PDA

View Full Version : bengals considering getting marshall


tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 03:25 PM
per adam schefter on ESPN. now THAT would be an interesting place to see him go. great role models everywhere.

Bronco CB40
03-07-2010, 03:33 PM
Bengals have the 21st pick. I would prefer to see Denver match the offer sheet in that case.

Dagmar
03-07-2010, 03:33 PM
He would only have to play 8 games.

meangene
03-07-2010, 03:34 PM
Unless Seattle moves fast with a sign and trade deal for their #14, I think he just ends up signing an offer sheet with someone like the Bengals, Jets or Pats.

TheDave
03-07-2010, 03:37 PM
For the 21st pick of the draft?

yeah, that's a pretty good deal... for them.

meangene
03-07-2010, 03:40 PM
Bengals have the 21st pick. I would prefer to see Denver match the offer sheet in that case.

Denver has no intention of matching an offer sheet for Marshall. That is why they only put a first round tender on him. If he gets an offer sheet, he is gone.

bowtown
03-07-2010, 03:40 PM
Unless Seattle moves fast with a sign and trade deal for their #14, I think he just ends up signing an offer sheet with someone like the Bengals, Jets or Pats.

Assuming Jets, Seahawks, and Bengals all offered him the same exact contract, where do you think he would choose to sign?

I'm guessing he would favor the big market of NY.

TheDave
03-07-2010, 03:42 PM
Assuming Jets, Seahawks, and Bengals all offered him the same exact contract, where do you think he would choose to sign?

I'm guessing he would favor the big market of NY.

Depends what his relationship with Bates is... he might want to go where he knows how they are going to use him.

But otherwise, yes I can see him thinking that NY would be just right for his big head.

meangene
03-07-2010, 03:42 PM
Assuming Jets, Seahawks, and Bengals all offered him the same exact contract, where do you think he would choose to sign?

I'm guessing he would favor the big market of NY.

I think with him it is all about the guaranteed money.

UberBroncoMan
03-07-2010, 03:51 PM
I love this **** rofl.

We're going to give Marshall away to a GOOD team from last year... likely in the AFC.

Low 1st round pick in return WOOT!

Who the **** steps up for a 6'5 (he's taller than listed) monster receiver like him? Jabar?

Great Work!

Rulon Velvet Jones
03-07-2010, 03:59 PM
I love this **** rofl.

We're going to give Marshall away to a GOOD team from last year... likely in the AFC.

Low 1st round pick in return WOOT!

Who the **** steps up for a 6'5 (he's taller than listed) monster receiver like him? Jabar?

Great Work!

Mmmm...I love fresh, new takes.

chex
03-07-2010, 04:17 PM
Who the **** steps up for a 6'5 (he's taller than listed) monster receiver like him?

Good question. I hope Cincinnati has a plan for the 8 game suspension.

StugotsIII
03-07-2010, 04:21 PM
I smell BS. Sounds like Denver is trying to drive up the price.

BroncoSojia
03-07-2010, 04:28 PM
I smell BS. Sounds like Denver is trying to drive up the price.

that's exactly what it is:

According to Bengals beat writer Joe Reedy, an ESPN report about the team's interest in restricted free agent Brandon Marshall is "mostly a smokescreen."
"Meant to drive up the price with Seattle," Reedy tweeted Sunday. The Bengals could really use a play-making wideout to book end Chad Ochocinco, but it appears they're not as interested as ESPN's Adam Schefter made it seem. The Seahawks continue to be the front-runners in the Marshall bidding. Mar. 7 - 7:09 pm et
Source: Joe Reedy on Twitter


http://twitter.com/joereedy

Broncosfreak_56
03-07-2010, 04:28 PM
The Bengals pick is right where the value for Mike Iupati would be, and possibly Dan Williams, 2 guys that make sense for Denver to draft. Plus, there is a lot less money being invested with that pick.

TonyR
03-07-2010, 05:34 PM
Why would Cincinnati want to drive up the price for Seattle? What am I missing?

Here's the PFT report:

Bengals have considered going after Marshall
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 7, 2010 6:43 PM ET

The Bengals believe they need a wide receiver.

Antonio Bryant and Terrell Owens are two free agents they are considering, but ESPN's Adam Schefter reports there have been internal discussions about going a splashier route.

Cincinnati has talked about going after Brandon Marshall. How serious the Bengals will be in their pursuit is a "matter of discussion within the organization."

The Bengals pick No. 21 overall, but giving that pick up would strongly go against Mike Brown's history. The Bengals grand poobah has used his first-round pick every year since 1989, and there is great value in contracts that late in the round.

The Seahawks hosted Marshall over the weekend, but it's unclear if they are willing to give up one of their first round picks to get him. (They own No. 6 and No. 14 overall.)

It remains unclear if there will be competition for Marshall's services, which this report could be aimed at doing.

The Broncos have taken the position that they will only take a first-round pick for Marshall, as they should. It still would be a stunner if the Bengals were the team to do it.

UPDATE: Joe Reedy of the Cincinnati Enquirer tweets he believes the report is "mostly a smokescreen" to drive the price up for Marshall.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/07/bengals-have-considered-going-after-marshall/

ZONA
03-07-2010, 05:37 PM
Bengals have the 21st pick. I would prefer to see Denver match the offer sheet in that case.

