View Full Version : Brandon Marshall
RavensD
08-20-2009, 08:30 PM
Hello everyone,
As my name suggests, I'm a Ravens fan. For the past couple of months, the members of our board have been talking about Brandon Marshall. I just wanted to check in here and ask what the current situation is with him, and the likelihood of him being traded?
Also, how would everyone feel about him being traded if that were to happen? Obviously, he is immensely talented, and after already losing Cutler, this could be a huge blow to the team.
However, it seems the guy also has a ton of baggage. Is he worth the trouble?
MOtorboat
08-20-2009, 08:33 PM
Oh joy...another thread about Marshall...
shank
08-20-2009, 08:36 PM
answer his question MO... you jerk.
RavensD
08-20-2009, 08:36 PM
Oh joy...another thread about Marshall...
hehe, that's what we say every time a new one pops up about him over there.
But what's the deal, is he still demanding a trade, etc...?
MOtorboat
08-20-2009, 08:40 PM
answer his question MO... you jerk.
I'm a real big fan of people who post without reading anything...but since you asked me to answer the question...no. he is not worth the money or the trouble.
hehe, that's what we say every time a new one pops up about him over there.
But what's the deal, is he still demanding a trade, etc...?
Yup, still demanding a trade. I don't know what "over there" is.
Hello everyone,
As my name suggests, I'm a Ravens fan. For the past couple of months, the members of our board have been talking about Brandon Marshall. I just wanted to check in here and ask what the current situation is with him, and the likelihood of him being traded?
Also, how would everyone feel about him being traded if that were to happen? Obviously, he is immensely talented, and after already losing Cutler, this could be a huge blow to the team.
However, it seems the guy also has a ton of baggage. Is he worth the trouble?
Welcome to the forum.
My guess would be right now it's about 70/30, in terms of fans that have turned sour on Marshall. I'm in the minority 30% that have not soured on him.
He is an incredible talent. I think one of only a half dozen or so recievers to have back to back 100 reception seasons, ever.
The only real knock on him is that he has had a number of brushes with the law. Several domestic violence arrests involving his old girlfriend (high school sweethearts), which he went to trial about last week and was found not-guilty. He believe he also had a problem with his current fiance where the police showed up and the prosecutor didn't file charges, because both he and his fiance refused to testify. I think there may also have been a DUI and there was a bar fight and arrest this last off season, but no charges filed.
So, off-field is a major concern. Since he was already suspended once, the thought is that if he gets in trouble again, it could be a 4-8 game suspension.
On the field, he is a beast. In his first game back last year (after his one game suspension) he had 18 or 19 receptions, which was about two receptions short of the single game NFL record. Basically, he can't be covered one on one by any defender, and he is a beast after the catch.
If he can clean up his act off the field, and is healthy (had off season hip surger and pulled a hamstring and missed two weeks of camp), he will be one of the top 5 receivers in the league, possibly top 3.
RavensD
08-20-2009, 08:48 PM
My apologies, I know that the proper etiquette is to read through the forums before posting, but there is so many topics on him already and none of them really address my question of his current status with the team (at least from what I did read through).
So what's the problem with moving him? Young, talented and low salary...even with the baggage, there shouldn't be any trouble finding suitors. In fact I think I read today the Jets may be interested. Has Denver simply not gotten what they feel is fair value for him, or are they actually sticking to their guns about not trading him?
My apologies, I know that the proper etiquette is to read through the forums before posting, but there is so many topics on him already and none of them really address my question of his current status with the team (at least from what I did read through).
So what's the problem with moving him? Young, talented and low salary...even with the baggage, there shouldn't be any trouble finding suitors. In fact I think I read today the Jets may be interested. Has Denver simply not gotten what they feel is fair value for him, or are they actually sticking to their guns about not trading him?
There is no problem with posting a question. It's been a 'tense' offseason, and we haven't been quite as friendly in our welcoming of new members as we usually are.
While there are rumors, the word out of the Denver FO is that they have no plans to trade him. Having said that, we heard the same thing about Cutler.
My 'guess' and that is all it is at this point, because we simply don't know, is that he will play this year, and then if he plays like the last two years, the Broncos will try and sign him to an extension before he becomes a restricted free agent.
If they can't come to an agreement, then they will give him the high tender offer, meaning that if another club makes him an offer that the Broncos choose not to match, then Denver will get a first and third round pick for him.
That's my guess, but it is hard to say.
