PDA

View Full Version : marshall or no marshall,we have options...



T.K.O.
06-30-2009, 10:59 AM
Beyond Brandon Marshall
by broncobear on Jun 21, 2009 5:45 PM MDT in 2009 Season Preview 57 comments


More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP
15 days ago: Denver Broncos tight end Tony Scheffler takes part in drills during the team's football minicamp at the Broncos headquarters in Englewood, Colo., on Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

Browse more photos »
The Denver Broncos Receiving Options




With the onset of yet another strange distraction this offseason, as Brandon Marshall ignores the effects of his injury and additional problems this offseason with his personal life (neither of which kept him from demanding a trade), there is a lot of talk about the Broncos and the potential receivers who are out there and might be part of a trade for Marshall. While I wouldn't rule those out, from one perspective it's difficult to imagine how an injured problem-child with more offseason issues on his radar (he's already been suspended once and has more court hearings upcoming) will bring a king's ransom in a trade. It's entirely possible that Marshall will be spending 2009 with the Broncos. Whether or not he is, however, I thought it worthwhile to do a quick rundown of who Denver already has as receiving options. For purposes of organization, I broke them down into wide receivers, tight ends and running backs. How they are used may not be the same as how they are listed, but I wanted to keep it as simple as possible.


Wide Receivers




1. Eddie Royal
Dust off the superlatives and break out the thesaurus - Eddie Royal may be vested with the nickname 'Cheese' but his real name in 2008 turned out to be 'Money'. At 5'10", 182 lbs, this is a young man who shattered the axioms about not counting on wide receivers in their first year. He showed the world that he was the top receiving rookie in the NFL in just his first game, blasting DeAngelo Hall and the rest of the Oakland Raiders backfield for 9 receptions, 146 yards and a TD en route to a Denver destruction of their division rival. He would finish the season with 91 receptions and 980 yards, with 5 TDs and only three drops despite some hand problems caused by Jay Cutler's hard throwing style. Royal showed that he can run tight routes, gain separation, get yards after the catch, adjust to the ball in the air and, oh, yes - be a constant threat as a return guy. In addition to destroying the theory about the struggles of 1st year receivers he also blew up the one about return guys not making the transition to receiver effectively.
With solid character, ceaseless effort and tremendous skill, Royal is one of the many young bright spots for a Denver squad going through major changes. Could he step in as a #1 receiver? Ask Steve Smith. In fact, think of Smith without the 'thuggery' tag that he has allowed to develop around him. Royal is the kind of player that every team dreams of having. It's interesting to reflect on the fact that most of the Broncos faithful blew their collective gasket when we drafted him last year, with many demanding to know why we didn't go with DeSean Jackson, now of the Philadelphia Eagles. Now we know...

2. Brandon Stokley
Last year, the 5'11" 192 lb. Stokley shook off the effects of a concussion that plagued him previously and showed that he is still one of the penultimate 3rd-down slot receivers in the league. He produce 49 receptions, 528 yards and 3 TDs for the Broncos. He's likely to spend this year teaching Kenny McKinley how to play the slot like an All-Pro, and if he can get across just some of the tricks of the trade that he's developed during his 10-year career, McKinley will be much the better for it. Talking about money - over those 10 years he has fumbled just 3 times and only 1 of them came with his previous employer, Indianapolis. None in his two years in Denver and none of them in the last four years shows us that he's still one of the best slot receivers in the NFL.

3. Jabar Gaffney
Coming over from the New England Patriots during this offseason, the 6'1" 200 lb Gaffney has a lot to offer the Broncos. He's familiar with the new system's terminology, used to Head Coach Josh McDaniels and a big supporter of his and has a lot of skill. Over the span of his 7-year career (the past three with New England and Houston before that) he's played in 107 games and caught 256 balls for over 3,000 yards. Gaffney put up 169 first-down receptions and 15 TDs over that stretch of time. Look for him and new quarterback Kyle Orton to spend a lot of time hooking up together.