Diddo. It's top 10 pick or we match. I'm sure the Broncos are not stupid and have told BM that or at least hinted to him in some fashion. If BM wants out of Denver, he will be making a deal with a team picking in the top 10. If he wants to stay in Denver, he will be making a deal for a team not in the top 10. I think that's what it comes down to.

And these teams that are thinking of getting Marshall know about his off field problems in the past, but it always comes down to the same thing. Coaches don't want to get fired and they want to win and talent wins games, not personalities, so they are willing to gamble on the guys who produce big time.

ColoradoBuff
03-07-2010, 05:40 PM
It's Seattle's 6th pick or he remains in denver!

Clockwork Orange
03-07-2010, 05:44 PM
Why would Cincinnati want to drive up the price for Seattle? What am I missing?

They wouldn't. The smokescreen would be if it's the Broncos floating this info out there about Cincy being interested to drive up the price on Seattle.

TonyR
03-07-2010, 05:49 PM
They wouldn't. The smokescreen would be if it's the Broncos floating this info out there about Cincy being interested to drive up the price on Seattle.

Doh! You're right, that must be it. That tweet doesn't make this very clear.

bowtown
03-07-2010, 05:51 PM
It's also possible that it's being leaked by Marshall's camp in an attempt to get a bigger offer sheet from Seattle.

TonyR
03-07-2010, 05:52 PM
It's Seattle's 6th pick or he remains in denver!

Yep, that's what the post is reporting and it's the first time I've seen/heard this definitively. It goes against what a lot of pundits are saying and a lot of what is being discussed here.


As the Seahawks meet with Marshall, rules prohibit the Broncos from getting involved in the matter. There is to be no compensation discussion during the offer-sheet process.

If the Seahawks decide they can't reach an agreement with Marshall on a new contract he figures to command a deal of at least $10 million a year or the team decides surrendering the No. 6 pick is too costly, there isn't much chance of Seattle acquiring the receiver for alternative compensation via trade.

If needed, the Broncos are expected to allow Marshall, who has let it be known he'd like to leave Denver, to seek offer-sheet suitors until April 15, the last day restricted free agents can sign with another team.

Should the Seahawks submit an offer sheet to Marshall and he signs it, the Broncos would have seven days to match or let him go for the sixth overall pick.

Considering the deal Arizona just made with Baltimore for Anquan Boldin, a No. 6 pick would be rich compensation for the Broncos. Boldin is the receiver who most closely resembles Marshall, in that both are physical, 100-catch, post-up type receivers.

Boldin has more wear; Marshall has more baggage.

Yet, all Arizona could get back from Baltimore for Boldin were third- and fourth-round picks. And the Cards even had to throw in a fifth-round pick to make it happen.

So a first-round pick, much less No. 6 overall, would be plenty for Marshall.

In that scenario, the Broncos would again have two first-round picks. Last year, they used the No. 12 and No. 18 overall picks to select Knowshon Moreno and Robert Ayers.

This year, Marshall to Seattle would give the Broncos the No. 6 and No. 11 overall picks.

This scenario, though, is putting the goal line ahead of the red zone. Before the Broncos can get Seattle's pick, Seattle must first submit an offer sheet.


Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14528011#ixzz0hXu3O4Mb

Tombstone RJ
03-07-2010, 05:52 PM
Marshall would be a great fit in Cincy. Remember, Chris Henry is gone and BMarsh could really come in an put new life into that offense. Chad Ocho gets a new lease on life too and with their QB, the skys the limit for that offense.

ColoradoBuff
03-07-2010, 05:53 PM
It's also possible that it's being leaked by Marshall's camp in an attempt to get a bigger offer sheet from Seattle.

i think that's the case....we know one thing, it will be fun to watch over the next few days/weeks.

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 05:59 PM
Marshall would be a great fit in Cincy. Remember, Chris Henry is gone and BMarsh could really come in an put new life into that offense. Chad Ocho gets a new lease on life too and with their QB, the skys the limit for that offense.

their QB basically sucked last year. hes living on reputation still.

Tombstone RJ
03-07-2010, 06:04 PM
their QB basically sucked last year. hes living on reputation still.

Palmer is still a great QB who can throw the ball with the best of them... health is his main issue.

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 06:06 PM
Palmer is still a great QB who can throw the ball with the best of them... health is his main issue.

except last year when he was not very good.

Tombstone RJ
03-07-2010, 06:07 PM
except last year when he was not very good.

What is your point?

Pony Boy
03-07-2010, 06:10 PM
Gheez.... I wish this thing would hurry up and get done .... this is wearing me smooth out.

chaz
03-07-2010, 07:49 PM
Denver has no intention of matching an offer sheet for Marshall. That is why they only put a first round tender on him. If he gets an offer sheet, he is gone.

I wouldn't be so sure. Unless the contract is ridiculous, I don't see the broncos letting him go for a late first round pick. That just isn't enough.

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 07:54 PM
What is your point?

you said hes a great QB, but hes not playing like a great QB at all. hes still going on reputation.

just like people who think orton is a ****ty QB, but he didnt play like a ****ty QB last year, he played like a pretty competent one. its reputation and perception, not necessarily reality.

