Broncos get busy, place 'Tenders' on Orton, Marshall, Kuper and Scheffler
by John Bena on Mar 3, 2010 12:37 PM MST
in 2010 Denver Broncos Offseason
Email
PrintLet the games begin. The Denver Broncos started the process of placing 'tenders' on the team's Restricted Free Agents today, though the big names people are wondering about were not on the list.
QB Kyle Orton and OL Chris Kuper received 1st Round Tenders, while TE Tony Scheffler received a 2nd Round Tender.
The tenders on Orton and Kuper mean if another team signs them to an offer sheet, the Broncos would have 7-days to match or they would have to give the Broncos a first-round pick in the upcoming NFL draft. Orton is guaranteed a $2.621 million salary as a fifth-year player while Kuper would get $2.521 million as a fourth-round player.
The same goes for WR Brandon Marshall. Now, there are two lines of thinking regarding Marshall. By tendering Marshall with only the 1st Round tender, the Broncos are likely keeping more teams in the hunt. A 1st and 3rd Round pick, in this market, is a hefty price for a player that wants a new contract to go along with it. It also does something else. Perhaps the Broncos are waiting to see what the market is for Marshall financially. What do I mean? Without a salary cap, teams can't front-load contracts(see Steve Hutchinson in Minnesota), also known as a 'poison pill' contract. The Broncos can sit back, wait for an offer-sheet, and match it. Case closed.
The Broncos tender to Scheffler is a bit of an olive-branch. The Broncos could have easily given Tony the 'low' tender, guaranteeing the Broncos 'same round' compensation should another team sign him away. By placing a 2nd Round tender on Tony, it will guarantee Scheffler him a $1.759 million. The 'same-round' tender is worth approximately $1.176 million. A difference of $583K.
Could that be because the Broncos are certain that Scheffler will be gone anyway or is it a true sign that the Broncos are trying to patch up the relationship? Only time will tell.
Last season, Kyle Orton made $1,300,000; Tony Scheffler $612,480 and Chris Kuper $451,480. While not the financial windfall the players were looking for, each will get a significant raise, if not signed by another team.
209 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Finally.
It’s about time we see some action from Dove Valley.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
Wonder how the feel about this..
.. probably mildly pissed but understanding of the situation.. How do those figures compare to their wages last year?
im wondering
why they didn’t tender bmarsh or elvis? i know they probably will but why not right away with these three? im sure they know what they are going to do. could this mean they have something going on with these two. it gets me excited!
They may be working on deals with them at this moment. They are two valuable players
and we talked about this the other day. If the team is so up on these two then why wouldn’t they sign them to long term deals and be done with it? Wouldn’t that make more sense or am I missing something in the CBA bull crap that’s been going around?
Seems to me
that they couldn’t find anybody willing to give them more than a 1st rounder for Marshall (ergo no 1st and 3rd tender). It also saves them some money if he doesn’t sign elsewhere. At least now other teams know what the price is.
Your point about no long term deals has to mean that they are all on the block.
by John in Castle Rock on Mar 3, 2010 1:49 PM MST up reply actions
I was waiting for this
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
I think the Broncos know how valuable Scheffler really is.
Giving him the 2nd rd tender may or may not legitimize their relationshhip with Scheff but it certain guarantees they will be compensated if another team wants him bad enough, say like the shnnay town skins.
don't you mean
Shanny in Skins Town? HAHAHA
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison
"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble
lol I know the feeling
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison
"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble
Schefter just tweeted this:
@Adam_Schefter Come and get him: Broncos placed the first-round tender on WR Brandon Marshall. 13 minutes ago
Step aside, my friend, I been doin' it for years.
Said sit on down, open ya eyes, say open up ya ears....
Is this the highest tender or a 1st and a 3rd?
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
Yeah, I thought we could slap the 1st and 3rd round tender on players? What happened to that?
All I know if I would be pissed if we lost BMarsh and only got a 1st rounder back.
i was just about to say
Without reading into this too much does this mean that Marshall is on his way out of town?