4. Kenny McKinley
This 5th-round choice for the Broncos was the key to the South Carolina Gamecocks offense for the past three years. Unintimidated by pressure situations, the incredibly productive McKinley was described by Head Coach Steve Spurrier as the "best wide receiver (he's) ever coached". His jersey was retired when he left school, one of only 5 players from USC to ever have been honored that way; he may yet bring a Brandon Stokley-like presence to the slot. His slight frame (5'10", 192 lb.) is perhaps his biggest concern, but there's simply no denying his level of skill. Some receivers are just a lot harder to cover than others. McKinley is like that. He runs good routes, has incredible hands and broke Sterling Sharpe's collegiate school records for receptions and receiving yards as well as catching a pass in each of his last 43 games. He did well in the Combine with a 4.44 40-yard dash, a 37-inch vertical leap, a broad jump of 113 inches and a 20-yard shuttle of 4.1 seconds, but his on-field production was the key to drafting him. He was ranked anywhere from the 2nd round to the middle-5th, so getting him in the 5th round was a good acquisition. He has great vision, solid instincts and is extremely elusive as a receiver. If he can stay healthy he'll fill in for Stokley whenever Brandon eventually falters. I hope that it's a long time. Look for him to struggle at first against press coverage

5. Chad Jackson
Chad Jackson is being gifted with the best opportunity of his short career. A 6'1" 215 lb receiver out of Florida, Jackson was picked by the Patriots with the 4th pick of the 2nd round but hasn't been about to break into the rotation with either New England or Denver. Over the past three years Jackson has only played in 18 games (12 of them in his first season), but he has had an elusive potential that has kept coaches willing to find ways to keep him on the roster. He has a history of kickoff returning that has also played in his favor. Shifty and quick with good acceleration, he often tends to round off his routes and must improve there. He came out of college a year early and that may have also worked against him as the problems with his game have been ones of an immature (professionally) player.

Yahoo's draft profile on him said in part, "He is best when running short area routes, where he shows better crispness in his breaks. He has the size to compete for the ball in traffic and make body adjustments, but does like to jump and body catch a bit. Jackson excels at catching in a crowd and has the courage to combat for the jump balls. He will extend and pluck the ball, but did struggle with his consistency in the past (lacks softness and will juggle the ball). When he catches with his body, he will bobble the ball, but when he extends, he can catch and run without having to gear down." The short routes that Orton is best at and which have predominated in New England over the past 4 years should play to his advantage. This is his best, and perhaps his last chance to show a team that he can be an NFL wide receiver. Elusive with good strength and the leg drive to get the yards after the catch, Jackson could be a fine addition to this year's team if he simply matures as a player.

6. Brandon Lloyd

Recently of the Chicago Bears, Lloyd hasn't found his niche in the 7 years that he's played for San Francisco, Washington and Chicago. Despite a talent for circus catches and athletic contributions, Lloyd has developed a reputation for not enjoying hard contact and having troubles maintaining his focus. It will be interesting to see how he handles the "no-excuses" atmosphere of Josh McDaniels' team. When he's on track with a team he can provide 45 catches a year and 600 yards a season as he did in San Francisco in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, the Broncos have Matt Willis, a 6'0" 200 lb. 4th-year player out of UCLA who is trying to catch on as well as Lucas Taylor (6'1" 195) and Nate Swift (6'0" 185), two CFAs trying to earn a place on the practice squad.
__________________________________________________ _______________ we still need a big bruising reciever but we do have a decent set if marshall wont play.
i like the fact that royal pretty much tops the list of rookies last year and he is 5'10" 182 lbs......so much for everyone saying we wasted our pick on alphonso smith....didnt learn anything last year !!!!

Ravage!!!
06-30-2009, 11:14 AM
One great pick doesn't absolve all bad choices.

But I'm not excited about these WRs without Marshall at all. Stokely can be money, but he dropped TD passes and if relied on to be the top guy when someone gets hurt, he is ALWAYS hurt. Seems like it never fails.

After Royal, I don't see anyone I would be happy to say is our starting WR. The rest are back-ups and fill ins at best. Ones that have failed other places. Lloyd, at one time, was decent.

Foochacho
06-30-2009, 11:16 AM
They better pay Marshall we need him. The man's a beast. It sucks his hip is still healing so we don't know if he will ever be 100% again. But if they let him go I will be pissed. We need a dominant force and that's what he is. I don't care about the off the field problems the man is talented pay the man. Sucks that he is a suspension waiting to happen but that is a risk I would be willing to take. It's not like we have a replacement for him right now so even if he does miss some games at least we will be that much better in the games he is in. We might get burnt by signing him to a big deal if he can't straighten his act up, But I would hate to trade him and watch him tear it up for some other team.