HAT
03-07-2010, 08:04 PM
I love this **** rofl.

We're going to give Marshall away to a GOOD team from last year... likely in the AFC.

Low 1st round pick in return WOOT!

Who the **** steps up for a 6'5 (he's taller than listed) monster receiver like him? Jabar?

Great Work!

Whoever.....WR's are a dime a dozen bro.

strafen
03-07-2010, 08:06 PM
Whoever.....WR's are a dime a dozen bro.Nice try!

HAT
03-07-2010, 08:21 PM
Nice try!

I want BM on the 2010 Broncos but it's really not that big of a deal if he bails.

If you have a decent passing scheme, your #1 WR is going to pull down 90/1000/10 every year.

Deal with it.

strafen
03-07-2010, 08:29 PM
I want BM on the 2010 Broncos but it's really not that big of a deal if he bails.

If you have a decent passing scheme, your #1 WR is going to pull down 90/1000/10 every year.

Deal with it.Like Gaffney?
That's a joke, man!
You just can't downplay the importance of missing Marshall in our offense
To say we're going to plug anybody in and expect to get 90 catches, 1000 yards and 10td's just shows how delusional you really are.

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 08:38 PM
Like Gaffney?
That's a joke, man!
You just can't downplay the importance of missing Marshall in our offense
To say we're going to plug anybody in and expect to get 90 catches, 1000 yards and 10td's just shows how delusional you really are.

maybe the lead receiver catches less but the other receivers catch more, and thus higher production. but carry on.

strafen
03-07-2010, 08:41 PM
maybe the lead receiver catches less but the other receivers catch more, and thus higher production. but carry on.Wow, what a discovery. Really?
Thanks for clearing that up!

HAT
03-07-2010, 08:42 PM
Like Gaffney?
.

Read my original post dipschnit.....WHOEVER!

strafen
03-07-2010, 08:44 PM
Read my original post dipschnit.....WHOEVER!I did, and I found it to be ridiculous...

cutthemdown
03-07-2010, 08:44 PM
Denver has no intention of matching an offer sheet for Marshall. That is why they only put a first round tender on him. If he gets an offer sheet, he is gone.

Unless it too low and a good deal. Broncos might match and then just offer him for trade to highest bidder. Contract already done.

The offer has to be made so Denver won't match.

Florida_Bronco
03-07-2010, 08:45 PM
Who the **** steps up for a 6'5 (he's taller than listed) monster receiver like him? Jabar?

I wouldn't have any problem with Gaffney taking Marshall's spot for the short term. Gaffney is a good receiver himself.

bowtown
03-07-2010, 08:48 PM
Unless it too low and a good deal. Broncos might match and then just offer him for trade to highest bidder.


This won't happen. It would be too big a risk without knowing what the new CBA cap rules will turn out to be. If Denver matches, they will keep Brandon.

HAT
03-07-2010, 08:52 PM
OK Drag....Guess it's time to shut you up just like everyone else.....

I will bet you any amount of money you wish between $250 and $500 that the 2010 Denver Broncos have a WR that finishes the season with at least 1,000 yards and ALSO one who has at least 10 TD's.

It may or may not be the same WR and it may or may not be BM.

I'll give you 72 hours to accept or decline. (Please accept)

Tombstone RJ
03-07-2010, 08:56 PM
you said hes a great QB, but hes not playing like a great QB at all. hes still going on reputation.

just like people who think orton is a ****ty QB, but he didnt play like a ****ty QB last year, he played like a pretty competent one. its reputation and perception, not necessarily reality.

Just because Palmer had a subpar year doesn't mean he's all of a sudden a bad QB. I'd say the reality of the situation is that Palmer is one of the top 5 QBs in the NFL. If you wanna argue Palmer is a bad QB go ahead. You'll be wrong, but that's ok, your wrong a lot of the time.

strafen
03-07-2010, 09:04 PM
OK Drag....Guess it's time to shut you up just like everyone else.....

I will bet you any amount of money you wish between $250 and $500 that the 2010 Denver Broncos have a WR that finishes the season with at least 1,000 yards and ALSO one who has at least 10 TD's.

It may or may not be the same WR and it may or may not be BM.

I'll give you 72 hours to accept or decline. (Please accept)Are you changing the rules now in your favor?
This is what you've said..


If you have a decent passing scheme, your #1 WR is going to pull down 90/1000/10 every year.

Nice try...

HAT
03-07-2010, 09:05 PM
Just because Palmer had a subpar year doesn't mean he's all of a sudden a bad QB. I'd say the reality of the situation is that Palmer is one of the top 5 QBs in the NFL. If you wanna argue Palmer is a bad QB go ahead. You'll be wrong, but that's ok, your wrong a lot of the time.


Wow Tombstone.....I'm a USC honk & kind of like Cincy since I have friends that do. I agree Palmer is still a good QB but TOP 5?

