PDA

View Full Version : Krieger: Money talks with Broncos' Marshall


oubronco
02-09-2010, 07:28 AM
Krieger: Money talks with Broncos' Marshall
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
Posted: 02/09/2010 01:00:00 AM MST


Now that the Super Bowl champion Saints have reminded everyone how useful a 6-foot-4 wide receiver can be — thank you, Marques Colston — let's set our imaginations free for a minute.

Imagine that everything the relevant parties have been saying lately about Brandon Marshall and the Broncos is true.

Imagine that neither Marshall nor coach Josh McDaniels has any problem continuing their professional association, as both recently said.

Imagine owner Pat Bowlen would like Marshall to stay, as he recently said, which really doesn't take much imagination.

Finally, imagine that this isn't all just posturing on everyone's part to salvage some semblance of leverage in trade talks.

In our imaginary world, where getting rid of a Pro Bowl wide receiver is not a foregone conclusion, the important thing to remember is that this is not like the Jay Cutler situation or the Tony Scheffler situation or the Peyton Hillis situation.

Despite the soap opera surrounding Marshall, this is not fundamentally about personality or performance. This is about money.

Marshall is one of only two NFL receivers to catch at least 100 passes in each of the past three seasons (Wes Welker is the other). He finished in the top five in catches and top 14 in receiving yardage each of those years.

Over those same three seasons, Marshall's salary cap number ranked 52nd (2009), 133rd (2008) and 137th (2007) among NFL wide receivers.

In other words, he has been underpaid throughout his NFL career to date. This was at the root of his problems with McDaniels last season. Based on former coach Mike Shanahan's policy, Marshall believed he was in line for a new deal as he entered the final year of a rookie contract he had clearly outplayed.

Shanahan's firing changed everything. McDaniels wasn't handing out a big new contract to a player who had proved nothing to him, especially one with significant off-field issues. So Marshall asked for a trade to a team that would pay him market value. McDaniels rejected this request as well.

That made it a war of wills. The message Marshall heard was that he would play for his below-market salary and like it. With NFL teams routinely renegotiating player salaries downward, the argument that he had no right to renegotiate his upward rang hollow. So he acted out, earning a preseason suspension.

Marshall has since acknowledged that was unprofessional, but there was a certain method to his petulance. The Broncos now know the risks in forcing him to play for below-market pay, which the lapsing labor agreement gives them the ability to do again next season.

With Marshall stuck in the purgatory of restricted free agency, the Broncos could tender him at the highest level, requiring compensation of first- and third-round draft choices from any team that signs him. If no team will pay that onerous price and the Broncos are unable to negotiate an acceptable trade, they could force Marshall to play for them in 2010 at a salary slightly in excess of $3 million, still well below his market value. That would be a prescription for more soap opera.

On the other hand, if all the parties to this relationship mean what they've been saying lately — a big if — the Broncos could attempt to bridge the gap by offering Marshall a one-year, market-value deal. The top 15 cap numbers for wideouts last season ranged from $6.4 million to $10.9 million.

Marshall would no doubt prefer a multiyear deal, but with a lockout looming in 2011, many teams may be reluctant to offer financial commitments beyond the coming season. And a one-year, market- value deal would let the Broncos see if Marshall could remain drama-free in the absence of a contract dispute.

Giving up on a Pro Bowl wideout one year after giving up on a Pro Bowl quarterback seems like a high price to pay for McDaniels to establish his authority, which is how Bowlen explained the young coach's behavior in his first year. By expressing the hope that Marshall stays, even Bowlen signaled that talent still matters.

Of course, everything Marshall and McDaniels have been saying lately could be spin. McDaniels' enthusiasm for establishing his authority, combined with the unhappiness among certain Shanahan holdovers toward the end of last season, strongly suggests the coach will continue cleaning house until the locker room is composed entirely of players he considers loyal.

So a Marshall trade still is the way to bet. But all the recent happy talk offers a reminder that it is not inevitable. The Broncos could yet decide to pay one of the NFL's top receivers a fair salary. In fact, it's likely to be their best option.

Dave Krieger: 303-954-5297, dkrieger@denverpost.com or twitter.com/DaveKrieger



Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14361974#ixzz0f36FGTpg



It's time to pay the man

Paladin
02-09-2010, 07:36 AM
See, Crash. If you could only read........

~Crash~
02-09-2010, 09:33 AM
See, Crash. If you could only read........

what the **** you are saying is we should not pay players right ? go root for the bengals

~Crash~
02-09-2010, 09:47 AM
See, Crash. If you could only read........

oh also Paladin I see no were in this fluff piece were Marshall says a damn thing.

what I do see is a player getting **** on.

lifeafter elway
02-09-2010, 09:58 AM
If we give him a 1 year deal at market value - he is an unrestricted free agent at the beginning of the next season?