He dropped alot of balls last year but I can guarantee that his nerve damage had alot to do with it. My nerves didn't start to really heal to the point where I could feel again until about 2-3 years after I cut them. This year his arm should be a little less numb and the balls will be coming with a little less velocity. Let's see what the guy's got.

T.K.O.
06-30-2009, 11:19 AM
One great pick doesn't absolve all bad choices.

But I'm not excited about these WRs without Marshall at all. Stokely can be money, but he dropped TD passes and if relied on to be the top guy when someone gets hurt, he is ALWAYS hurt. Seems like it never fails.

After Royal, I don't see anyone I would be happy to say is our starting WR. The rest are back-ups and fill ins at best. Ones that have failed other places. Lloyd, at one time, was decent.

i dont see how you can say that when royal (now your top guy sans marshall)was a rookie last year.
why do you feel we cant get good production from our new rookies and guys like gaffney and stokes
that mckinley kid sounds like he could make an impact.
spurrier said he is "the best reciever he's EVER coached ! thats a pretty bold statement

Mike
06-30-2009, 11:59 AM
Scheff and Graham will most certainly be utilized. Not to mention Hillis and Moreno. I expect all of these guys to have a roll catching the ball. Having Marshall would be nice, but the Broncos have solid receiving options for the dink and dunk offense.

Northman
06-30-2009, 12:13 PM
After Royal, I don't see anyone I would be happy to say is our starting WR. The rest are back-ups and fill ins at best. Ones that have failed other places. Lloyd, at one time, was decent.

Im sure a lot of people were saying that going into last year regarding Royal. Until we can see what these other guys can do im not writing anyone off yet.

NameUsedBefore
06-30-2009, 12:44 PM
Outside of Royal it doesn't look good at all. The other guys are either on the otherside of their careers, always close to injury, or both. Lloyd... Well he's the Eric Crouch of receivers.

broncofaninfla
06-30-2009, 12:44 PM
This is a solid group of WR's BUT it's even better with Marshall.

horsepig
06-30-2009, 02:16 PM
I remember when Mike drafted Royal and I thought who the hell is this guy? Then I pulled up that u-tube video to Revolution and said to myself, Wow! Just wanted to say that.

I love Marshall's game. He gets frustated and can be taken out of games by wiley defenders, look at the Miami game. McD apparently was able to keep Randy Moss in the game, if he could do the same for BM tou could add another 15-20 catches/year to his numbers.

Don't yell about Cutler not being here, I'm just saying in the same sort of circumstances BM could really excel, even exceed, his already impressive production in this new Offense.

LoyalSoldier
06-30-2009, 02:40 PM
i dont see how you can say that when royal (now your top guy sans marshall)was a rookie last year.
why do you feel we cant get good production from our new rookies and guys like gaffney and stokes
that mckinley kid sounds like he could make an impact.
spurrier said he is "the best reciever he's EVER coached ! thats a pretty bold statement

Royal was an anomaly (a very good anomaly) as far as rookie WRs go. The average WR takes time to develop. So I expect the veteran receivers to have more of an impact which I would have to agree with others, I don't like all the options after Royal and maybe Stokely. Everyone else was either a scrub, failed WR, or a 4th option. Forgive me for not being overconfident.

topscribe
06-30-2009, 03:02 PM
Recently, I spent a few hours observing Bears games and highlights, mostly to
investigate Orton. Meanwhile, another player popped out at me.

Brandon Lloyd.

He was hurt for a while last year, but before and after, he was regularly
beating some pretty good CBs and safeties . . . and he has flypaper for hands!
Really, if Marshall doesn't come back (and even if he does, he will be behind), I
would not at all be surprised to see Lloyd step up and complete a terrific trio of
WRs along with Fast Eddie and the Slot Machine . . .