All those posts going back and forth about Marshalls trade value I think a majority of us over valued him.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
I feel the same
I thought we would put more than a 1st for Marshall. I don’t want to see him go, however if he does then I hope we get compensated for him. I mean a pick or two and a player along with it.
Floyd Little: HOF Class of 2010.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
Shocking if true
Wow…
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
"It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes" Douglas Adams
by orange&blue_aussie on Mar 3, 2010 1:06 PM MST up reply actions
Yup... true... see the 2nd paragraph
http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_14505367
First time I’ve gone to denverpost for a while…
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
"It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes" Douglas Adams
by orange&blue_aussie on Mar 3, 2010 1:09 PM MST up reply actions
That also means
that the Bears aren’t getting him for sure
"I can do all things through HIM who gives me strength"
"Death had a near Chuck Norris experience."
by BroncoCountryHawaii on Mar 3, 2010 1:10 PM MST reply actions
I'm mad that the bar for Marshall was set so low
We should have been able to get a 1 and a 3. I guess we can still hold hope that the idea here is to get an offer to show Brandon his worth… then match it. I would assume an offer sheet will be made and signed by Brandon within a week.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
What if the Bucs offered us...
Their #1 and #4 (which is basically a late 3rd round pick). What if the Bucs offered us their #1 and Jeff Faine? Those deals are only deals we can do by NOT offering a #1 & #3 tender.
We’re just keeping our options open. Trust me, Denver will get a bounty of Marshall if they decide to pull the trigger on a deal. Too many teams want a top tier WR to let him get away for less than a bounty.
This is also an olive branch to Marshall. Bowlen promised he’d consider moving #15. All Denver’s doing is opening negotiations, which they promised Marshall they’d do and is something they should do. Why wouldn’t they? Let the market determine his value.
Anyone who’s knee jerk reaction to a first round tender here is that ’Marshall’s as good as gone’ is being far too emotional. Denver’s very calculating/shrewd right now. I like it.
by super7 on Mar 3, 2010 1:28 PM MST up reply actions 3 recs
That's the point
Teams don’t have to offer more than a 1st rounder now. He’s gone!
by John in Castle Rock on Mar 3, 2010 1:51 PM MST up reply actions
Yeah of course we would match a ridiculous or low ball offer
But it won’t be. You’ve got to remember that Brandon signs and agrees to the deal before we can match or send him packing.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
No that is incorrect
he can agree to a deal, but denver has the right to match any deal before it is done
"Precipitation, which side are you on?
Are you on the rise? Are you falling down?
Let me know, Come on let's go, yeah
Got some if you need it!" -EV
Not sure what you thought was incorrect
I think we’re saying the same thing, though. Marshall negotiates with a team(s), then once he gets a deal he likes they submit him an offer sheet with those terms. Then he signs it. Then we have seven days to match or let him go. If he goes, we get the pick. If we match, we’re bound to the same terms (with few exceptions), including salary, guaranteed money, and Brandon-don’t-get-in-trouble clauses.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
The Marshall tender
Is the right tender. There’s a market for him. It should be very competitive market at that. A team will have to give Denver AT LEAST a 1st rounder. That doesn’t mean Denver won’t get more. Denver’s putting themselves in the best possible situation. They WILL have offers and the will have to decide if any of them is enough. By putting a 1st & 3rd on Marshall, they could be cutting themselves out of a potential negotiation.
Remember, Marshall is considered a top tier WR by most teams, but he’s also considered immarture too. The on the field Marshall greatly outweighs the off the field Marshall, but it doesn’t eliminate it’s consideration.
I hope we keep him unless there’s an offer we can’t refuse! I’d be excited if I was Xanders & McD right now. Exciting times. Let the negotiations and phone calls commence!
by super7 on Mar 3, 2010 1:12 PM MST reply actions 8 recs
You point is well made.
I see what you are saying and now that I thought about that…….sweet move. This way the Broncos will get exactly what they want or Marshall will stay here.
Let the games begin. This will be one busy weekend.
Floyd Little: HOF Class of 2010.
