Poll: Trade Marshall?

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6
Results 76 to 89 of 89

Thread: Should the Broncos trade Brandon Marshall?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silkamilkamonico View Post
    LMAO that's funny and I agree.


    Here's an interesting thought on Marshall. Suppose they tendered him only to a first, because they are hoping a team comes in and puts down an offer that would be less than what he is wanting at the moment in terms of a long term deal. So they match the offer and get him for less than what he was wanting in terms of a contract extension, or less than what they thought he was going to want.

    I'm unaware of how the matched offer works. Do teams put down an amount as well as length of contract that needs to be matched, or are all the offers for the last year of his contract?
    Beware the poison pill. i say we let him go for a 1st, then sign Ausitn Miles to an offer and put a poison pill clause in it guaranteeing his money if he iSNT the highest paid receiver on the team. Then if Dallas matches it, they have to gusrantee his money because of what they are already paying Williams. if not...we essentially swap Marshall and a third for Miles. I could live with that.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    415

    Default Bears!

    http://broncotalk.net/2010/03/14182/...ndon-marshall/

    How about this scenario?

    "The problem with acquiring Brandon Marshall is compensation. What exactly does Chicago plan on giving up for Marshall? Marshall will most likely be tendered for a first round pick at the very least. The Bears don’t own a first round pick until 2011. This means Denver would either have to accept a player of equal value (or a player tacked along with a third rounder), or a first round pick in 2011. Adam Schefter is thinking the same thing."

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Elpaso TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    Josh McDaniels Sucks
    Posts
    31,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Biz1 View Post
    http://broncotalk.net/2010/03/14182/...ndon-marshall/

    How about this scenario?

    "The problem with acquiring Brandon Marshall is compensation. What exactly does Chicago plan on giving up for Marshall? Marshall will most likely be tendered for a first round pick at the very least. The Bears don’t own a first round pick until 2011. This means Denver would either have to accept a player of equal value (or a player tacked along with a third rounder), or a first round pick in 2011. Adam Schefter is thinking the same thing."
    Hester and Cutler and he's yours!

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    montana
    Adopted Bronco:
    D.Thomas....the next great broncos WR
    Posts
    6,115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by claymore View Post
    Hester and Cutler and he's yours!
    i dont think cutler's ego would allow him to be 2nd string ,behind orton.

  5. The Following 2 Users High Fived T.K.O. For This Post:


  6. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Elpaso TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    Josh McDaniels Sucks
    Posts
    31,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.K.O. (team kyle orton) View Post
    i dont think cutler's ego would allow him to be 2nd string ,behind orton.

  7. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Romania
    Adopted Bronco:
    D.J. Williams // Demaryius Thomas // Shannon Sharpe
    Posts
    263

    Default

    I don't think that trading Marshall is a solution for this team! It's not like we're talking about an aged WR that can hardly catch a pass. He's a talented young receiver. Yes, his personality can be a problem, but if we expect having holy players in football, than we chose the wrong sport!
    I say , do not trade Marshall! We need him, and it's better to play for us, than against us!

  8. The Following User High Fived RedFalcon For This Post:


  9. #82
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    22,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    Beware the poison pill. i say we let him go for a 1st, then sign Ausitn Miles to an offer and put a poison pill clause in it guaranteeing his money if he iSNT the highest paid receiver on the team. Then if Dallas matches it, they have to gusrantee his money because of what they are already paying Williams. if not...we essentially swap Marshall and a third for Miles. I could live with that.
    I'm pretty sure the poison pills that you are refering too were made against the rules after the Vikings did it.
    (the previous comment was not directed at any particular individual and was not intended to slander,disrespect or offend any reader of said statement)

  10. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    high elevation
    Adopted Bronco:
    Baron Browning, Jaleel McLaughlin
    Posts
    43,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    I'm pretty sure the poison pills that you are refering too were made against the rules after the Vikings did it.
    i don't think they were-- mike florio at PFT talks about the possibility of teams using them all the time, and although the guy doesn't know the first damn thing about football on the field, he's pretty astute about rules and the workings of contracts (dude's a lawyer, reading the fine print is second nature to him). . . .
    Last edited by dogfish; 03-03-2010 at 06:27 PM.
    “When we do find that guy, we’ve got to have the continuity on the offensive side to where we can train him and develop him and get him there. This is our fourth offense in probably three or four years. Quarterbacks need to be developed. You don’t find one ready-made. We got to have a solid system in place for when we do go after whatever guy it may be, a young guy or a trade or whatnot.”
    - John Elway

  11. The Following User High Fived dogfish For This Post:


  12. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    22,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dogfish View Post
    i don't think they were-- mike florio at PFT talks about the possibility of teams using them all the time, and although the guy doesn't know the first damn thing about football on the field, he's pretty astute about rules and the workings of contracts (dude's a lawyer, reading the fine print is second nature to him). . . .
    I'm pretty sure that I read the rule that kept teams from using poison pills like that again. The Vikings were genius in their ingenuity on the wording of that contract, but I think that the NFL saw this as a clever way AROUND the rules, thus they shut the door. I don't have a clue as to how to go and look it up, but I remember reading a long article on the explanation that eliminated such poison pills.