I think we'd all agree that Manning/Brees/Brady are still top 3 at this point....You're saying that you have only one other QB other than Palmer at the top after those 3? Interesting.

strafen
03-07-2010, 09:05 PM
Just because Palmer had a subpar year doesn't mean he's all of a sudden a bad QB. I'd say the reality of the situation is that Palmer is one of the top 5 QBs in the NFL. If you wanna argue Palmer is a bad QB go ahead. You'll be wrong, but that's ok, your wrong a lot of the time.Wasn't Palmer coming off an injury?

HAT
03-07-2010, 09:07 PM
Are you changing the rules now in your favor?
This is what you've said..

Nice try...

I'm not changing anything you epic POS....I offered a bet. Accept it or not.

strafen
03-07-2010, 09:34 PM
I'm not changing anything you epic POS....I offered a bet. Accept it or not.I let everybody else to judge whether you've changed anything or not, since you won't come clean and admit it.
Re-read:
First:
If you have a decent passing scheme, your #1 WR is going to pull down 90/1000/10 every year.
Then...
I will bet you any amount of money you wish between $250 and $500 that the 2010 Denver Broncos have a WR that finishes the season with at least 1,000 yards and ]b]ALSO one who has at least 10 TD's.[/b]

It may or may not be the same WR and it may or may not be BM.
In the meantime, your proven dishonesty is something I'm going to have to try to stay away from.
Perhaps you need to change your name to assHAT
Nice try!

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 09:46 PM
Just because Palmer had a subpar year doesn't mean he's all of a sudden a bad QB. I'd say the reality of the situation is that Palmer is one of the top 5 QBs in the NFL. If you wanna argue Palmer is a bad QB go ahead. You'll be wrong, but that's ok, your wrong a lot of the time.

i said hes not playing like a great QB, like you said, and he hasnt for a few years. so regardless of how hes actually playing, hes still a top 5 QB?

hes better than mcnabb/rivers/manning/brees/brady/schaubb/rodgers/favre?

ignoring matt ryan and flacco since they are relatively new.

get over the past, until he comes back and proves hes a great QB again, throwing that label around based on reputation and past success is pretty silly. but then, im always wrong, as are everyone who dont blame mcdaniels for all of lifes failures.

tsiguy96
03-07-2010, 09:51 PM
and since i brought up the comparison, lets compare carson to orton in 2009: orton, in a new system with new players and coaches, and carson coming off injury:
orton/palmer

yards: 3802, 3094

td/int: 21/12, 21/13

avg: 7.0, 6.6

completion %: 60.5, 62.1

so how, again, is palmer as good as you claim him to be?

HAT
03-07-2010, 09:59 PM
I let everybody else to judge whether you've changed anything or not, since you won't come clean and admit it.
Re-read:
First:

Then...

In the meantime, your proven dishonesty is something I'm going to have to try to stay away from.
Perhaps you need to change your name to assHAT
Nice try!

The first post was a statement. The second post was a wagering proposition. Two independent posts...Therefore, nothing was 'changed'.

Whatever.....Just another pussy talking **** but won't back it up with his wallet. Just as well I suppose....You'd probably pull a BF7 when you lost anyway.

strafen
03-07-2010, 10:06 PM
The first post was a statement. The second post was a wagering proposition. Two independent posts...Therefore, nothing was 'changed'.

Whatever.....Just another p***Y talking **** but won't back it up with his wallet. Just as well I suppose....You'd probably pull a BF7 when you lost anyway.What kind of dumbass would wage money on the internet with somebody he doesn't know?
You're not very bright, are you?

strafen
03-07-2010, 10:28 PM
and since i brought up the comparison, lets compare carson to orton in 2009: orton, in a new system with new players and coaches, and carson coming off injury:
orton/palmer

yards: 3802, 3094

td/int: 21/12, 21/13

avg: 7.0, 6.6

completion %: 60.5, 62.1

so how, again, is palmer as good as you claim him to be? Palmer had 3800 yds 32td's in 2005, 4000 yds 28td's in 2006, 4000yds 26td's in 2007, injured in 2008, 3094yds and 21td's in 2009
I think that qualifies as a good QB

tsiguy96
03-08-2010, 04:10 AM
Palmer had 3800 yds 32td's in 2005, 4000 yds 28td's in 2006, 4000yds 26td's in 2007, injured in 2008, 3094yds and 21td's in 2009
I think that qualifies as a good QB

so 2007 was his last year playing great at QB position. that was 2 seasons ago. again, living on reputation. when you measure how good someone is, do you say "well how did they do in 2007?"

hes not PLAYING great football right now, and theres really not an argument to it. he has before, i get it. that was then. until he shows he can do it again, why crown him with this GREAT qb talk, or even top 5 qb?

HAT
03-08-2010, 07:32 AM
What kind of dumbass would wage money on the internet with somebody he doesn't know?
You're not very bright, are you?

Keep back pedaling dip****. Name an amount (250-500) and we can post it up before the season starts for a trusted 3rd party member to hold in escrow until the bet is settled.

No more excuses.

HAT
03-08-2010, 07:34 AM
Palmer had 3800 yds 32td's in 2005, 4000 yds 28td's in 2006, 4000yds 26td's in 2007, injured in 2008, 3094yds and 21td's in 2009
I think that qualifies as a good QB

Kyle Orton agrees with you. :thumbs:

strafen
03-08-2010, 07:36 AM
Keep back pedaling dip****. Name an amount (250-500) and we can post it up before the season starts for a trusted 3rd party member to hold in escrow until the bet is settled.