2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant
Agreed.
I agree with you that this will open up our options. Plus well know exactly what Marshall is worth. If we don’t wanna pay that much…well then we move on.
We would have been lucky to get a 1st and a 3rd anyway. One off-field incident away from a suspension. Wants a big, new contract. All this before a new CBA. Highly unlikely.
Lower price, means more interested teams. If we don’t like the price tag, so long Brandon.
"You can make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you blame others for those mistakes." -John Wooden
I see it the opposite
Brandon will negotiate with the teams and need to agree to the offer sheet, then sign it. Only one offer sheet is valid at any one time. We then have seven days to match the offer. If we don’t match the offer then it’s a done deal.
What are we going to do, match an offer just to turn around and jack up the price? That’s MFing dangerous. We could easily get stuck with him. We don’t even know if the terms he’s offered are matchable.
Like I said, a 1 and a 3 is good starting spot. From there, you can work down. It’s way harder to work up, because you can’t do it without matching the offer first – even if it’s a ten year deal. Even if the entire contract is “guaranteed”.
Placing the first-round tender on him was done for one of two reasons. Either (a) Josh wants this to be done and over quickly – take our first rounder and be done with it, or (b) he’s looking to match the contract after BM sees what he’s worth.
I tend to think it’s “A”. I think Brandon’s out of Denver in a week. And for only a first-rounder. Grrrr!
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
by Alex on Mar 3, 2010 1:30 PM MST up reply actions 3 recs
Well, I disagree
I can tell you’re upset, but I think the offer was reasonable.
First round tender opens the door for a trade for a current player(s) and a #1, not just draft picks. Marshall’s such a big part of the team that Denver would be smart to add a known quantity rather than a draft pick along with a #1.
We don’t have to agree, I just don’t understand why you’d think that a 3rd round player is so valuable. I’d rather have a current player that can come in and start on day 1.
by super7 on Mar 3, 2010 1:36 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I understand your point in your post above about knee-jerk reactions. But I don’t think that’s the case here.
First round tender opens the door for a trade for a current player(s) and a #1, not just draft picks.
No it doesn’t. It closes the door. I think it will be the very near future before one of us realizes he was wrong.
The thing is that Marshall can go talk to teams on his own. We’re not even at the table necessarily. If he likes the deal, he signs it. The only way we’re invited to the table is if we match the offer. Unlikely is putting it mildly.
I just don’t understand why you’d think that a 3rd round player is so valuable.
I don’t. I simply think getting more than a 1 would have been better than getting just a 1. Getting a 3 in top of that would have been better. More is always better.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
See, I disagree
I think Denver will match a contract offer without hesitation if the draft pick is not good/valueable enough.
by super7 on Mar 3, 2010 1:51 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I noted above somewhere
that it is possible that Denver is wanting to show Brandon his worth and then they match the offer and keep him. So we do agree that it’s possible.
But it’s dangerous to allow another team to do your negotiating for you. Especially in an uncapped year. I see it as very unlikely, yet possible nonetheless.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I agree...
This is much better than getting into an argument with his agent on what he is worth. Just let the market show him exactly what he is worth, how can he argue with that?
Level of Tender
The level of the tender is just a negotiating signal, I don’t think it actually affects what the Broncos might be able to get for Marshall. If they had put a 1st and 3rd tender on him, correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that would not prevent them from trading him for less than that or for a first and a player. And putting only a 1st tender on him doesn’t make it much more likely that we will get less than what we would have gotten with a 1st and 3rd tender if we choose to let Brandon go. The Broncos are still on solid ground to bargain for more than a first by essentially trading their right to match for the additional compensation. Look at when the Nuggets signed Kenyon as a restricted free agent. They gave up 2 or 3 first round picks, even though they had the cap space to just sign him outright, b/c it ensured that the Nets wouldn’t match. This could be particularly valuable as the time to match ties up that money with uncertainty, preventing the team from moving forward with its other free agency goals. The only real risk is that some team buys Marshall for only a first by giving him a rediculous, unmatchable contract, but I don’t think there is a real risk of that happening.