-----

nevcraw
06-30-2009, 03:46 PM
without marshall the WR corp looks pretty pedestrian. Could they prove to be better? sure. But Stokes is an excellent older slot WR. He should not be counted on for the whole season without some injury time or some drop-off due to fatigue. Royal benifits greatly as a #2. Nothing except for the Oakland game last years screams he's a number one yet.
The rest are average to below average NFL WR's. #3's at best 4-6's more likely.

rcsodak
06-30-2009, 04:41 PM
I'm not by any means a 'husker fan, but I've followed them enough to see that Swift isn't a bad wr.
I could see worse making the team, if nothing more, at first, than a PS'r.

haroldthebarrel
06-30-2009, 04:43 PM
I don't get these kinda threads. Sure the teams have options but it isnt like they can scheme up to replace him.
You not only loose a receiver who can catch and are dangerous running. You also loose maybe the second best blocker at wr. Which incidently, with all the free agents and Moreno looks to be a huge part of our offense.

T.K.O.
06-30-2009, 06:34 PM
I don't get these kinda threads. Sure the teams have options but it isnt like they can scheme up to replace him.
You not only loose a receiver who can catch and are dangerous running. You also loose maybe the second best blocker at wr. Which incidently, with all the free agents and Moreno looks to be a huge part of our offense.

the thread was just a look at our options,it was by no means intended to say we are as good with or without marshall.
it would suck to lose a guy like marshall but as with every team and every player,you are always one play away from losing your best player for the season .(see the patriots )
so we better have some descent options either way contract or no contract we still might have to do without him due to his hip and legal issues:salute:

Lonestar
07-01-2009, 12:50 AM
mar$hall could make the team better if and that is a BIG IF he is healthy and not in trouble..

but he could also make the team worse if they cut a bidding star to keep this head case and he screws the pooch again or his hip or nerve damage does not heal..

I could see him on PUP.. at the beginning of the year.. and allow us not to have to make those decisions.. right away..

Does anyone know how that affects him getting paid.. his FA status I know he is not counted on the roster but does his salary count toward the cap..

Tned
07-01-2009, 07:17 AM
It's pretty simple, the team is much better on the field with Marshall. Look around the league, and look at how people like Owens and Moss get 2nd and third chances (or more) even when they cause problems, look how guys like Bolden and Fitzgerald are coveted.

There simply are a small number of elite WR's, and the number of them that are big, physical beasts is even shorter.

Does his off-field problems negate all of that? Maybe. But, if Denver lets him go for anything but a first rounder plus something, they are crazy, because they could have 10 4th round picks and the odds are they would not find another Brandon Marshall in the draft, because they are simply very rare commodities.

T.K.O.
07-01-2009, 08:34 AM
It's pretty simple, the team is much better on the field with Marshall. Look around the league, and look at how people like Owens and Moss get 2nd and third chances (or more) even when they cause problems, look how guys like Bolden and Fitzgerald are coveted.

There simply are a small number of elite WR's, and the number of them that are big, physical beasts is even shorter.

Does his off-field problems negate all of that? Maybe. But, if Denver lets him go for anything but a first rounder plus something, they are crazy, because they could have 10 4th round picks and the odds are they would not find another Brandon Marshall in the draft, because they are simply very rare commodities.

on the other hand the cowboys felt the distractions owens brings out-weighed the benefits.and believe the other players (including the qb)will play better as a team without him? and we all remember how productive moss was when he was on a team he was'nt happy with.
again i'm not saying we are better off without him.but if he plans on a poutfest ala cutler....maybe we are !
is harrison still out there? maybe he would have one last great season to prove the naysayers wrong.

horsepig
07-01-2009, 11:49 PM
It's pretty simple, the team is much better on the field with Marshall. Look around the league, and look at how people like Owens and Moss get 2nd and third chances (or more) even when they cause problems, look how guys like Bolden and Fitzgerald are coveted.

There simply are a small number of elite WR's, and the number of them that are big, physical beasts is even shorter.

Does his off-field problems negate all of that? Maybe. But, if Denver lets him go for anything but a first rounder plus something, they are crazy, because they could have 10 4th round picks and the odds are they would not find another Brandon Marshall in the draft, because they are simply very rare commodities.

I agree T. BM is like a Ford GT, beautiful, super fast and gets 2 miles/gal.

It's also tempermental and VERY expensive.

Reliable? Yes for what it is. Is BM? So far yes.