Coach McDaniels has had him running on the scout team this week when he came back from injury, including him running as the safety on the scout team one practice, which is pretty unusual for a teams #1 receiver, so some speculate that the relationship isn't salvagable. It is really hard to predict. To date, I haven't heard any credible reports about the Broncos shopping him. Most credible reports indicate the Broncos have no plans to trade him at this time.
shank
08-20-2009, 08:54 PM
we are simply not going to get fair value for marshall in a trade IMO. fair value to the denver broncos doesn't include his off-field shit, because we have him in our possesion right now. he has no leverage, and we shouldn't move him unless we get a mind-blowing offer.
get him to play, and see where it leads... hopefully to a contract extension.
we are simply not going to get fair value for marshall in a trade IMO. fair value to the denver broncos doesn't include his off-field shit, because we have him in our possesion right now. he has no leverage, and we shouldn't move him unless we get a mind-blowing offer.
get him to play, and see where it leads... hopefully to a contract extension.
Exactly, because of the off field problems, and clearly soured relationship between him and the FO, we won't get anything worth his talent level. If he plays this year like past years, then at WORST we would get a first and a third by giving him the high tender offer, assuming a team signed him to an offer sheet we chose not to match.
I don't think there is any chance we would get a first and third for him today.
The Denver Post (www.denverpost.com/broncos) would have all the answers you need.
I'm not sour on him, yet. I think the media is making this out to be a lot more than it is. Everything that Marshall has been quoted as saying and everything that McDaniels has been quoted as saying leads me to believe Marshall is putting in the time and effort to learn the playbook and better himself. Eddie Royal's comments today (or yesterday) lead me to believe Marshall is putting forth an honest effort. I think the Media is painting an uglier picture than what, in reality, is really happening.
MOtorboat
08-20-2009, 08:58 PM
Exactly, because of the off field problems, and clearly soured relationship between him and the FO
Ironically, you just disputed this...and asked for "facts"
The Denver Post (www.denverpost.com/broncos) would have all the answers you need.
I'm not sour on him, yet. I think the media is making this out to be a lot more than it is. Everything that Marshall has been quoted as saying and everything that McDaniels has been quoted as saying leads me to believe Marshall is putting in the time and effort to learn the playbook and better himself. Eddie Royal's comments today (or yesterday) lead me to believe Marshall is putting forth an honest effort. I think the Media is painting an uglier picture than what, in reality, is really happening.
I agree. I have posted as much in a couple threads here, as well as a comment on a DP article that wasn't even factual -- they gave the impression that Marshall has had a playbook all offseason that he chose not to learn (they didn't work it exactly that way, but it was clearly the impression they were giving).
I think the local media has seen the fan sentiment turn, and are playing to their audience.
Ironically, you just disputed this...and asked for "facts"
No, I didn't.
Denver Native (Carol)
08-20-2009, 09:06 PM
The Denver Post (www.denverpost.com/broncos) would have all the answers you need.
I'm not sour on him, yet. I think the media is making this out to be a lot more than it is. Everything that Marshall has been quoted as saying and everything that McDaniels has been quoted as saying leads me to believe Marshall is putting in the time and effort to learn the playbook and better himself. Eddie Royal's comments today (or yesterday) lead me to believe Marshall is putting forth an honest effort. I think the Media is painting an uglier picture than what, in reality, is really happening.
I agree with this, and I am also not sour on him.
Lonestar
08-20-2009, 09:12 PM
welcome to the forum .. please do not let a few rude posters scare you away..
We have a pretty good smack area next time we play..
to your answer, he is an enormous talent on the field.. off the field has a lot of baggage.
he would make your team a great addition if you can lock him up between games.. but the the commish might do that anyway if the law does not get him first..
as MY Sig shows I'd take a high number one for him in a heart beat..
welcome to the forum .. please do not let a few rude posters scare you away..
We have a pretty good smack area next time we play..
to your answer, he is an enormous talent on the field.. off the field has a lot of baggage.
he would make your team a great addition if you can lock him up between games.. but the the commish might do that anyway if the law does not get him first..
as MY Sig shows I'd take a high number one for him in a heart beat..
Jr's not his biggest fan, because of his off field problems, but he sums it up pretty well. Great talent on the field, one of the best in the league -- not quite Fitzgerald caliber, but just a notch below. The problem is you don't know if he is done with his immature off-field problems, which could land him with a big suspension.
Broncos Mtnman
08-20-2009, 09:49 PM
The two most potent members of the Broncos offense (both of which went to the Pro Bowl) have either been traded or are wanting a trade.