What the first round tender does do is signal clearly that the Broncos are inviting other teams to negotiate with him and make him or them an offer. This benefits both the Broncos and Marshall as both sides will be able to get a clear view of what he is really worth. If Marshall didn’t get much interest with a 1st and 3rd tender, he would blame it on the tender. But its harder to do that with the lower tender.
by asdqqq on Mar 3, 2010 2:26 PM MST up reply actions 2 recs
as I understand it
We’re not limited in trade terms so we could trade him for whatever terms we can agree upon with the prospective trade partner.
The tender offer itself has specific terms, i.e., #1st, etc., and the team that signs him away (after we fail to match) must pay us the terms of that tender offer.
The strategy — IMO — for Marshall was to tender him at a level where he would draw offer sheets. Tendering him too high would have created a disincentive. We wanted him to receive offers because we want to trade him (or at least have that option). We’re always free to match and retain him, but we’re also free to match and negotiate with the offering team.
no goats, no glory.
by Colinski on Mar 3, 2010 3:08 PM MST up reply actions 2 recs
I believe that true
Didn’t NE trade Cassel for less than the offer last year?
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 3:16 PM MST up reply actions
Brandon won't negotiate anything.
But his agent is probably already on the phone with anyone and everyone who will talk with him until he finds the best deal out there. I’m guessing that deal would then be presented to Brandon for his blessing, and then to the Broncos to either accept or match and keep Brandon.
makes zero sense to me. at least? then put the 3rd on there too.
How is THIS green?
by Whidbey Bronco on Mar 3, 2010 5:52 PM MST up reply actions
Prater?
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
One thing that's got me head-scratching
Is McBean. He’s unrestricted on Friday. I wonder how close we are to a deal. There’s quite a few more guys in the same boat, but I think McBean is the most important.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
he should be ERFA, right?
He signed on as an UFA so he can only bargain with us — is what I thought.
no goats, no glory.
L K Smith no tender for L K (no surprise)
Just went looking for corroboration and found this on Rotoworld. LINK
The Broncos will not tender DL Le Kevin Smith, making him an unrestricted free agent.
“The Kevin” is free to sign with the highest bidder at 12AM ET Thursday night. The Broncos thought they had a potential five-technique starter when they acquired Smith (and a seventh-rounder) for a fifth-round pick from the Pats last August. Instead, Smith was a non-factor and Denver got swindled.
no goats, no glory.
I believe
McBean is an exclusive rights restricted free agent because of the number of years he has in the league, so no one else can sign him even though his contract is up, and no tender is necessary. But I could be wrong. Where did you see that he is an unrestricted free agent?
That's how we obtained him
I recall and I was also just checking Rotoworld’s contract page. He was let go by Pittsburgh and we signed him. ERFAs aren’t under that status because of years in the league by because of what status they had when signed. Barrett is also an ERFA, too, I believe. We can dally in our negotiations because no one else can sign him. We still need to come to terms or he becomes a FA though.
no goats, no glory.
league [but] because
correction, trying to type too fast
Rotoworld has this information (mostly), but they don’t always.
no goats, no glory.
also, Prater should be an ERFA
He’s not listed either but we picked him up as a FA so we’re the only team he can negotiate with this year.
no goats, no glory.
Nice catch on Prater and McBean
I was aware of Barrett’s status, but didn’t know we have exclusive rights to McBean or Prater (thought Prater was restricted, but forgot he was unrestricted prior).
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Rotoworld has McBean as futures contract
We may have already re-upped him.
I can’t vouch for the accuracy of Rotoworld but I’ve checked the contracts that were posted. Sometimes the terms aren’t announced.
no goats, no glory.
Maybe how they were acquired is also relevant somehow
But I am pretty sure any player who has between 0 and 2 years of NFL experience becomes an exclusive rights restricted free agent when their contract expires, which would cover McBean, right? Maybe its just that anyone who gets drafted automatically gets a contract longer than that so only guys who are signed as free agents ever come within the scope of the rule.