    But :shrugs: I guess we'll find out. It would seem that we would see more of those if they could be. Seems that it could also come to bite a team in the ass pretty quickly.
    (the previous comment was not directed at any particular individual and was not intended to slander,disrespect or offend any reader of said statement)

  13. #85
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    high elevation
    Adopted Bronco:
    Baron Browning, Jaleel McLaughlin
    Posts
    43,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    I'm pretty sure that I read the rule that kept teams from using poison pills like that again. The Vikings were genius in their ingenuity on the wording of that contract, but I think that the NFL saw this as a clever way AROUND the rules, thus they shut the door. I don't have a clue as to how to go and look it up, but I remember reading a long article on the explanation that eliminated such poison pills.

    But :shrugs: I guess we'll find out. It would seem that we would see more of those if they could be. Seems that it could also come to bite a team in the ass pretty quickly.
    teams have avoided using them because they're afraid of somebody coming back and doing it to them when one of their young stars hits restricted free agency. . . .
    “When we do find that guy, we’ve got to have the continuity on the offensive side to where we can train him and develop him and get him there. This is our fourth offense in probably three or four years. Quarterbacks need to be developed. You don’t find one ready-made. We got to have a solid system in place for when we do go after whatever guy it may be, a young guy or a trade or whatnot.”
    - John Elway

  14. #86

    Default

    if we could get petyon manning, lawrence taylor circa 1986 and lebron james let's do it.

  15. #87
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    montana
    Adopted Bronco:
    D.Thomas....the next great broncos WR
    Posts
    6,115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rationalfan View Post
    if we could get petyon manning, lawrence taylor circa 1986 and lebron james let's do it.
    would you settle for boldin and a 3rd ?

  16. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    26,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.K.O. (team kyle orton) View Post
    would you settle for boldin and a 3rd ?
    In a heartbeat!!!

    We get equal players pretty much, plus an extra 3rd in an extremely deep draft!
    The Plan at the moment:

    Draft: Trade a 3rd and 6th this year to a team to move up and get a 2nd next year (this will happen).

    Players I want:
    Jake Ferguson (Jake Butt) or Jelani Woods or Jeremy Ruckert or Cade Otten (owen daniels) at TE- All 4th rd or later.
    Troy Anderson LB 3rd/4th rd (yay Timmy!)
    Neil Farrell, JR DL- run stuffer- bye purcell

  17. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    I'm pretty sure the poison pills that you are refering too were made against the rules after the Vikings did it.
    Quote Originally Posted by dogfish View Post
    i don't think they were-- mike florio at PFT talks about the possibility of teams using them all the time, and although the guy doesn't know the first damn thing about football on the field, he's pretty astute about rules and the workings of contracts (dude's a lawyer, reading the fine print is second nature to him). . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravage!!! View Post
    I'm pretty sure that I read the rule that kept teams from using poison pills like that again. The Vikings were genius in their ingenuity on the wording of that contract, but I think that the NFL saw this as a clever way AROUND the rules, thus they shut the door. I don't have a clue as to how to go and look it up, but I remember reading a long article on the explanation that eliminated such poison pills.

    But :shrugs: I guess we'll find out. It would seem that we would see more of those if they could be. Seems that it could also come to bite a team in the ass pretty quickly.
    Quote Originally Posted by dogfish View Post
    teams have avoided using them because they're afraid of somebody coming back and doing it to them when one of their young stars hits restricted free agency. . . .
    The NFL strongly frowns on teams using "poison pills", but there are no rules against it. The Minnesota/Seattle debacle went both ways. The Vikes pulled that with Hutchinson...and Seattle pulled it with Burleson.

    But if it means landing a stud like Miles and screwing Jerry Jones...I'm all for it

  18. The Following User High Fived CoachChaz For This Post:


Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why The Broncos Won't Trade Brandon Marshall
    By Denver Native (Carol) in forum Broncos Talk
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-03-2009, 12:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group