The only constant in that scenario is Broncos Management. So, that should tell you all you need to know about Marshall's trade demands.
Any team that gets him will get a huge talent. When he's gone, the destruction by the offensive mastermind of the only part of the team that was working last over the past two years will be complete.
Marshall has been a tool at times, but he's being treated like crap by Mickey Mouse now that he's back. Is it payback for his holdout? You better believe it is.
Under those conditions, who can blame BM for wanting out.
The two most potent members of the Broncos offense (both of which went to the Pro Bowl) have either been traded or are wanting a trade.
The only constant in that scenario is Broncos Management. So, that should tell you all you need to know about Marshall's trade demands.
Any team that gets him will get a huge talent. When he's gone, the destruction by the offensive mastermind of the only part of the team that was working last over the past two years will be complete.
Marshall has been a tool at times, but he's being treated like crap by Mickey Mouse now that he's back. Is it payback for his holdout? You better believe it is.
Under those conditions, who can blame BM for wanting out.
Yeah, poor guy is only getting $2 million and change this year and his boss was mean to him...
How can anyone work under those conditions? :rolleyes:
LRtagger
08-20-2009, 09:57 PM
Marshall has been a tool at times, but he's being treated like crap by Mickey Mouse now that he's back. Is it payback for his holdout? You better believe it is.
Under those conditions, who can blame BM for wanting out.
Marshall wanted a trade long ago and it had nothing to do with Mickey Mouse and everything to do with Brandon's bank account.
Cutler wanted out before Mickey Mouse even stepped foot in Denver.
But nice try.
Marshall wanted a trade long ago and it had nothing to do with Mickey Mouse and everything to do with Brandon's bank account.
Cutler wanted out before Mickey Mouse even stepped foot in Denver.
But nice try.
Ok, show us where both of these guys gave any indication they wanted out before McDaniels was hired.
LRtagger
08-20-2009, 10:04 PM
Ok, show us where both of these guys gave any indication they wanted out before McDaniels was hired.
That is not what I said.
I said Marshall wanted out a while ago when Pat wouldn't give him a new contract. That has nothing to do with McDaniels.
And I believe it was Lombardi who was reporting that Cutler requested a trade right when Shanny was fired and again when Bates was fired.
That is not what I said.
I said Marshall wanted out a while ago when Pat wouldn't give him a new contract. That has nothing to do with McDaniels.
And I believe it was Lombardi who was reporting that Cutler requested a trade right when Shanny was fired and again when Bates was fired.
I thought it was Peter King, but either way, someone was reporting that.
Broncos Mtnman
08-20-2009, 10:22 PM
And I believe it was Lombardi who was reporting that Cutler requested a trade right when Shanny was fired and again when Bates was fired.
Nope.
Shanny and Bates were fired way before Cutler made a trade demand in March, which also occurred only after Jay had met with Mickey Mouse face-to-face.
Nope.
Shanny and Bates were fired way before Cutler made a trade demand in March, which also occurred only after Jay had met with Mickey Mouse face-to-face.
Were you able to get rid of your season tickets?
Broncos Mtnman
08-20-2009, 10:27 PM
Were you able to get rid of your season tickets?
No. I'm not a season ticket holder this year.
LRtagger
08-20-2009, 10:28 PM
Nope.
Shanny and Bates were fired way before Cutler made a trade demand in March, which also occurred only after Jay had met with Mickey Mouse face-to-face.
That was the second or third trade request.
But according to Jay he never wanted to be traded anyways.
Buff was right it was Peter King.
http://www.yardbarker.com/author/article_external/528828
Broncos Mtnman
08-20-2009, 10:34 PM
Yeah, poor guy is only getting $2 million and change this year and his boss was mean to him...
How can anyone work under those conditions? :rolleyes:
Save your class warfare responses for the politics forum.
It doesn't matter what he makes. Just like anyone who is paid to do a job, he's entitled to make what the market will bear, and he's entitled to be treated fairly by his employer.
Broncos Mtnman
08-20-2009, 10:36 PM
That was the second or third trade request.
But according to Jay he never wanted to be traded anyways.
Buff was right it was Peter King.
http://www.yardbarker.com/author/article_external/528828
Your own link shows it was in March.
Cutler had met face-to-face with Mickey Mouse and was on record that he was looking forward to working with him.
Any trade talk prior to that was nothing but rumour.
Save your class warfare responses for the politics forum.
It doesn't matter what he makes. Just like anyone who is paid to do a job, he's entitled to make what the market will bear, and he's entitled to be treated fairly by his employer.
