make me a guy that wants to see him go??

broncswin
02-05-2010, 06:07 PM
It's better to have a star QB

well if were gonna go there, its better to have stars all over on both sides of the ball, but thats not gonna happen now is it...we havent had even close to a star in the QB position since...moment of silence...Elway:strong:

The MVPlaya
02-05-2010, 06:13 PM
Why does this story keep getting spinned like this? Josh made it a point - but damn are people this stupid?

Marshall SAID he was MOST LIKELY not going to play - Josh just made it a point that he was being benched, not because of injury related news heard from doctors/medical staff.

oubronco
02-05-2010, 06:18 PM
well if were gonna go there, its better to have stars all over on both sides of the ball, but thats not gonna happen now is it...we havent had even close to a star in the QB position since...moment of silence...Elway:strong:

Of course everyone wants AllPro's at every position but it's just not going to happen but if we have to choose

All Star QB > ProBowl WR

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 06:33 PM
Why does this story keep getting spinned like this? Josh made it a point - but damn are people this stupid?

Marshall SAID he was MOST LIKELY not going to play - Josh just made it a point that he was being benched, not because of injury related news heard from doctors/medical staff.

And McDaniels (IMHO) should have kept that stuff "in-house" (preferably just between him and "the player") rather than airing it out in the media. Even if he was... at that point... determined to seek a trade for Marshall (if the "issues" between them had become unresolvable to that degree) during the upcoming offseason, letting the media get ahold of it was never going to do anything but possibly damage Marshall's trade value.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 07:17 PM
It's better to have a star QB

It is indeed.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 07:20 PM
I said this in another thread and was virtually laughed at but if you think about it its very true. Even the game that BM set the reception record in we didnt win. The prima-dona wide outs have not been making any bit of difference in the playoffs. You can definitely win with the guys we have on the roster not including BM.

That was the point they were making.

I can't recall the last time a team won the SB with one of the highest paid wide-outs on the roster.

Though Jerry Rice comes to mind.

BroncoMan4ever
02-05-2010, 07:25 PM
All possible but I also have doubts about most of them. Baltimore is very possible but I'm not sure Ozzie will want to give up high draft picks for a character concern. Dallas? They already paid big for Roy Williams, and Miles Austin was really good this year and has a big pay day coming down the road. If the rumors are true that Shanahan grew tired of Marshall last year that rules the Skins out. Chicago, as you said, doesn't have the comp. Cleveland and Seattle probably have too many needs to give up a lot for a WR. The Jets, along with the Ravens, are probably among the more likely scenarios. Teams that are ready to compete and have a need.

i look at Baltimore as that team that is an offensive playmaker or 2 away from being a legit Super Bowl contender. i know they are saying they would want to draft a receiver, but if for around the same cost in terms of pick and guaranteed money on a rookie 1st rounder contract, minus the risk of being an NFL bust as marshall is proven, i think they are just blowing smoke in hopes that we lower the price on him.

and i know the Jets haven't said anything in regards to even looking at a receiver, but with a young QB, a receiver like Marshall would be his best friend. if Cothery is your best receiver and only has around 800 receiving yards, you need an upgrade.

robbieopperude
02-05-2010, 07:29 PM
Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison were both elite WR's for the Colts.
Then the Patriots went to the Super Bowl with Moss but lost to the Giants who had an elite WR in Burress who caught a huge TD pass in the game.
This year Wayne is again one of the best WR's in the game.
When the Rams won they had T.Holt and I.Bruce who were both elite.
I guess off the top of my head I could argue that at least one very good WR is important. Still not as necessary as having an elite QB though.

robbieopperude
02-05-2010, 07:34 PM
On the other hand the Ravens and Buc's won the SB w/out elite QB's or WR's. But that is rarely the norm. The bottom line is Marshall could be the type of player to get Dallas, Baltimore, NE over the hump or put teams like the Titans or Jets really in the discussion.
Also Arizona went to the SB with two elite WR's last year while the Steelers one with a clutch but not elite QB and WR's.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 07:36 PM
And McDaniels (IMHO) should have kept that stuff "in-house" (preferably just between him and "the player") rather than airing it out in the media. Even if he was... at that point... determined to seek a trade for Marshall (if the "issues" between them had become unresolvable to that degree) during the upcoming offseason, letting the media get ahold of it was never going to do anything but possibly damage Marshall's trade value.

Which is very helpful if Denver plans on keeping BM. :wiggle:

Trading BM is all speculation based on assumptions born of rumors.