Give him a multiyear, or trade him while we can some value for him. Getting him for 1 year doesn't do anything for the broncos if they lose him at the end of that 1 year deal.

strafen
02-09-2010, 10:06 AM
This is still a very delicate situation I'm not sure the Broncos are prepared to handle.
While both parties seem to agree on everything so far as far as mutually wanting each other, this can still blow up at the end...

TonyR
02-09-2010, 10:09 AM
Give him a multiyear...

If there is no cba I can't see many multi-year deals being done around the league, particularly involving guaranteed upfront money. Owner aren't going to be handing out big upfront checks with a potential lockout on the horizon.

Bronco Rob
02-09-2010, 10:22 AM
Broncos Brandon Marshall trade still best option?


With Brandon Marshall stuck in the purgatory of restricted free agency, the Broncos could tender him at the highest level, requiring compensation of first- and third-round draft choices from any team that signs him. If no team will pay that onerous price and the Broncos are unable to negotiate an acceptable trade, they could force Marshall to play for them in 2010 at a salary slightly in excess of $3 million, still well below his market value.

That would be a prescription for more soap opera. On the other hand, if all the parties to this relationship mean what they’ve been saying lately — a big if — the Broncos could attempt to bridge the gap by offering Marshall a one-year, market-value deal. The top 15 cap numbers for wideouts last season ranged from $6.4 million to $10.9 million.

Marshall would no doubt prefer a multiyear deal, but with a lockout looming in 2011, many teams may be reluctant to offer financial commitments beyond the coming season. And a one-year, market- value deal would let the Broncos see if Marshall could remain drama-free in the absence of a contract dispute.

Giving up on a Pro Bowl wideout one year after giving up on a Pro Bowl quarterback seems like a high price to pay for McDaniels to establish his authority, which is how Bowlen explained the young coach’s behavior in his first year.

By expressing the hope that Marshall stays, even Bowlen signaled that talent still matters. Of course, everything Marshall and McDaniels have been saying lately could be spin. … So a Marshall trade still is the way to bet. — Denver Post



http://benmaller.com/nfl/#1

Beantown Bronco
02-09-2010, 10:24 AM
If we give him a 1 year deal at market value - he is an unrestricted free agent at the beginning of the next season?

Give him a multiyear, or trade him while we can some value for him. Getting him for 1 year doesn't do anything for the broncos if they lose him at the end of that 1 year deal.

If they tender him this year at the high level for one year, they can still franchise him in 2011.....if there's any football to be played in 2011. He can only become a true unrestricted FA if the team allows him to become one. They hold all the cards this year and next.

oubronco
02-09-2010, 10:26 AM
Broncos Brandon Marshall trade still best option?


With Brandon Marshall stuck in the purgatory of restricted free agency, the Broncos could tender him at the highest level, requiring compensation of first- and third-round draft choices from any team that signs him. If no team will pay that onerous price and the Broncos are unable to negotiate an acceptable trade, they could force Marshall to play for them in 2010 at a salary slightly in excess of $3 million, still well below his market value.

That would be a prescription for more soap opera. On the other hand, if all the parties to this relationship mean what they’ve been saying lately — a big if — the Broncos could attempt to bridge the gap by offering Marshall a one-year, market-value deal. The top 15 cap numbers for wideouts last season ranged from $6.4 million to $10.9 million.

Marshall would no doubt prefer a multiyear deal, but with a lockout looming in 2011, many teams may be reluctant to offer financial commitments beyond the coming season. And a one-year, market- value deal would let the Broncos see if Marshall could remain drama-free in the absence of a contract dispute.

Giving up on a Pro Bowl wideout one year after giving up on a Pro Bowl quarterback seems like a high price to pay for McDaniels to establish his authority, which is how Bowlen explained the young coach’s behavior in his first year.

By expressing the hope that Marshall stays, even Bowlen signaled that talent still matters. Of course, everything Marshall and McDaniels have been saying lately could be spin. … So a Marshall trade still is the way to bet. — Denver Post



http://benmaller.com/nfl/#1

I don't think Bowlen will put up with too much of this IMO

~Crash~
02-09-2010, 10:26 AM
If we give him a 1 year deal at market value - he is an unrestricted free agent at the beginning of the next season?

Give him a multiyear, or trade him while we can some value for him. Getting him for 1 year doesn't do anything for the broncos if they lose him at the end of that 1 year deal.

true the NFL is not falling off the map you still need players give him a multi year contract that pays bones some this year and the rest the next time Marshall suits up after next years season .

Bronco Rob
02-09-2010, 10:27 AM
I don't think Bowlen will put up with too much of this IMO



:thumbsup:

~Crash~
02-09-2010, 10:27 AM
If there is no cba I can't see many multi-year deals being done around the league, particularly involving guaranteed upfront money. Owner aren't going to be handing out big upfront checks with a potential lockout on the horizon.

see post above...

Drek
02-09-2010, 10:41 AM
Dan Krieger has got to be a complete ****ing idiot.