He's also entitled to honor his contract and stop hitting women in the mouth...
That was the second or third trade request.
But according to Jay he never wanted to be traded anyways.
Buff was right it was Peter King.
http://www.yardbarker.com/author/article_external/528828
Well, as posted above by Mtn, that was after Bates was fired, after McDaniels was hired.
Lonestar
08-20-2009, 10:56 PM
That was the second or third trade request.
But according to Jay he never wanted to be traded anyways.
Buff was right it was Peter King.
http://www.yardbarker.com/author/article_external/528828
If you weren’t a Jay Cutler fan before, you’re really going to like him now.
Remember how upset Cutler was after his name came up in trade talks over the weekend? Well according to SI.com’s Peter King, Cutler had already asked the Broncos to trade him, long before the events of this weekend took place.
Via Rotoworld.com:
According to SI’s Peter King, Jay Cutler had asked the Broncos to trade him after the team lost offensive coordinator Jim Bates to USC after the season.
Cutler wasn’t happy about losing Bates or head coach Mike Shanahan, and he’s not handling the recent trade talks well at all. It doesn’t look like the Broncos are going to trade Cutler at this point, so, as King suggested, “maybe both sides need to get into marriage counseling.”
You’re kidding me right? Cutler had already asked to be traded after Shanahan and Bates were fired, yet said he was shocked when his name came up in trade talks over the weekend? I guess he still could have been surprised by all the news, but for him to say how upset he was about the whole thing makes him look two-faced with this latest information coming to the table.
Any way you slice it, the Josh McDaniels era in Denver has not started off well. Cutler isn’t expected to be dealt any time this offseason, so that means the two parities will have to come together and bury the hatchet before the start of next season. These things tend to work themselves out and the situation will probably be a dead one by the time Week 1 hits, but again, this isn’t a good start for McDaniels.
If you weren’t a Jay Cutler fan before, you’re really going to like him now.
Remember how upset Cutler was after his name came up in trade talks over the weekend? Well according to SI.com’s Peter King, Cutler had already asked the Broncos to trade him, long before the events of this weekend took place.
Via Rotoworld.com:
According to SI’s Peter King, Jay Cutler had asked the Broncos to trade him after the team lost offensive coordinator Jim Bates to USC after the season.
Cutler wasn’t happy about losing Bates or head coach Mike Shanahan, and he’s not handling the recent trade talks well at all. It doesn’t look like the Broncos are going to trade Cutler at this point, so, as King suggested, “maybe both sides need to get into marriage counseling.”
You’re kidding me right? Cutler had already asked to be traded after Shanahan and Bates were fired, yet said he was shocked when his name came up in trade talks over the weekend? I guess he still could have been surprised by all the news, but for him to say how upset he was about the whole thing makes him look two-faced with this latest information coming to the table.
Any way you slice it, the Josh McDaniels era in Denver has not started off well. Cutler isn’t expected to be dealt any time this offseason, so that means the two parities will have to come together and bury the hatchet before the start of next season. These things tend to work themselves out and the situation will probably be a dead one by the time Week 1 hits, but again, this isn’t a good start for McDaniels.
As Mtn and I have pointed out, this article prove that Jay first asked to be traded after Bates was let go, not befoe McDaniels was hired.
Lonestar
08-21-2009, 01:51 AM
As Mtn and I have pointed out, this article prove that Jay first asked to be traded after Bates was let go, not befoe McDaniels was hired.
Yep it did no one said he asked to be traded before Josh was hired.
Although I believe it was reported that he was asking for a trade after mike was fired. And also right after Josh was hired and he found out the O was changing.
Frankly I could care less since that is water under the bridge as both mike and jay have moved on.
But some folks can't quite get over it. :D
So it continues to be thrown up for debate.
Time to realize ther is a new sheriff in town with a bunch of new deputies and none of them are mike or jay.
Time to get behind them or feel free to root for one of them in chitown. Night all.
EMB6903
08-21-2009, 08:06 AM
Marshall has 200+ receptions 2500+ yards receiving 13 touchdowns in his first 2 years as a starting reciever in this league... Hes a monster at moving the chains and imo the hardest WR to tackle with the ball in his hands...I think hes well worth the money with an incentive based contract...
Marshall has 200+ receptions 2500+ yards receiving 13 touchdowns in his first 2 years as a starting reciever in this league... Hes a monster at moving the chains and imo the hardest WR to tackle with the ball in his hands...I think hes well worth the money with an incentive based contract...