No more excuses.You're a truly asshat, aren't you?
How old are you?
About $25,000?
Take it or leave it? (rolleyes)

Lev Vyvanse
03-08-2010, 07:37 AM
Keep back pedaling dip****. Name an amount (250-500) and we can post it up before the season starts for a trusted 3rd party member to hold in escrow until the bet is settled.

No more excuses.

I'm a trustworthy 3rd party. I'd be open to people sending me money.

TheDave
03-08-2010, 07:40 AM
I'm a trustworthy 3rd party. I'd be open to people sending me money.

Actually that one is about as untrustworthy as it gets... I on the other hand am a pillar of integrity.

I'd be happy to hold all money for all bets this season... ;D

strafen
03-08-2010, 07:43 AM
I'm a trustworthy 3rd party. I'd be open to people sending me money.No kiddin' ;D
I wonder who the freakin' idiot considers a trustworthy party from a pool of internet posters he's never met, you know?
What a freakin' tool that guy is. Really!

Lev Vyvanse
03-08-2010, 07:44 AM
Actually that one is about as untrustworthy as it gets... I on the other hand am a pillar of integrity.

I'd be happy to hold all money for all bets this season... ;D

Don't make me show them the types of threads you start on other boards.

TheDave
03-08-2010, 07:45 AM
Don't make me show them the types of threads you start on other boards.

See what I mean...

Lev Vyvanse
03-08-2010, 07:50 AM
No kiddin' ;D
I wonder who the freakin' idiot considers a trustworthy party from a pool of internet posters he's never met, you know?
What a freakin' tool that guy is. Really!

You actually can meet trustworthy people on an internet forum.

Step 1) Stop calling everyone that disagrees with you a tool or idiot.

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 07:54 AM
and since i brought up the comparison, lets compare carson to orton in 2009: orton, in a new system with new players and coaches, and carson coming off injury:
orton/palmer

yards: 3802, 3094

td/int: 21/12, 21/13

avg: 7.0, 6.6

completion %: 60.5, 62.1

so how, again, is palmer as good as you claim him to be?


He's 30 years old dude. Get over yourself and just admit you don't have a good point. In fact, you are just arguing to argue.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PalmCa00.htm?redir

His career stats speak for themselves. Again, my point is clear and valid: Bmarsh can put up great numbers for the Bengals and fill the roll that TJ Housh and Chris Henry filled for Carson Palmer. Just because Palmer has had some injuries doesn't mean he can't get the ball to Bmarsh. In fact, I think Bmarsh's career numbers with a guy like Carson Palmer are gonna go up even more.

Again, BMarsh to Cincy just make sense.

oubronco
03-08-2010, 08:04 AM
Doubts emerge regarding Bengals' interest in Brandon Marshall (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/08/doubts-emerge-regarding-bengals-interest-in-brandon-marshall/)

Posted by Mike Florio on March 8, 2010 9:44 AM ET
On Sunday, ESPN's Adam Schefter reported that the Bengals could become participants (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/07/bengals-have-considered-going-after-marshall/) in the Brandon Marshall sweepstakes. Specifically, Schefter said that the Bengals were discussing internally the possibility of pursuing the Broncos' restricted free agent receiver, who carries only a first-round tender.

James Walker of ESPN.com gingerly sprinkles water on his colleague's theory, explaining that "thinking about a player and actually making a trade are two vastly different things (http://espn.go.com/blog/afcnorth/post/_/id/10280/bengals-sending-mixed-messages)." Walker points out that giving up a first-round pick and paying Marshall a contract in the range of $30 million to $40 million would not mesh with the Bengals' historical approach to player acquisition.

Joe Reedy of the Cincinnati Enquirer has offered a more cynical view, suggesting that the rumor reported by Schefter is "mostly a smoke screen (http://twitter.com/joereedy/status/10142608438)" that is aimed at "driv[ing] up the price with Seattle."

Frankly, we're not sure why the Bengals would help the Broncos get a better draft pick for Marshall, or why the Bengals who held Marshall get more money from Seattle. And we doubt that Schefter would be reporting so unequivocally that the Bengals are discussing Marshall if in fact they aren't.

The more likely explanation is that the Bengals are trying to drive down the demands of the other receivers whom they currently are considering -- Antonio Bryant and Terrell Owens. Bryant made nearly $10 million in 2009; he likely is looking for a deal that averages close to that number. And Owens consistently has been able to get big-money contracts even in one-team bidding wars, under the notion that Owens won't be "happy" with his new team unless he's making the kind of money that causes him to conclude that his skills are being properly respected.

So we think that the Bengals are considering Brandon Marshall in order to let Bryant and Owens know that, for the kind of cash they presumably want, the Bengals are more inclined to pay it to a guy who is younger and, frankly, better than either of them.

strafen
03-08-2010, 08:07 AM
You actually can meet trustworthy people on an internet forum.