You NEVER pay a player market value for a one year deal when you can make him play a contract season at one third as much money.

If Marshall gets an extension it'll be a multi-year deal. He'll likely get a big base salary for 2010 with a lot of non-guaranteed and deferred bonuses, requiring the league to actually play football in order for Marshall to get paid.

Doom is the only guy who will be given a bunch of money he might not actually play for in 2011. Everyone else is either getting the one year RFA or they'll take a deal that pays them for the expected services in 2010 but not a ton of guaranteed signing bonuses.

meangene
02-09-2010, 11:15 AM
Dan Krieger has got to be a complete ****ing idiot.

You NEVER pay a player market value for a one year deal when you can make him play a contract season at one third as much money.

If Marshall gets an extension it'll be a multi-year deal. He'll likely get a big base salary for 2010 with a lot of non-guaranteed and deferred bonuses, requiring the league to actually play football in order for Marshall to get paid.

Doom is the only guy who will be given a bunch of money he might not actually play for in 2011. Everyone else is either getting the one year RFA or they'll take a deal that pays them for the expected services in 2010 but not a ton of guaranteed signing bonuses.

EXACTLY! Plus, whether he gets market value for one year or is forced to play for less, Marshall is going to be unhappy. And then, we have this circus all over again. No, the best thing is to trade him to someone willing to give him a long term deal with the guaranteed money he wants. All this talk of him returning to Denver is just that - talk. It is in the best interest of both parties to use this as a tool to facilitate a trade. We are not going to give him away and there needs to be at least one team willing to pay him and give up the compensation to get him for both sides to be satisfied.

Drek
02-09-2010, 11:36 AM
EXACTLY! Plus, whether he gets market value for one year or is forced to play for less, Marshall is going to be unhappy. And then, we have this circus all over again. No, the best thing is to trade him to someone willing to give him a long term deal with the guaranteed money he wants. All this talk of him returning to Denver is just that - talk. It is in the best interest of both parties to use this as a tool to facilitate a trade. We are not going to give him away and there needs to be at least one team willing to pay him and give up the compensation to get him for both sides to be satisfied.

If Marshall is willing to take a deal structured something like this:

2010 - $10M base
2011 - $10M base
2012 - $5M base, $6M roster bonus
2013 - $3M base, $8M roster bonus
2014- $1M base, $12M roster bonus

Then I'd be absolutely ecstatic to see him extended. 5 years, $55M is more than what Roddy White got. This kind of deal would make Marshall second to only Larry Fitzgerald in WR salary. But at the same time he's got to earn it. He only gets the bonus money if the team hasn't been given reason to release him and if the league goes to lockout there isn't any guaranteed money tied up in him. He gets his $10M year one though so that he's gets a taste of what his compensation will be like going forward if he keeps his off-season activities out of the newspapers and his on field production at its current elite level.

BroncoMan4ever
02-09-2010, 11:51 AM
i agree. IF he truly has no problem with McDaniels, McDaniels has no problem with him, he wants to return to Denver, then get it done and give the man his money. but if it is all bull****, get what we can for him.

BroncoBuff
02-09-2010, 11:56 AM
Giving up on a Pro Bowl wideout one year after giving up on a Pro Bowl quarterback seems like a high price to pay for McDaniels to establish his authority.
Denver Post

I was saying just exactly this in another thread ... and I was attacked as a "troll."

I guess the Post is a troll-rag now, right? :~ohyah!:

BroncoBuff
02-09-2010, 11:58 AM
Drek, what's up with Anquan Boldin ... wasn't he franchised this year, or did they finally sign him?

rastaman
02-09-2010, 12:02 PM
If they tender him this year at the high level for one year, they can still franchise him in 2011.....if there's any football to be played in 2011. He can only become a true unrestricted FA if the team allows him to become one. They hold all the cards this year and next.

Sure Denver holds the cards in 2010 & 2011. However, what happens with this scenario, Brandon decides to do a Randy Moss inspersonation when Moss was with the Raiders. How much trade value would Marshall have then? Baring injury(s) two years from now Marshall will still be a beast of talent and still in his prime. Teams will pay him the mega bucks while Denver gets hardly anything in return in 2012. Are Bowlen and McD sure they want to deal with the possible media drama, locker room distraction, and player divide in 2010 and 2011.

Dr. Broncenstein
02-09-2010, 12:08 PM
Sure Denver holds the cards in 2010 & 2011. However, what happens with this scenario, Brandon decides to do a Randy Moss inspersonation when Moss was with the Raiders. How much trade value would Marshall have then? Baring injury(s) two years from now Marshall will still be a beast of talent and still in his prime. Teams will pay him the mega bucks while Denver gets hardly anything in return in 2012. Are Bowlen and McD sure they want to deal with the possible media drama, locker room distraction, and player divide in 2010 and 2011.