SmilinAssasSin27
07-02-2009, 08:26 AM
Even the biggest homer has to say that group as a whole doesn't make em feel confident about the season at WR. I do think Lloyd has a lot of talent, but there is sumthin that holds him back.

Tned
07-02-2009, 09:40 AM
on the other hand the cowboys felt the distractions owens brings out-weighed the benefits.and believe the other players (including the qb)will play better as a team without him? and we all remember how productive moss was when he was on a team he was'nt happy with.
again i'm not saying we are better off without him.but if he plans on a poutfest ala cutler....maybe we are !
is harrison still out there? maybe he would have one last great season to prove the naysayers wrong.

And as the years have gone by, Moss has become less of a problem. Marshall has had his off field problems, most of them relating to his girlfriend, some have been pretty bogus (like the imprisonment charge when he got home and pulled his car across the driveway when the cab was about to pull out). Other's have been stupid, DUI and bar fights, and if he hit his girlfriend(s) that's bad, although some reports have them hitting each other.

I don't know, regardless of all that nonsense, to date he has missed one game on the field, and that is under a commissioner that suspends for just about any possible reason. The drop off with him gone is HUGE. No matter how anyone plays up the other receivers, there is no way with the players we have to make up for Marshall being gone.

Could we hit the jackpot next draft? Maybe, but the odds are against it. It's the reason why receivers like Marshall, Moss, TO, Fitzgerald, etc. become so covetted, because more times than not, you simply can't predict which wide receiver is going to become elite.

Tned
07-02-2009, 09:50 AM
Even the biggest homer has to say that group as a whole doesn't make em feel confident about the season at WR. I do think Lloyd has a lot of talent, but there is sumthin that holds him back.

Add Marshall, and that group is good, to very good. However, take Marshall out, and there is a major domino effect.

I put Stokely in the slot either way, becuase two years ago when Stokely was used extensively at number one, they said he wore down and it wasn't where they would use him again, so presumably, now two years later, even if Marshall is gone, Stokely would primarily be a slot guy, even if he 'sometimes' lined up as #2 wide.

#1 Marshall > Royal
#2 Royal > Gaffney
Slot Stokley = Stokley
#4 Gaffney > Lloyd (maybe, flip of the coin)
#5 Lloyd > Jackson

Now, we don't know if the rookie will be ready to play, so I don't include him, but if you are looking at going five wide at tmies, then you can see that the column on the right, with Marshall is a MUCH stronger group, because pulling Marshall out makes every spot except slot weaker. Now, depending how Scheffler is used, he could solidify the 4/5 spot in 4 and 5 receiver packages, with or without Marshall, but again, the WR corp is substantially weaker with the removal of that piece, and that's just in terms of depth.

The other factor is that Marshall will command a double team, or cannot be stopped. That means that there are a lot few defenders for the other 3 or 4 receivers in the pattern. Royal will not command the same double, or even triple teams that Marshall does.

TXBRONC
07-02-2009, 09:59 AM
on the other hand the cowboys felt the distractions owens brings out-weighed the benefits.and believe the other players (including the qb)will play better as a team without him? and we all remember how productive moss was when he was on a team he was'nt happy with.
again i'm not saying we are better off without him.but if he plans on a poutfest ala cutler....maybe we are !
is harrison still out there? maybe he would have one last great season to prove the naysayers wrong.

Harrison's has really fallen off so I seriously doubt he would be an adequate replacement if Marshall. Let's just say Harrison has on last great left in him. Then what? Now Denver has to go all the way back to the drawing board and yet another go to wide receiver. Marshall has had some off the field problems but name me one time that he's thrown a teammate under the bus or not given his all when he's been on the field?

I don't think it's debatable, the talent wise would be worse off without Marshall.

LRtagger
07-02-2009, 10:04 AM
The drop off with him gone is HUGE. No matter how anyone plays up the other receivers, there is no way with the players we have to make up for Marshall being gone.

Which is exactly why they should consider trading him if the opportunity arises.

The guy doesn't want to be here, he could miss 8 games as early as the 2009 season and we would have no one to replace him with, he is coming off major surgery, etc.

At least if we trade him we can target another player to help either at he WR position or somewhere on D.

Marshall is a tremendous talent, but it is extremely risky to bend over backwards and hand a guy money who has maturity issues off the field. If you make the guy feel like he can continue on his current path and still get paid, then he wont change.