Step 1) Stop calling everyone that disagrees with you a tool or idiot.That disagrees with me?
Disagree in what?
I called the guy out for a stupid statement he made. I refuted his statement, he comes back I want me to put my mouth where my money is by trying to suck me into a bet this time with a modified version of the original statement I called him out for.
Yup. I will agree with that. [/stupid]

bowtown
03-08-2010, 08:23 AM
What kind of dumbass would wage money on the internet with somebody he doesn't know?
You're not very bright, are you?

Pretty much everyone who places bets in this day and age. Don't know about you, but I don't see too many bookie shops in my neighborhood.

HAT
03-08-2010, 10:10 AM
I called the guy out for a stupid statement he made. I refuted his statement,

Nevermind you pussing out on a bet for a second.....

My statement was that though I want BM in Denver, his numbers are not hard to replicate in a pass friendly offense.

You have done nothing to 'refute' that.

Brandon Marshall has missed two games over the last two years.

His 'replacements' went 9/146 & 14/213 in those games.

oubronco
03-08-2010, 10:18 AM
Nevermind you pussing out on a bet for a second.....

My statement was that though I want BM in Denver, his numbers are not hard to replicate in a pass friendly offense.

You have done nothing to 'refute' that.

Brandon Marshall has missed two games over the last two years.

His 'replacements' went 9/146 & 14/213 in those games.

but could they do that on a consistant basis like BMarsh has done for 4yrs

Beantown Bronco
03-08-2010, 10:20 AM
but could they do that on a consistant basis like BMarsh has done for 4yrs

Only one way to find out.

oubronco
03-08-2010, 10:22 AM
Only one way to find out.

Yep and unfortunately we are heading that direction

Rulon Velvet Jones
03-08-2010, 10:23 AM
Guys, send me the money.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 10:31 AM
There's no way in hell Ochocinco's and Marshall's personalities play well together. Marshall will start pwning Ochocinco's routes, YAC, and toughness. Ochocino lashes out and wants to be traded. Count on it! Then again, the bagels are that ignorant...

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 10:34 AM
There's no way in hell Ochocinco's and Marshall's personalities play well together. Marshall will start pwning Ochocinco's routes, YAC, and toughness. Ochocino lashes out and wants to be traded. Count on it! Then again, the bagels are that ignorant...

Nice made up story. Fantasy land is a great place to visit, but please remember, it's not reality...

OOJack
03-08-2010, 10:40 AM
Nice made up story. Fantasy land is a great place to visit, but please remember, it's not reality...

Because Tombstonee RJ disagrees, it must be fantasy. Got it! You're a politician, right?

Man I'm pissing everyone off today...I guess that's how it goes when you have opinions.

bowtown
03-08-2010, 10:43 AM
Because Tombstonee RJ disagrees, it must be fantasy. Got it! You're a politician, right?

Man I'm pissing everyone off today...I guess that's how it goes when you have opinions.

Really has more to do with the quality of your opinions. When you run around opining that Josh's whole strategy is to purposely lose and destroy the Broncos, it kind of discredits everything else you might have to say.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 10:57 AM
Really has more to do with the quality of your opinions. When you run around opining that Josh's whole strategy is to purposely lose and destroy the Broncos, it kind of discredits everything else you might have to say.

So when did I say he was purposely losing? But that does bring up a good point. I agree with you, It is hard to believe you cannot EFF up a team as much as ours has been without actually trying. That or maybe he just isn't a good head coach...

TonyR
03-08-2010, 11:00 AM
...It is hard to believe you cannot EFF up a team as much as ours has been without actually trying.

You mean by taking over an 8-8 team, completely rebuilding the defense, changing the schemes on both sides of the ball, and going 8-8 against a considerably more difficult schedule? That kind of eff up? I mean, sheesh, the guy didn't win the Super Bowl his first year! He sucks! Fire him!

HAT
03-08-2010, 11:04 AM
but could they do that on a consistant basis like BMarsh has done for 4yrs

I believe you mean 3 years. BM caught 20 passes in his rookie campaign.

Regardless....For the last 3 years, BM has averaged:

102 Rec
1,236 Yards
7-8 TDs

Impresive numbers (which is why I want him back) but let's put some perspective to that.

2006:
Javon Walker 70/1084/8

1997-2005:
Rod Smith averaged
86/1165/7

Rod Smith was the freakin' man....And was an UFA as we all know.

The point is...Denver is a pass friendly offense. Their #1 WR is going to produce. And it doesn't matter if it's Elway, Brister, Griese, Ferotte, Plummer, Cutler or Orton throwing them the ball.

This year alone, there were 20 WR's who broke 1,000 yards. Here's the 16 teams they played for:

Hou, NE, Dal, Min, Indy, Pit, NYG, Phi, SD, ATL, Den, GB, AZ, NO, Cincy, Balt.

Everyone of those teams is either pass happy, pass friendly, or in the case of Pitt, NYG & Balty, have top 10 or up & coming QB's.

By the way, two of the top 3 yardage getting WR's this year were also UFA's.

I dig Brandon & hope they can find a way to keep him but It's not the end of the world if he walks and Denver is fairly compensated. BM is far from irreplaceable as some here would suggest.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:07 AM
You mean by taking over an 8-8 team, completely rebuilding the defense, changing the schemes on both sides of the ball, and going 8-8 against a considerably more difficult schedule? That kind of eff up? I mean, sheesh, the guy didn't win the Super Bowl his first year! He sucks! Fire him!