This is an astonishingly stupid post, even by your standards. Just... wow.

rastaman
02-09-2010, 12:20 PM
If Marshall is willing to take a deal structured something like this:

2010 - $10M base
2011 - $10M base
2012 - $5M base, $6M roster bonus
2013 - $3M base, $8M roster bonus
2014- $1M base, $12M roster bonus

Then I'd be absolutely ecstatic to see him extended. 5 years, $55M is more than what Roddy White got. This kind of deal would make Marshall second to only Larry Fitzgerald in WR salary. But at the same time he's got to earn it. He only gets the bonus money if the team hasn't been given reason to release him and if the league goes to lockout there isn't any guaranteed money tied up in him. He gets his $10M year one though so that he's gets a taste of what his compensation will be like going forward if he keeps his off-season activities out of the newspapers and his on field production at its current elite level.

Here's and another spin or possibility no one is considering nor talking about.

Marshall would be a fool to sign such a deal. He would be better off waiting until he's truly a free agent and while doing so not playing risky football by taking unnecessary punishment and hoping he stays injury free over the next two years.

In fact untill he signs a longer term deal Brandon may want to forego trying to catch 100 plus receptions in 010 and 011 to cut down on the wear and tear and his body and b/c 010 and 011 he may still be signifigantly under paid. Denver can't expect that type of production out of Marshall if they can't pay him top 5 money.

So if Bmarsh is getting under paid in 010 and 011, the Broncos can't arrogantly expect him to have further 100 plus receptions over the next 2 years. And to save wear and tear on his body and avoiding 100 plus receptioins while under paid, Brandon may have no other choice but to turn into the Randy Moss of the Oakland Raiders.

Remember there are risk factors for Bowlen financially and risk factors for BMarsh that he could suffer a career ending injury on any given Sunday.

The Broncos can't hold over Brandon's head his past off the field problems as leverage and bargaining, as each year pass as in 010 and 011 conclude and there are no incidents. Meanwhile

rastaman
02-09-2010, 12:27 PM
This is an astonishingly stupid post, even by your standards. Just... wow.

Its still a possibility. Brandon is still young enough and talented enough to pull it off. He just needs to avoid a career ending injury btwn 010 and 011. Teams already know what a beast of talent Brandon truly remains. While Denver is playing hard ball and demanding too much for a trade btwn 010 and 011 for Brandon, NFL teams will simply out wait the Broncos.

Meanwhile Marshall just needs to stay healthy and just not break his neck to have 100 plus receptions in 010 and 011 to cut down wear and tear on his body. Randy Moss was able to do this while with the Raiders and Oakland was only given something like a 4th round pick by NE when the trade was made. The Raider organization just wanted Moss gone and to hell with the compensation!

BroncoBuff
02-09-2010, 12:29 PM
This is an astonishingly stupid post, even by your standards. Just... wow.

What was wrong with it? I'm not sure I agree with it, but it certainly wasn't stupid.

rastaman
02-09-2010, 12:37 PM
What was wrong with it? I'm not sure I agree with it, but it certainly wasn't stupid.

This could be a worst case scenario and should be considered as a possibility. Brandon is simple a difference maker and missing ingredient for some teams ready to take the next step of getting better or even getting to the SB.

Dr. Broncenstein
02-09-2010, 12:39 PM
What was wrong with it? I'm not sure I agree with it, but it certainly wasn't stupid.

The idea that Marshall could essentially pout for two years and intenionally underproduce, only to reap the rewards of a huge contract when he hits unrestricted free agency. So therefore the front office should ignore the fact that they have all the leverage for the next two years and give it to Marshall... hoping that Marshall won't choose to mail it in. It's a swiss watch if I understand it correctly.

meangene
02-09-2010, 12:51 PM
If Marshall is willing to take a deal structured something like this:

2010 - $10M base
2011 - $10M base
2012 - $5M base, $6M roster bonus
2013 - $3M base, $8M roster bonus
2014- $1M base, $12M roster bonus

Then I'd be absolutely ecstatic to see him extended. 5 years, $55M is more than what Roddy White got. This kind of deal would make Marshall second to only Larry Fitzgerald in WR salary. But at the same time he's got to earn it. He only gets the bonus money if the team hasn't been given reason to release him and if the league goes to lockout there isn't any guaranteed money tied up in him. He gets his $10M year one though so that he's gets a taste of what his compensation will be like going forward if he keeps his off-season activities out of the newspapers and his on field production at its current elite level.

Problem is Marshall is not going to go for something like that. He wants the big money guaranteed bonus on the front end of a long-term deal. And, I don't see us giving it to him with a his NFL disciplinary record, his antics this past year and an impending lockout. You're right, only a guy like Doom is going to get paid like that by Denver right now.

meangene
02-09-2010, 01:01 PM
The idea that Marshall could essentially pout for two years and intenionally underproduce, only to reap the rewards of a huge contract when he hits unrestricted free agency. So therefore the front office should ignore the fact that they have all the leverage for the next two years and give it to Marshall... hoping that Marshall won't choose to mail it in. It's a swiss watch if I understand it correctly.