I do think I mispoke about having to tender him though. I think they do, it’s just a different kind of tender, obviously, and maybe there is no report on it because it hasn’t happened yet or is just not newsworthy. I don’t think the Broncos would just let him go.
sounds good
I couldn’t find a source on this originally so I has to infer. It sounds like you’ve put your finger on it. Prater may have a slightly different status if this is true, because he signed at the end of 07.
I’m at the mercy of the sources since the rules governing these things are only intelligible to lawyer accountants.
no goats, no glory.
before 3 years accrued are ERFA
The draft picks sign 4 year (at least) contracts so that’s why UFAs and draftees are different.
no goats, no glory.
What we as fans value our own players at
is never what other people value them at. I too think Marshall is worth much more than a first but if Arizona couldn’t get a first for Boldin, that indicates the number of teams willing to pay a high price for WR’s is minimal. We’ll never get full value for Marshall he remains most valuale as a member of the team but if that’s not going to happen a first seems to be all we can get for him.
i wouild have gave marsh 1 and 3
on the first day
okay i have cerebral palsy arthris and chronic fatigue as well i have a great life and loveing folks some days are better than other days i got a make-a-wish in 2001 and saw my favorite team the broncos it was the trip of a lifetime i wish everyone couild have gotten to enjoy that with me i know some of u hate the broncos and that okay but i bleed organ and bule for my mnr fans but i bleed orange and blue denver will rise again resident broncos fan for every blog resident broncos for stampede bule thanks shvd98z24
Well, looks like we'll have two first rounders after all.
It’s unlikely that it will be a “final eight” team either, so the pick should be in the top 24. Not too shabby. I love Brandon as a player and I think he is one of the most charasmatic guys in the league. I’ll always root for him and wish him nothing but success in the future. Having said that, I will not miss the constant drama. As Mancuso said to Vonn in the greatest line in the Olympics, “save the drama for your mama”.
The first round pick is just gravey— from a championship team-building perspective this is addition by subtraction.
I don't want BM to go but...
Hearing top 24 made me think about Williams and Pouncey in the same round.. sweet compensation.
"Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
"It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes" Douglas Adams
by orange&blue_aussie on Mar 3, 2010 1:27 PM MST up reply actions
Maybe I'm wrong about the "final 8" rule...
I went to check, and the nfl.com FAQ and it only mentiones UFAs. Maybe these teams can sign RFA’s? Anyone know?
it doesn't apply to RFA's
or any kind of trade.
Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.
"That's MR.Styg..."
by Jeremy Bolander on Mar 3, 2010 4:38 PM MST up reply actions
The final eight rule
has nothing to do with restricted guys, only the unrestricted guys. It could easily the Jets’ or Ravens’ late round pick.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
True, but this is the part that makes it tricky.....
A. Yes. As per the "Final Eight" rules in an uncapped 2010 season, those eight clubs can sign unrestricted free agents as listed below. (Note: For all "Final Eight" teams, the unrestricted free agents signed to replace their own lost unrestricted free agents cannot exceed the first year salary of the player lost with limitations on the per year increases.)
So they cannot just cut any old player because they would have to pay Brandon more money and they are not allowed to do that.
It's also not really the final eight
It’s the final four. The teams that lost in the divisional playoffs (teams 5-8) get one “freebie” unrestricted guy with no restrictions. After that is when they’re bound by the same terms as the final four. In either event, Brandon doesn’t factor in as he is restricted and those teams are not handcuffed by any additional restrictions relating to restricted FA’s.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I think
all of the tender offers are dead-on. Well done, front office.
I think we should have put a 1st and 3rd on Marshall for leverage purposes. He is gone at the price of a #1 – which will likely be a late 1.
At least late 1’s won’t kill Bowlen’s pocket book. Maybe there is something to Pat being in a cash crunch.
In my opinion.
you could be right
Hopefully Denver matches an offer from B-More types for just a late first and a new contract. I don’t think Denver’s scared of paying Marshall, I think they’re scared of missing out on something they could have had by not listening to offers.