He did have a small part in that, by hiring Nolan. But guess what, he EFFED up and and got rid of him (fired, mutual agreement, slapped d*cks, however you want to smooth it over in your head). And please don't mention the sh*t offense he fielded or that he turned the offense around, negatively. I mean god forbid he actually improves our 8-8 record in his first year.

I figured the firing of Shanny was to improve our team, not stay the same.

bowtown
03-08-2010, 11:08 AM
So when did I say he was purposely losing? But that does bring up a good point. I agree with you, It is hard to believe you cannot EFF up a team as much as ours has been without actually trying. That or maybe he just isn't a good head coach...


Shanny by far; he has to try to win. EFFING up comes natural to McD as a head coach, which is his obvious strategy for the job.

.

oubronco
03-08-2010, 11:09 AM
I believe you mean 3 years. BM caught 20 passes in his rookie campaign.

Regardless....For the last 3 years, BM has averaged:

102 Rec
1,236 Yards
7-8 TDs

Impresive numbers (which is why I want him back) but let's put some perspective to that.

2006:
Javon Walker 70/1084/8

1997-2005:
Rod Smith averaged
86/1165/7

Rod Smith was the freakin' man....And was an UFA as we all know.

The point is...Denver is a pass friendly offense. Their #1 WR is going to produce. And it doesn't matter if it's Elway, Brister, Griese, Ferotte, Plummer, Cutler or Orton throwing them the ball.

This year alone, there were 20 WR's who broke 1,000 yards. Here's the 16 teams they played for:

Hou, NE, Dal, Min, Indy, Pit, NYG, Phi, SD, ATL, Den, GB, AZ, NO, Cincy, Balt.

Everyone of those teams is either pass happy, pass friendly, or in the case of Pitt, NYG & Balty, have top 10 or up & coming QB's.

By the way, two of the top 3 yardage getting WR's this year were also UFA's.

I dig Brandon & hope they can find a way to keep him but It's not the end of the world if he walks and Denver is fairly compensated. BM is far from irreplaceable as some here would suggest.

I highly doubt that anyone on the roster will produce anything like Marshall and the draft is a crapshoot I prefer to keep Marshall

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:11 AM
.

Again, so when did I say he was purposely losing?

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:13 AM
oh and thank bowtown for hijacking the thread...

bowtown
03-08-2010, 11:14 AM
I guess I just put 2 and 2 together. Seeing as how the overall point in football is to win, then the opposite of that or "EFFing up" in football would be to lose. So if his stategy is to Eff up, then you are saying his strategy is to lose.

TonyR
03-08-2010, 11:17 AM
He did have a small part in that, by hiring Nolan.

How about getting the players? No credit for that?

And is this joker BF7?

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 11:18 AM
Again, so when did I say he was purposely losing?

and this:

Shanny by far; he has to try to win. EFFING up comes natural to McD as a head coach, which is his obvious strategy for the job.


Keep up the nice work OO. Keep pretending to know stuff.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:19 AM
I guess I just put 2 and 2 together. Seeing as how the overall point in football is to win, then the opposite of that or "EFFing up" in football would be to lose. So if his stategy is to Eff up, then you are saying his strategy is to lose.

With your rules of inference, sure. So with those rules, the overall point in hiring McD was to improve an 8-8 record, then the opposite of that would be not improving the record. So if his strategy was to improve an 8-8 record, he EFFED up by not improving.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:20 AM
How about getting the players? No credit for that?

And is this joker BF7?

Of course I would give Nolan credit for that. He's the man.

oubronco
03-08-2010, 11:21 AM
With your rules of inference, sure. So with those rules, the overall point in hiring McD was to improve an 8-8 record, then the opposite of that would be not improving the record. So if his strategy was to improve an 8-8 record, he EFFED up by not improving.

Let it play itself out for a couple seasons and if it doesn't workout then we can bytch about it

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 11:23 AM
Because Tombstonee RJ disagrees, it must be fantasy. Got it! You're a politician, right?

Man I'm pissing everyone off today...I guess that's how it goes when you have opinions.

I don't think you can separate fantasy from reality, and that's kinda sad. Hey, why don't you go root for another team? It might be easier for you than hating the team you supposedly are a fan of. Eh, maybe not.

Your probably the type of guy who loves to roll in sschitt and then blame everyone else for how bad you smell.

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 11:26 AM
With your rules of inference, sure. So with those rules, the overall point in hiring McD was to improve an 8-8 record, then the opposite of that would be not improving the record. So if his strategy was to improve an 8-8 record, he EFFED up by not improving.

Your the one infering. Unless you were in the room when McD signed his contract with the Broncos, you have no clue what his goals for the 2009 season were.

Keep living in fantasy land and pretending you know stuff. I'm sure it's warm and fuzzy where you live.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:29 AM
I don't think you can separate fantasy from reality, and that's kinda sad. Hey, why don't you go root for another team? It might be easier for you than hating the team you supposedly are a fan of. Eh, maybe not.

Your probably the type of guy who loves to roll in sschitt and then blame everyone else for how bad you smell.