Actually, I think he will pout and be a distraction unless, and until, he gets the contract he wants. He may well still produce on the field but at what cost? If he does get the fat contract, I have no confidence whatsoever that he can stay out of trouble off the field or not continue to be a distraction to the team.

cmhargrove
02-09-2010, 01:34 PM
Anyone else here miss Rod Smith?

Dude just came to work with his hard hat on every day and the team eventually rewarded him. I know it's not "all that simple," but my respect for Rod Smith the Bronco will never wane. Dude was one of the greatest Broncos ever and i'm still proud to wear his jersey.

Now, back to Marshall's business strategy discussions...

Chris
02-09-2010, 02:18 PM
Marshall is great, just not 55M great. 25 M for 5 years - sweet. He's a possession WR that catches a lot of balls for short to medium distances, occasionally breaking the big one.

He is not a be all end all WR. He will not solve our problems... and he does have problems with drops and disappearing in big games.

Let's be realistic. I love Marshall as a player. I'd like to see him back... but he's not going to solve all our problems on offense.

He did great in shanny's system, he did great in our system as the possession WR last year... but look how gaffney did in his place (granted one game, granted gaffney is not as good as Marshall).

People need to look objectively at what Marshall does and doesn't do. There's a lot he does extremely well but there are also things he doesn't do for us. Things diverting a ton of resources to pay him won't solve in our offense. The media isn't helping because they make their money on spectacle and selling players as more than they are.

rastaman
02-09-2010, 02:38 PM
Actually, I think he will pout and be a distraction unless, and until, he gets the contract he wants. He may well still produce on the field but at what cost? If he does get the fat contract, I have no confidence whatsoever that he can stay out of trouble off the field or not continue to be a distraction to the team.

But if Marshall is only paid 3.0 million bucks in 010, why should Brandon put his body thru further wear and tear of trying to accomplish 100 plus receptions for a a measley $3.0 million! For that sum of money Marshall would be well in his rights to only catch 50 to 60 receptions. The Broncos have under paid Brandon 3 consecutive years while he has caught 100 plus receptions the last 3 years!

Believe me, you don't want a pissed off under paid Marshall on your roster in 2010! Marshall may just play well enough not to get benched or actually play like a receiver that earns $3.0 million per year. Which involve not running precise routs, droping passes, and running out of bounds instead of trying to get the extra yards.

Denver can't have its cake and eat to! The Broncos got premium benefits and mileage out of under paying Marshall while receiving optimum production from him over the last 3 years.

If Denver doesn't have confidence that they can depend on Brandon...then they need to get as much value as they can now for him based on his STATS; or risk the possibility that Brandon's stats and performances dip/decrease b/c you have a WR who is pissed off over his contract.

Question I have, how does Denver demand a 1st and 3rd for Brandon when his stats/production takes a decrease? Teams already know that Marshall is a Beast and simple wait the next two years as Marshall's trade/draft compensation steadily decline btwn 010 and 011. Brandon can still play the Randy Moss card and thus drastically decreasing his draft/trade compensation.

watermock
02-09-2010, 02:44 PM
Marshall is great, just not 55M great. 25 M for 5 years - sweet. He's a possession WR that catches a lot of balls for short to medium distances, occasionally breaking the big one.

He is not a be all end all WR. He will not solve our problems... and he does have problems with drops and disappearing in big games.

Let's be realistic. I love Marshall as a player. I'd like to see him back... but he's not going to solve all our problems on offense.

He did great in shanny's system, he did great in our system as the possession WR last year... but look how gaffney did in his place (granted one game, granted gaffney is not as good as Marshall).

People need to look objectively at what Marshall does and doesn't do. There's a lot he does extremely well but there are also things he doesn't do for us. Things diverting a ton of resources to pay him won't solve in our offense. The media isn't helping because they make their money on spectacle and selling players as more than they are.

How amusing. I've never seen a reciever who went up like him, ever, to get a ball other than Fitz.

watermock
02-09-2010, 02:47 PM
All you doing is blaming the media. How weak!

You just don't want to pay him...fine.

Beantown Bronco
02-09-2010, 02:56 PM
How amusing. I've never seen a reciever who went up like him, ever, to get a ball other than Fitz.

And you call yourself a Vikings fan.....Randy Moss is no fan of yours either.

meangene
02-09-2010, 02:58 PM
But if Marshall is only paid 3.0 million bucks in 010, why should Brandon put his body thru further wear and tear of trying to accomplish 100 plus receptions for a a measley $3.0 million! For that sum of money Marshall would be well in his rights to only catch 50 to 60 receptions. The Broncos have under paid Brandon 3 consecutive years while he has caught 100 plus receptions the last 3 years!