...certainly...once he proves he's healthy and can stay out of trouble.
Mike, you are supposed to take his word for it....even if he has said it like 2 or 3 times before. :lol:
Yep it did no one said he asked to be traded before Josh was hired.
I guess you missed some of the earlier posts. The whole reason that article was drug up and linked to, which you then posted in this thread, was trying to prove something that there is no evidence about, which is that Cutler asked to be traded before McDaniels was hired.
Here is the post you missed, where it was asserted that Cutler asked to be traded before McDaniels was hired.
Marshall wanted a trade long ago and it had nothing to do with Mickey Mouse and everything to do with Brandon's bank account.
Cutler wanted out before Mickey Mouse even stepped foot in Denver.
But nice try.
Dortoh
08-21-2009, 10:02 AM
He's also entitled to honor his contract and stop hitting women in the mouth...
http://baseball.mikeandkatharina.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/holy-cow.jpg
LRtagger
08-21-2009, 10:16 AM
I guess you missed some of the earlier posts. The whole reason that article was drug up and linked to, which you then posted in this thread, was trying to prove something that there is no evidence about, which is that Cutler asked to be traded before McDaniels was hired.
Here is the post you missed, where it was asserted that Cutler asked to be traded before McDaniels was hired.
My timeline was a bit off...I thought I remembered Jay talking to Bowlen after Mike was fired and there was word that Jay was unhappy. That was before Josh was hired.
Anyways, my point being that Jay asked for a trade before Josh was involved with trade talks. Supposedly Jay was traded because Joshwas shopping him, but evidence shows Jay wanted to be traded before Cassell was ever mentioned. IMO the Cassell rumors going public was Jay's golden chance to go public with his trade requests.
And Brandon's trade request has nothing to do with Josh and everything to do with money and what happened before Josh was hired (hip misdiagnosis), just like I said.
CoachChaz
08-21-2009, 12:07 PM
Here's the Marshall package. A very big and strong receiver with good numbers to date. The consummate safety valve for QB's (when he doesnt drop the ball). However, he has nerve damage to his hand that may never be the same again. Can he adhust to that? Sure. He also has a bad hip which required surgery. That injury runs the risk of becoming degenerative as all crucial joint injuries do.
So, you get a WR with legitimate health and longetivity questions that has a significant history of run-ins with the law. Now...how do you get him? That part isnt so easy.
First you have to evaluate what he would bring to your team and if it's worth the risk considering his physical and legal issues. If you decide he's worth it, you move to step 2. Now you have to negotiate a contract with him. He wants big money and will not be happy til he gets it. So spending alot of cash is a requirement before step 3. In this step you have to come up with adequate compensation to acquire him. Denver isn't going to let him go for anything that doesnt bring immediate equivalent talent in return. They still control him this year and perhaps a few more based on potential changes to the CBA and use of franchise tags.
So what do we have...
A talented WR with real physical concerns and definite personality issues, that wants a big, long-term payday and belongs to a team that wont let him go for pocket change.
Good luck with that endeavor.
underrated29
08-21-2009, 12:25 PM
See what happenes ravens guy when you bring up jay,marshall or mcd.
A civil war starts.
We are like Israel. Peace for a moment, but then someone throws a rock and boom back to civil war.
As for Brandon, I do NOT think we will trade him this year. The only way you guys get him is if you cough up one of your elite DT. WHich i am sure is not going to happen. And by elite i mean equivalent to marshall. .So young and getting better.
Not a treavor price.
We really have no reason to trade him unless washington comes along and lets us rape them like we always do in a trade. You would be better off going after Dwayne Bowe. Supposedly the chefs are looking to trade him. I would count on that happeneing first.
My timeline was a bit off...I thought I remembered Jay talking to Bowlen after Mike was fired and there was word that Jay was unhappy. That was before Josh was hired.
Anyways, my point being that Jay asked for a trade before Josh was involved with trade talks. Supposedly Jay was traded because Joshwas shopping him, but evidence shows Jay wanted to be traded before Cassell was ever mentioned. IMO the Cassell rumors going public was Jay's golden chance to go public with his trade requests.
And Brandon's trade request has nothing to do with Josh and everything to do with money and what happened before Josh was hired (hip misdiagnosis), just like I said.
Agreed on all accounts. I don't know if the Cassel situation was a golden chance, but it is very plausible. It seemed that Jay wasn't getting good advice from his agent, IMO.