Good point McG!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
We agree
Maybe this part of me is just a knee-jerk, but my opinion is that he just wants the deal done. Quick and painless. Not dissimilar to when Mr. B gave the green light to get rid of Cutler. Coach took the express lane. We should have started high (1&3) with the ability to bargain and lower it. This is bad value. The chances of getting somebody of Marshall’s impact with a single unproven lotto ticket are slim to none.
Marshall’s probably going to go to a winning team, it’s basically his choice now. Probably the Jets or Ravens would be attractive to him. Their picks are late. This is wack.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Wait until we make the pick to replace him.
You think Alphonso Smith had pressure?
With this move, McDaniels is staking him future on the 2010 draft and how these players pan out in 2010 and 2011. We replace Marshall with a good player and we should be okay. If we miss on our high picks in 2010, we’ll be drafting in the Top 10 for the next few years.
In my opinion.
Look, I think Marshall’s a good player, too. But losign him equals being a perennial cellar dwellar? Really? If he’s worth that much, then any other team who doesn’t pick him up is run by morons who should be driven out of town.
You’re a good guy, McGeorge, but the irony of you citing the pressure on Alphonso Smith is enough to make my keyboard explode.
by Chibronx on Mar 3, 2010 2:17 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think that is quite correct...
If Marshall played for a true contender (which Denver is not right now), then a team could afford to lose him. We just don’t have that much top caliber talent besides Marshall. It is a much bigger impact on our team.
"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!
IMO – take Marshall, Clady or Elvis (maybe Harris) off our team and we get instantly worse. Other than those three, I think pretty much any player on our roster is more or less replaceable with one FA signing or draft pick.
What is the irony with Alphonso Smith? He did have a lot of pressure on him as a rookie due to the trade. I think the guy we draft with the Marshall pick will also have high expectations beyond his draft slot. Just like Smith. Is that ironic?
In my opinion.
by McGeorge on Mar 3, 2010 2:26 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know how much of that is an actual concern in the head of an NFL player.
Sure, it’s one thing for all of us armchair QBs to say “well, Alphonso needs to step up and play like the 14th overall pick because that’s what he really is”.
Do you think that Alphonso Smith says that to himself? I doubt it. He is going to prepare and work and play as hard as he can, regardless of where he was drafted. The pressure that we think we induce on a player doesn’t always equate to the pressure the athlete feels.
So, sure, the guy we would draft with the Marshall pick would be expected to produce more, from your perspective. However, I don’t think that a guy like Robert Ayers actively thought about how Jay Cutler was doing during the season to make sure that he did a little bit better than Jay.
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Mar 3, 2010 2:32 PM MST up reply actions 2 recs
You are probably right on this one so I won’t try to make a case.
My guess is Alphonso does not like hearing about the trade and the expecatations. I’ve heard the MSM (Denver Post) ask him about this.
But it’s probably just annoying than anything and a pro athlete should be able to blow that off pretty easily.
+1 to you -1 to me.
In my opinion.
by McGeorge on Mar 3, 2010 6:33 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
The irony is the same irony as a guy driving 80mph on a residential street telling you to look out, there’s a lot of fast drivers around here. It is ironic, although maybe it’s some other things first and foremost.
I agree that the Broncos are worse without Marshall. But you’re basically saying they turn into the Raiders. That’s beyond a stretch.
I guess I still don’t get your irony point.
I think we are instantly worse without Marshall. He is worth a few W’s IMO.
In my opinion.
Here’s the nub of the disagreement — a possession receiver worth a few Ws? There are lots of guys on a football field. For any one player to be worth 2-3 wins is extraordinarily rare. Wide receivers, well, maybe Randy Moss c. 1998 or 2007. Jerry Rice c. 1985 or 1994. Others? I wouldn’t bet heavily on it. And if I did, I’d come out in favor of the deep threat guys, who rack up big gains (unlike Marshall) and who stretch the field.