Believe me, you don't want a pissed off under paid Marshall on your roster in 2010! Marshall may just play well enough not to get benched or actually play like a receiver that earns $3.0 million per year. Which involve not running precise routs, droping passes, and running out of bounds instead of trying to get the extra yards.

Denver can't have its cake and eat to! The Broncos got premium benefits and mileage out of under paying Marshall while receiving optimum production from him over the last 3 years.

If Denver doesn't have confidence that they can depend on Brandon...then they need to get as much value as they can now for him based on his STATS; or risk the possibility that Brandon's stats and performances dip/decrease b/c you have a WR who is pissed off over his contract.

Question I have, how does Denver demand a 1st and 3rd for Brandon when his stats/production takes a decrease? Teams already know that Marshall is a Beast and simple wait the next two years as Marshall's trade/draft compensation steadily decline btwn 010 and 011. Brandon can still play the Randy Moss card and thus drastically decreasing his draft/trade compensation.

I agree Marshall was underpaid in his last three years based on his production on the field. He was a mid-round draft pick and was slotted based on that in his initial contract. Many players exceed their initial contract in terms of production just like many underachieve. That's just the way the system works. Unless you are a highly drafted player, where you are rewarded is in your second contract. Unfortunately for Brandon, his time for free agency could not have been timed more poorly due to the CBA. As such, in order to get what he wants, he will either have to wait until he reaches UFA or is traded to a team willing to pay him and the price to obtain him. The Broncos simply are not going to pay him the kind of guaranteed money he wants. If Brandon is forced to wait for free agency, he would be an idiot to tank the next two seasons. No matter how talented he is, if he stops producing on the field no one is going to give him the kind of money he is looking for. He is already off the list for many teams due to his off field behavior and his situation with league discipline. Moss did not cash in on a big payday when he went to NE for a late round draft pick - he had already gotten a big payday.

I agree with you, however, that we should trade him now if we can get reasonable compensation for him. I don't see him being worth more in trade value in the next couple years - we don't know what is going to happen with the CBA or when he might become an UFA. I also think that, while he will produce on the field, he will be a distraction to this football team moving forward.

Doggcow
02-09-2010, 03:01 PM
How amusing. I've never seen a reciever who went up like him, ever, to get a ball other than Fitz.

Steve Smith, Lynn Swan, Jerry Rice, Eddie Mac, Rod Smith, Andre Johnson, Hines Ward........

Just off the top of my head guys who attacked the ball in the air.

Drek
02-09-2010, 03:03 PM
Drek, what's up with Anquan Boldin ... wasn't he franchised this year, or did they finally sign him?

Boldin is still under contract through 2010.

This is where the "Mike Shanahan would've extended Marshall and this wouldn't be a problem!" crowd need to learn a lesson from history actually.

Anquan Boldin was a 2nd round pick so his rookie deal was worth only marginally more than Marshall's as a 4th. When he grossly outperformed that deal from day one the Cards quickly moved to give him a multi-year extension. He has now spent the last three years of that deal bitching because he feels underpaid.

He signed a rookie contract for a few hundred thousand a season for his first few years in the league. When he was killing it he wanted more, and they gave it to him. When he then out performed that deal he wanted more once again. At what point does the player honor the contract?

If the Broncos gave Marshall a new deal last off-season worth say, $7M per and in three years Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson, etc. are all making $12M do you really think Marshall is going to be content with his $7M? Its the nature of the beast with WRs and CBs. Those guys play on an island. They're the closest to playing a 1 on 1 sport as anyone in football. Doing that takes a certain kind of ego. You get the rare Rod Smith or Jerry Rice who are such powerful self motivators that they don't need anyone reaffirming their greatness, just that they're still allowed to play. But more often than not you get what most WRs in the league are, guys who view their value in terms of what they get paid. Not out of greed but out of a tweaked view on appreciation. In some ways its a more realistic view as guaranteed money = can't be cut, so its the team showing a commitment. But that is a hard place for an organization to be.

Chris
02-09-2010, 03:29 PM
You probably haven't been watching football long then Watercress.

Chris
02-09-2010, 03:32 PM
All you doing is blaming the media. How weak!

You just don't want to pay him...fine.

I would like to pay him as is equivalent to his value. Yes he's the biggest part of our O right now... but our O does not have an over the shoulder deep threat and relies on him way too much. That's not his bread and butter. If we're talking about completely dominant WRs (ala Fitzgerald) then you need someone that can do it all. If Fitz was on this team I'd pay him 55 M for a 7 year contract. As it stands, we have a great posession guy with awesome stats (note: Wes Welker --another great WR that isn't a deep threat-- has awesome stats) because our offense has to rely on him.

DBroncos4life
02-09-2010, 04:06 PM
Marshall is great, just not 55M great. 25 M for 5 years - sweet. He's a possession WR that catches a lot of balls for short to medium distances, occasionally breaking the big one.