Hahaha, since I disagree with decisions of the current coach of a team I have grown up watching, I should to root for another team?

Hogan11
03-08-2010, 11:34 AM
God I hate the Bengals.

Tombstone RJ
03-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Hahaha, since I disagree with decisions of the current coach of a team I have grown up watching, I should to root for another team?

Maybe you should stick with the "growing up" part and try to master that before you post.

:peace:

cutthemdown
03-08-2010, 11:38 AM
Hahaha, since I disagree with decisions of the current coach of a team I have grown up watching, I should to root for another team?

No it's just people on the other side just as frustrated as you are. We end up taking it out on each other. Really no one likes what is going on in Denver.

Honestly since Darrent got gunned down nothing has felt right IMO. We have a dark cloud that seems to get worst as the team gets closer to the end of the season and all the reminders of the time of yr Darrent got shot.

I never had a close loved one get gunned down but I know all about how a smell in the air can trigger a memory of a lost loved one. Or a building, or a song, or anything really. Things like that can be very powerful and men often keep them to themselves. Who knows how much this plays into the Marshal thing. In reality he could have really told Broncos man I don't feel right in Denver. This city creeps me out because of what happened.

In that case they would probably say let's say you would say, but we are open to also getting a first. We won't tender too high, and be willing to deal as long as we get first round pick. You don't get labeled a malcontent or head case, and everyone can move on.

There is so much we never hear about. That is a fact we have to accept.

In Mcdaniels credit though not all his moves has been bad. He has a good plan and I think Broncos can get over the hump.

Unfortunately to really make it work, within 2 yrs we need a new starting QB. Orton only good enough to handle the Broncos until running game squared away and defensive line and oline in place.

Mcdaniels unleashes someone like Brandstater in a yr or so and he plays well you will be singing his praises.

Whose mad now, and whose waiting, doesn't determine who is a better fan. I used to think it does. I'm starting to think its just a reflection of people personalities and how we deal with things that bother us.

Stay pissed, do whatever you want, it's about how much you want the Broncos to win that determines what kind of fan you are. Not how much you whine, complain, bitch, moan...whatever you crying women do. :thumbsup:

OOJack
03-08-2010, 11:45 AM
No it's just people on the other side just as frustrated as you are. We end up taking it out on each other. Really no one likes what is going on in Denver.

Honestly since Darrent got gunned down nothing has felt right IMO. We have a dark cloud that seems to get worst as the team gets closer to the end of the season and all the reminders of the time of yr Darrent got shot.

I never had a close loved one get gunned down but I know all about how a smell in the air can trigger a memory of a lost loved one. Or a building, or a song, or anything really. Things like that can be very powerful and men often keep them to themselves. Who knows how much this plays into the Marshal thing. In reality he could have really told Broncos man I don't feel right in Denver. This city creeps me out because of what happened.

In that case they would probably say let's say you would say, but we are open to also getting a first. We won't tender too high, and be willing to deal as long as we get first round pick. You don't get labeled a malcontent or head case, and everyone can move on.

There is so much we never hear about. That is a fact we have to accept.

In Mcdaniels credit though not all his moves has been bad. He has a good plan and I think Broncos can get over the hump.

Unfortunately to really make it work, within 2 yrs we need a new starting QB. Orton only good enough to handle the Broncos until running game squared away and defensive line and oline in place.

Mcdaniels unleashes someone like Brandstater in a yr or so and he plays well you will be singing his praises.

Whose mad now, and whose waiting, doesn't determine who is a better fan. I used to think it does. I'm starting to think its just a reflection of people personalities and how we deal with things that bother us.

Stay pissed, do whatever you want, it's about how much you want the Broncos to win that determines what kind of fan you are. Not how much you whine, complain, b****, moan...whatever you crying women do. :thumbsup:

Well for what it's worth, I'm the guy losing his voice each game rooting for the Broncos to win, regardless of personal. But never since I've been a fan has our fan base been as divided. And that is mostly due to the hiring and decisions of McD. So I feel the need send rants over a web of transferring bits that will go mostly unheard, only to satisfy my frustration with what we now call our Denver Broncos.

Beantown Bronco
03-08-2010, 12:56 PM
But never since I've been a fan has our fan base been as divided. And that is mostly due to the hiring and decisions of McD. So I feel the need send rants over a web of transferring bits that will go mostly unheard, only to satisfy my frustration with what we now call our Denver Broncos.

You wouldn't feel this way if you posted here more back in the day. This is NO different than the Griese/Plummer/Cutler debates that have gone on since the early days of the Mane and other sites like Cyber High. Fans are always divided passionately about the coaching and QB positions in particular and this past year has been no different.

OOJack
03-08-2010, 01:04 PM
You wouldn't feel this way if you posted here more back in the day. This is NO different than the Griese/Plummer/Cutler debates that have gone on since the early days of the Mane and other sites like Cyber High. Fans are always divided passionately about the coaching and QB positions in particular and this past year has been no different.

I disagree. This has been much worse with the loss of long time super bowl coach, coinciding with the loss of arguably the best Broncos QB since 7 and the best WR since Rod.

And I was here when the Griese/Plummer/Cutler debates were taking place...