If you make him sweat for the money and reward him for good behavior, then maybe he will man up and stop getting drunk and beating women. He can no longer blame it on LaQuinta since he has already had an incident with his new girl.

It is not unreasonable at all to ask him to play one year, stay out of trouble, make $2+mil and guarantee a big paycheck for 2010 should he mature off the field. I would have no problem paying him 7 or 8 mil a year if he can prove he can be a man off the field as well as on. I'm sure Pat would agree.

Tned
07-02-2009, 10:17 AM
Which is exactly why they should consider trading him if the opportunity arises.

The guy doesn't want to be here, he could miss 8 games as early as the 2009 season and we would have no one to replace him with, he is coming off major surgery, etc.

At least if we trade him we can target another player to help either at he WR position or somewhere on D.

Marshall is a tremendous talent, but it is extremely risky to bend over backwards and hand a guy money who has maturity issues off the field. If you make the guy feel like he can continue on his current path and still get paid, then he wont change.

If you make him sweat for the money and reward him for good behavior, then maybe he will man up and stop getting drunk and beating women. He can no longer blame it on LaQuinta since he has already had an incident with his new girl.

It is not unreasonable at all to ask him to play one year, stay out of trouble, make $2+mil and guarantee a big paycheck for 2010 should he mature off the field. I would have no problem paying him 7 or 8 mil a year if he can prove he can be a man off the field as well as on. I'm sure Pat would agree.

Well, if we trade him now, we almost certainly get no where near his value, both in terms of how high a pick, because there are questions, and in terms of the fact that the hit rate on drafted players is really pretty low. So, the risk of keeping him is MUCH lower than the risk of trying to draft an impact player (on either side of the ball) with a pick we get for him.

At this point, the Broncos need to play hard ball. There is no question he has probably been the biggest bargain in the NFL the last three years, in terms of being the most underpaid for how he performed (certainly among WR's and probably among the biggest bargains at any position). Now, unless there is a major change to the CBA, we have him locked up for at least two years (one under contract, one as a RFA).

If he holds out, then he can't hold out for more than 10 games, and will loose most of his salary, and then will be back in the same boat the next year (as that will probably hurt what other teams offer him or are willing to give up to get him).

On the flip side, if he caves and plays and can keep his act together, then the Broncos can resign him to a long term contract and have one of the few elite WR's in the league.

Bowlen and McDaniels need to learn from other teams. Look at all the players around the league that have asked for trades over the last five or ten years and how many of them actually get traded. Out front office needs to both grow some balls, but also learn from some other front offices.

haroldthebarrel
07-02-2009, 02:01 PM
Even the biggest homer has to say that group as a whole doesn't make em feel confident about the season at WR. I do think Lloyd has a lot of talent, but there is sumthin that holds him back.

he is just a tease. He has never been consistent at all, he has also been a somewhat of a distraction of team morale.
But we should see some awesome catches along with the drops and being out of places in his routes.

LRtagger
07-02-2009, 07:52 PM
Well, if we trade him now, we almost certainly get no where near his value, both in terms of how high a pick, because there are questions, and in terms of the fact that the hit rate on drafted players is really pretty low. So, the risk of keeping him is MUCH lower than the risk of trying to draft an impact player (on either side of the ball) with a pick we get for him.

At this point, the Broncos need to play hard ball. There is no question he has probably been the biggest bargain in the NFL the last three years, in terms of being the most underpaid for how he performed (certainly among WR's and probably among the biggest bargains at any position). Now, unless there is a major change to the CBA, we have him locked up for at least two years (one under contract, one as a RFA).

If he holds out, then he can't hold out for more than 10 games, and will loose most of his salary, and then will be back in the same boat the next year (as that will probably hurt what other teams offer him or are willing to give up to get him).

On the flip side, if he caves and plays and can keep his act together, then the Broncos can resign him to a long term contract and have one of the few elite WR's in the league.

Bowlen and McDaniels need to learn from other teams. Look at all the players around the league that have asked for trades over the last five or ten years and how many of them actually get traded. Out front office needs to both grow some balls, but also learn from some other front offices.

I am sure that is there plan. Wait him out and force him to play. Try to agree on terms next year.