He is not a be all end all WR. He will not solve our problems... and he does have problems with drops and disappearing in big games.

Let's be realistic. I love Marshall as a player. I'd like to see him back... but he's not going to solve all our problems on offense.

He did great in shanny's system, he did great in our system as the possession WR last year... but look how gaffney did in his place (granted one game, granted gaffney is not as good as Marshall).

People need to look objectively at what Marshall does and doesn't do. There's a lot he does extremely well but there are also things he doesn't do for us. Things diverting a ton of resources to pay him won't solve in our offense. The media isn't helping because they make their money on spectacle and selling players as more than they are.

Did people turn off the game after the first half? Gaffney did nothing vs press coverage in the second half. As for the rest of your post you clearly have never seen Marshall play or cared to understand our system we run in Denver. Of course he catches a lot of short to medium range passes. That is what we run.

Chris
02-09-2010, 04:08 PM
That is what we run because that is all we can run. We tried using Eddie to stretch the field and it failed miserably. He's not that type of WR. Marshall certainly isn't.

Our system in its ideal form... aka what the Pats run... calls for a slot WR (Eddie / Welker), a posession guy ( NE roleplayers/ Gaffney / Marshall) and a deep threat to stretch the field (Moss / this is what we're missing).

rastaman
02-09-2010, 04:09 PM
I agree Marshall was underpaid in his last three years based on his production on the field. He was a mid-round draft pick and was slotted based on that in his initial contract. Many players exceed their initial contract in terms of production just like many underachieve. That's just the way the system works. Unless you are a highly drafted player, where you are rewarded is in your second contract. Unfortunately for Brandon, his time for free agency could not have been timed more poorly due to the CBA. As such, in order to get what he wants, he will either have to wait until he reaches UFA or is traded to a team willing to pay him and the price to obtain him. The Broncos simply are not going to pay him the kind of guaranteed money he wants. If Brandon is forced to wait for free agency, he would be an idiot to tank the next two seasons. No matter how talented he is, if he stops producing on the field no one is going to give him the kind of money he is looking for. He is already off the list for many teams due to his off field behavior and his situation with league discipline. Moss did not cash in on a big payday when he went to NE for a late round draft pick - he had already gotten a big payday.

I agree with you, however, that we should trade him now if we can get reasonable compensation for him. I don't see him being worth more in trade value in the next couple years - we don't know what is going to happen with the CBA or when he might become an UFA. I also think that, while he will produce on the field, he will be a distraction to this football team moving forward.

I agree partly. However, if Brandon is smart he will not risk further injury or wear and tear on his body to continue taking a beating while catching 100 plus passes, making circus catches, and selling out to use every inch of his talent to make something out of nothing for $3.0 million dollars. Teams have already seen what Bmarsh brings to the table. And should understand Brandon playing up to the level he's being paid salary wise.

What other recourse does a player have when faced with this situation? Brandon only gets paid if he produces on the field and he can't produce if he's injured or is worn down prematurely! where is Brandon's leverage for top 5 pay or contract? The Broncos nor any team in the NFL can expect a player to give it their all and not be compensated fairly for their production.

McDaniel's shouldn't expect Brandon to go "Balls-to-The Wall" for him either if they can't agree on a contract or if Marshall is grossly underpaid in 2010.

rastaman
02-09-2010, 04:29 PM
I would like to pay him as is equivalent to his value. Yes he's the biggest part of our O right now... but our O does not have an over the shoulder deep threat and relies on him way too much. That's not his bread and butter. If we're talking about completely dominant WRs (ala Fitzgerald) then you need someone that can do it all. If Fitz was on this team I'd pay him 55 M for a 7 year contract. As it stands, we have a great posession guy with awesome stats (note: Wes Welker --another great WR that isn't a deep threat-- has awesome stats) because our offense has to rely on him.

Well if the offense depends on Marshall shouldn't they pay him accordingly? Should Marshall perform in 2010 like he's being paid like a WR making $3 million a year? Where do fans, HC, and fans get off demanding that Marshall should continue his performance of the the last 3 years for a paltry $3.0 million a year? That doesn't pass the logic test!

By the way the claim that BMarsh is only a possession WR just b/c of the passing scheme Denver is presently running does not give a true picture of what Bmarsh is capable of. Especially if you consider the fact that Orton did not or could not hit Marshall in full stride the entire season.

Marshall had to slow down and comeback or out jump for all of Orton's inaccurate intermediate passes. We don't know how well Marshall will do playing with a QB and offensive passing scheme that hit Marshall in full stride either on slant routes or intermediate fly patterns.

Marshall just made the best of a lousy passing scheme and a an inaccurate QB who can't hit Marshall in full stride.