Don't you think that using a tag for BM, in an uncapped year, could be a low cost option for Denver worth considering? Especially as next year could be a lock-out.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 07:37 PM
Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison were both elite WR's for the Colts.
Then the Patriots went to the Super Bowl with Moss but lost to the Giants who had an elite WR in Burress who caught a huge TD pass in the game.
This year Wayne is again one of the best WR's in the game.
When the Rams won they had T.Holt and I.Bruce who were both elite.
I guess off the top of my head I could argue that at least one very good WR is important. Still not as necessary as having an elite QB though.

........and a good offensive line.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 07:38 PM
On the other hand the Ravens and Buc's won the SB w/out elite QB's or WR's. But that is rarely the norm. The bottom line is Marshall could be the type of player to get Dallas, Baltimore, NE over the hump or put teams like the Titans or Jets really in the discussion.
Also Arizona went to the SB with two elite WR's last year while the Steelers one with a clutch but not elite QB and WR's.

....and a HOF QB and still didn't win. ;D

DBroncos4life
02-05-2010, 07:44 PM
Why does this story keep getting spinned like this? Josh made it a point - but damn are people this stupid?

Marshall SAID he was MOST LIKELY not going to play - Josh just made it a point that he was being benched, not because of injury related news heard from doctors/medical staff.

Why don't you take your Mensa card holding ass to another board if you don't like the posters here?

Broncos4tw
02-05-2010, 07:47 PM
Ugh... you have to be kidding me. Baggage? In terms of franchise baggage, this guy is little league, honestly. He'll garner a solid trade. However, I hope we work to keep him. Our receiving game IS Marshall. I hate to think how we'll look without another franchise player on our team.

broncswin
02-05-2010, 10:07 PM
Of course everyone wants AllPro's at every position but it's just not going to happen but if we have to choose

All Star QB > ProBowl WR

Gottcha:thumbsup:

BroncoMan4ever
02-06-2010, 02:21 AM
Ugh... you have to be kidding me. Baggage? In terms of franchise baggage, this guy is little league, honestly. He'll garner a solid trade. However, I hope we work to keep him. Our receiving game IS Marshall. I hate to think how we'll look without another franchise player on our team.

Cutler was NOT a ****ing franchise QB

I am so sick of reading these posts proclaiming him to be better than he was.

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 04:43 AM
Which is very helpful if Denver plans on keeping BM. :wiggle:

Trading BM is all speculation based on assumptions born of rumors.

Don't you think that using a tag for BM, in an uncapped year, could be a low cost option for Denver worth considering? Especially as next year could be a lock-out.

Maybe... my personal thought is that he should have been paid (new contract, perhaps with "good behavior" clauses) months ago. You don't find WRs with the physical ability to be gamechangers every day... and I do think that the Broncos offense with Brandon Marshall... is far > any possible Broncos offense without him.

SoDak Bronco
02-06-2010, 05:08 AM
Get a 1st and a 3rd and call it a night. Brandon Marshall is going to be very good for a long time. But his off the field issues are a concern, and at this point he hasn't earned the trust of his team or his coaches.

I like the idea of getting Baltimores 25th pick in the first and possibly a 3rd plus giving them Marshall and our 6th rounder.

robbieopperude
02-06-2010, 05:38 AM
Get a 1st and a 3rd and call it a night. Brandon Marshall is going to be very good for a long time. But his off the field issues are a concern, and at this point he hasn't earned the trust of his team or his coaches.

I like the idea of getting Baltimores 25th pick in the first and possibly a 3rd plus giving them Marshall and our 6th rounder.

I still hate the idea of getting a guy at pick 25 for the kind of talent Marshall is. I look at this as if Marshall was in the draft what pick would he go. Probably in the top 10. So to me that is where the 1st round pick should come from.

_Oro_
02-06-2010, 06:54 AM
I still hate the idea of getting a guy at pick 25 for the kind of talent Marshall is. I look at this as if Marshall was in the draft what pick would he go. Probably in the top 10. So to me that is where the 1st round pick should come from.

Except nobody wants top ten picks when rookie caps are imminent.

Beantown Bronco
02-06-2010, 07:26 AM
Except nobody wants top ten picks when rookie caps are imminent.

Then it should be easy for the Broncos to land one if they wanted one, right?

TonyR
02-06-2010, 08:01 AM
... my personal thought is that he should have been paid (new contract, perhaps with "good behavior" clauses) months ago.