Here's the Marshall package. A very big and strong receiver with good numbers to date. The consummate safety valve for QB's (when he doesnt drop the ball). However, he has nerve damage to his hand that may never be the same again. Can he adhust to that? Sure. He also has a bad hip which required surgery. That injury runs the risk of becoming degenerative as all crucial joint injuries do.
So, you get a WR with legitimate health and longetivity questions that has a significant history of run-ins with the law. Now...how do you get him? That part isnt so easy.
First you have to evaluate what he would bring to your team and if it's worth the risk considering his physical and legal issues. If you decide he's worth it, you move to step 2. Now you have to negotiate a contract with him. He wants big money and will not be happy til he gets it. So spending alot of cash is a requirement before step 3. In this step you have to come up with adequate compensation to acquire him. Denver isn't going to let him go for anything that doesnt bring immediate equivalent talent in return. They still control him this year and perhaps a few more based on potential changes to the CBA and use of franchise tags.
So what do we have...
A talented WR with real physical concerns and definite personality issues, that wants a big, long-term payday and belongs to a team that wont let him go for pocket change.
Good luck with that endeavor.
Well said. One additional note on the controlling him. Not only is he under contract this year, but he is a restricted free agent next year (in the uncapped year, assuming a new CBA is not in place prior to 2010), which means we can match any offer he gets -- assuming he even gets an offer since we will give him the high tender which will cost the team that signs him a first and third round pick, and then in 2011, we have the franchise tag, unless that is gone in the next CBA, which supposedly the union wants gone.
underrated29
08-21-2009, 01:34 PM
If Brandond does explode this year- which he has the potential too and yet, he still does not want us to give him the fat contract and still wants out. I can see us putting a double first tender on him.
I would be the smartest move. Afterall his production would warrant it, and if he refuses our contract (i doubt he would) and wants to get paid elsewhere then we put the highest tender on him possible. And get 2 first rd picks.
Similiar to what the fiaders did to nnnnmandi. (only he did sign with them)
If Brandond does explode this year- which he has the potential too and yet, he still does not want us to give him the fat contract and still wants out. I can see us putting a double first tender on him.
I would be the smartest move. Afterall his production would warrant it, and if he refuses our contract (i doubt he would) and wants to get paid elsewhere then we put the highest tender on him possible. And get 2 first rd picks.
Similiar to what the fiaders did to nnnnmandi. (only he did sign with them)
I was under the impression that the highest tender would return us a 1st and a 3rd, not to first round picks.
underrated29
08-21-2009, 01:56 PM
Maybe i am wrong...I thought that the raiders put a double first on NNNNNamndi.
But maybe it was a 1,3 and thats the highest you can go.
:dunno:
Maybe i am wrong...I thought that the raiders put a double first on NNNNNamndi.
But maybe it was a 1,3 and thats the highest you can go.
:dunno:
Either way, I agree, that is what the Broncos will do after the season if they don't get a new contract worked out.
frauschieze
08-21-2009, 02:04 PM
I was under the impression that the highest tender would return us a 1st and a 3rd, not to first round picks.
Non-exclusive Franchise Tags net two 1st rounders for the original team if the player is signed by another team.
Dortoh
08-21-2009, 02:13 PM
Non-exclusive Franchise Tags net two 1st rounders for the original team if the player is signed by another team.
Thats not what were doing here. He would be a RFA which means we could tender him so that if anyone signed him they would give us a 1st and 3rd or we could match their offer to him.
We would only franchise tag him as a FA after next season
frauschieze
08-21-2009, 02:53 PM
Thats not what were doing here. He would be a RFA which means we could tender him so that if anyone signed him they would give us a 1st and 3rd or we could match their offer to him.
We would only franchise tag him as a FA after next season
Well yeah, but U29 was talking about Asomugha, who was franchise tagged which is why the Raiders would have gotten two 1sts if he'd signed elsewhere.
I quoted the wrong post. :(
underrated29
08-21-2009, 03:05 PM
Non-exclusive Franchise Tags net two 1st rounders for the original team if the player is signed by another team.
Thanks for backing me up cheese!
It just so happens i am an idiot. Hotrod should have told me i was wrong, not you.
Back off my cheesey Hotstuff.
Dortoh
08-21-2009, 03:34 PM
Thanks for backing me up cheese!
It just so happens i am an idiot. Hotrod should have told me i was wrong, not you.
Back off my cheesey Hotstuff.
Its good for her we dont want her getting to big a head ya know :laugh:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Release Candidate 2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.