Ya can't get pissed off at player that doesn't play or give 100% every Sunday if said player is getting grossly under paid. At this stage, Marshall has honored his rookie 4 year contract and vastly out performed the contract. Now its time for the Broncos to step up like the professional organization they claim to be and hammer out a deal that makes BMarsh the top 5 paid WR in NFL.

DBroncos4life
02-09-2010, 04:32 PM
That is what we run because that is all we can run. We tried using Eddie to stretch the field and it failed miserably. He's not that type of WR. Marshall certainly isn't.

Our system in its ideal form... aka what the Pats run... calls for a slot WR (Eddie / Welker), a posession guy ( NE roleplayers/ Gaffney / Marshall) and a deep threat to stretch the field (Moss / this is what we're missing).

No we are missing the QB that can throw the ball deep with accuracy with consistency. McD should look at making up a new system if you think Marshall falls into a NE roleplayers type. You won't find many WRs that can do what Randy Moss does. It's one thing to be able to stretch the field Lelie could do that, Randy Moss takes it to a whole new level.
Randy Moss is more then likely the second best WR ever to play the game. So I guess we will be looking for awhile to fill that role.

Beantown Bronco
02-09-2010, 05:22 PM
Did people turn off the game after the first half? Gaffney did nothing vs press coverage in the second half.

Did YOU turn off the game after the first half?

He had 4 catches for 68 yds and drew a 19 yard pass interference call in the 2nd half of that game. For one half of a game, that's outstanding.....unless you think a 16 game pace of 128 receptions for 2,176 yds is "nothing". Insanity.

Paladin
02-09-2010, 05:25 PM
what the **** you are saying is we should not pay players right ? go root for the bengals

No, Dickweed. What this means is that Marshall is not likely to get more than a one year tender and it is not likely to get the big bucks you think Bowlen should spend on him. I douubt many of the RFAs will get the big deals for more than one year.

Krieger's article directly contradicts everything you had been blathering.

Mayabe you need to get one of these. It'll help you get out of your teenybopper years. TrueCompanion.com

DBroncos4life
02-09-2010, 05:45 PM
Did YOU turn off the game after the first half?

He had 4 catches for 68 yds and drew a 19 yard pass interference call in the 2nd half of that game. For one half of a game, that's outstanding.....unless you think a 16 game pace of 128 receptions for 2,176 yds is "nothing". Insanity.
Sorry dude if I think that ****ing KC can make adjustments to take him from 10 catches to 4 other teams will have more success at it as well. He was running a clinic on KC the first half then fell off but I guess you don't think so.

You really think he can reach 128 catches and 2K yards? Insanity is ****ing right. Hilarious!

Broncoman13
02-10-2010, 05:04 AM
I don't think Bowlen will put up with too much of this IMO

Well fortunately for McD we don't have any more offensive weapons that score TDs for him to move. Cutler and Marshall were the main two and he figured out how to neutralize Scheff, Hillis and Royal without moving them. McD is a genius. ;D

rastaman
02-10-2010, 06:56 AM
Well fortunately for McD we don't have any more offensive weapons that score TDs for him to move. Cutler and Marshall were the main two and he figured out how to neutralize Scheff, Hillis and Royal without moving them. McD is a genius. ;D

Yep McD is such a genius that he has a penchant for players he uses for his own gain will eventually quit on him and despise him in the long run! McD will learn that his rah-rah propaganda mind games will only get him so far both in life and as a HC in the NFL. Once the players and team figure out that he can't be trusted or talks out of both sides of his mouth he will be toast.

Beantown Bronco
02-10-2010, 07:36 AM
Sorry dude if I think that ****ing KC can make adjustments to take him from 10 catches to 4 other teams will have more success at it as well. He was running a clinic on KC the first half then fell off but I guess you don't think so.


Can't even admit you're wrong when it's staring you right in the face. Shocker.

If you had simply said that his numbers weren't as good in the 2nd half of that game as the first, you would've been right and nobody would've said a thing. But you couldn't help yourself. You said he did NOTHING in the 2nd half. You have been proven wrong. 4 catches for 68 yds...drew a flag for another 19. In what world is that "nothing" for one half of work?

And why are you bagging on KC in this discussion? Shows how much you followed their pass defense this year. They were middle of the road, only giving up 30 yds per game through the air more than the top 5 teams. They weren't exactly a bottom feeder there and Gaffney was drawing their top defenders.

You really think he can reach 128 catches and 2K yards? Insanity is ****ing right. Hilarious!

Reading comp.....it's not for everyone. Obviously, I was pointing out how his 2nd half pace in that game.....which was supposedly nothing according to you....would have him set all time receiving records.

Jabar is a really good receiver. Better than most here give him credit for. In part time duty this year, he had 54 receptions for 732 yds. In the last two games alone, he had 21 receptions for 282 yds and 2 TDs against two decent/middle of the road pass defenses. All that with supposedly the worst QB in the league throwing him the ball. That gives me hope for next year regardless of whether Marshall is back or not.