Perhaps, but the "just pay him" mentality grossly oversimplifies the situation. Just for starters you can't simply ignore the character concerns and incidents nor the fact that Marshall and his agent have to agree to a contract that contains clauses like you mention. We all want Brandon on the field but it's easy to understand why the organization thinks twice about whether or not they want him off it with $20 million of Pat Bowlen's banked.

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 08:06 AM
Perhaps, but the "just pay him" mentality grossly oversimplifies the situation. Just for starters you can't simply ignore the character concerns and incidents nor the fact that Marshall and his agent have to agree to a contract that contains clauses like you mention. We all want Brandon on the field but it's easy to understand why the organization thinks twice about whether or not they want him off it with $20 million of Pat Bowlen's banked.

Brandon's been a very good value for the Broncos.

TonyR
02-06-2010, 08:10 AM
Brandon's been a very good value for the Broncos.

No doubt about that. First round production for fourth round money!

TotallyScrewed
02-06-2010, 11:20 AM
I have to think that even if we had won the superbowl this year Marsh would still be looking for a payday ...... and rightly so.

Marshall isn't near the crap shoot that the draft is. I don't think there's a team out there that wouldn't gladly trade their #1 and #3 for a WR with Marshall's ability and past stats. Especially if they watched him play in 2009, given his situation.

Chris
02-06-2010, 12:04 PM
I'd like to see us landing a pick in the 15-20 range of the first round but we probably don't have any suitors there.

To me it looks like

Miami (12 pick - our needs don't dictate that we need to be at 11 and 12 so if we make a Marshall trade we'd probably want to trade down one of these picks to the 15-20 range for Dan Williams if Mcclain goes and we don't want Bryant) - who's going to want to trade up there? Someone going for Clausen or Bryant.

Baltimore (25 pick - good position for us to reach a bit and pick up a stud OL guy like Iupati or Pouncey if we really want them). Possibly also Dallas (27) and NYJ (29). Same deal there.

rastaman
02-07-2010, 11:20 AM
Perhaps, but the "just pay him" mentality grossly oversimplifies the situation. Just for starters you can't simply ignore the character concerns and incidents nor the fact that Marshall and his agent have to agree to a contract that contains clauses like you mention. We all want Brandon on the field but it's easy to understand why the organization thinks twice about whether or not they want him off it with $20 million of Pat Bowlen's banked.

Same token can be said that the Broncos can't have their cake and eat it to. Sure we all know the talent that Bmarsh has and so does the rest of the NFL for that matter.

But if the Broncos want to continue to hang over Brandon's head his past off the field problems as the reason not to pay him, Marshall can also behave as a malcontent-locker room cancer in 2010 and 2011 (A-LA Randy Moss in Minnesota and Oakland) and drive his trade/compensation value down! While wearing out his welcome in Denver.

Remember, Marshall's ability to land that big top 5 pay day is his ability to stay injury free and having a longer term career of 12 to 14 years. His talent, agility and mismatches his presents is a fore gone understood conclusion.

Yet should he remain healthy thu-out 2010 or 2011 teams will still value his beastly athletic mis-matched talent, and then be in the position to bounce on a lower compensation trade value and the Broncos loose.

Denver needs to be careful not to blinded by the myth of high first round draft picks = automatic replacement talent for Pro Bowl players like Brandon Marshall. Marshall isn't a BUST! Where first round players could become just mediocre and/or down right bust. Just like the case in point with Cutler. Should he continue to throw 20 plus interception for the next 4 years or more then he will have proven to be bust.

However, over the next 4 years he avg. 17 or less interception and becomes an elite QB as a result, and Ayers becomes mediocre then this proves the case you don't trade Pro Bowl players for unproven 1st round draft picks.

DenverBrit
02-07-2010, 12:45 PM
Brandon's been a very good value for the Broncos.

He has indeed.

Giving BM a fat contract and making him the focal point of the offense carries risks that would make any GM/Owner pause.

One more off-field slip and he's facing an 8 game suspension.....more if the 'slip' is serious.
But most of would like to see BM stay a Bronco, so hopefully both sides can find language that satisfies their respective concerns.

For all we know, both sides might be close to new agreement.

bowtown
02-07-2010, 12:48 PM
No doubt about that. First round production for fourth round money!

You have to also include Stokley's babysitting salary in there too.

Blueflame
02-07-2010, 12:58 PM
You have to also include Stokley's babysitting salary in there too.

Stokley's been well worth his salary, too.... just sayin'.