Lonestar
02-09-2010, 11:08 PM
Krieger: Money talks with Broncos' Marshall
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
POSTED: 02/09/2010 01:00:00 AM MST
UPDATED: 02/09/2010 11:46:41 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#ixzz0f6Qn9lTY
By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist
POSTED: 02/09/2010 01:00:00 AM MST
UPDATED: 02/09/2010 11:46:41 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#ixzz0f6Qn9lTY