I get your point, and we both think he’s a very good player. But even before you factor in his injury and attitude issues, I just have trouble buying that any underneath receiver can be worth a few wins.
by Chibronx on Mar 3, 2010 7:08 PM MST up reply actions 3 recs
Consider this my being wrong all along
I was under the impression, actually I guaranteed that Marshall would receive a first AND third round tender. I am a bit surprised that he didn’t, and I would be lying if I said I was not surprised that we didn’t give him the highest tender. I think this opens the door for a team like Baltimore, who could get a nice draft haul by adding Marshall in the first while keeping their third as well.
If we get one unproven commodity for Marshall, I will be shocked, and a little skeptical.
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
That's right Sayre
Denver should get somebody’s #1 and ideally a known quantity/proven commodity player as well.
Marshall (IMO) is worth more than just a 1st round pick, unless that pick is in the top 2 or 3. Otherwise, the question begs: how MUCH more is he worth? This is a way the Broncos can figure that out as time goes by without potentially hamstringing themselves into JUST a #3.
If Denver comes out of this with JUST somebody’s #1, McD’s job will get exponetiatlly tougher.
It is what I said it would be.
You’re also wrong about Balt being interested. IMO
Surprised at the Scheff deal though. I thought we wanted him gone.
Deal already projected...
I am actually thinking a team like Jax or Miami have already made a case for Marshall. Marshall went to school in Fla and I see his agent making the moves already. We would get a 10 or 12 – back-to-back picks in this scenario…Perfect for a Rolando McClain and Dan Williams 1st rd treasure find. I would like it. Go WR in 2nd and OL in 3rd. We would have a great draft.
by Orange and Blue on Mar 3, 2010 2:16 PM MST up reply actions
It's called addition by subtraction...
Thinking long term, one could argue that Marshall’s constant drama in the locker room and off the field outweigh his talent and performance on the field. Not to mention the money you save by not having to sign him to a big money deal this year, or get nothing for him next year.
The first round tender all but assures he’s a gonner, but it also assures that we will likely get a very valuable late first round pick. Like I said above, the pick is gravey. The drama and money issues are enough to part ways— at least under this circumstance we get a shot at like you said an unproven commodity with a lot of potential.
by ButteBronco on Mar 3, 2010 2:20 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
On a separate note
This team clearly values Orton and Kuper, as they tendered them both with first round compensation. Scheff got a second round tender as expected, but not the lowest one. Interesting…Any news on Prater? He is a RFA correct?
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
I disagree.
If we hadn’t tendered them very high then how would we maintain integrity of those positions?
It is plainly obvious that the front office has no desire whatsoever to give out an long term deals this year, which is why the tenders are all high. I don’t think they want to match offers for any of our guys.
I also think the only one they will aggresively match would be Doom, but even that is likely a crapshoot. This is shaping up to be the most interesting, yet worrisome offseason in Broncos history imo. IMO! IMO!
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
Brandon Marshall is today’s biggest winner. He is almost certain to land a long term contract as a RFA.
Biggest loser is Elvis or Orton, whom are almost certain to be retained on one year deals at well below market value.
In my opinion.
Regardless of the CBA
I think teams, especially this team should take care of the players that compromise it’s core.
Of course, realizing big business doesn’t usually work this way I doubt it happens. But I believe in the philosphy of keeping your stars happy.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
comprise
not compromise…. geez…
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
around MHR
I always read about how we need to sign Marshall and other guys to long-term deals to keep them happy. I just don’t understand where this comes from. you won’t see anyone else in any form of media or blog except MHR talk about handing out 20+ million in guarenteed money to a guy who is one arrest away from a multiple game suspension,and a guy who depending on who you listen to possibly quit on his team at the end of the season.
I get that he is a premier player on the Broncos. However the broncos can retain his rights for far less than a long-term contract (yah maybe he leaves the team, but obviously they dont care that much about him to do their best to make sure he stays.)
I am hoping that someone can explain to me at what point it became favorable to hand out risky long term contracts to people to keep them happy, when they have no other choice. If he has to play for the 2 million or so, then he has no choice…..absolutely no choice. Please dont say throwing a hissy fit and dividing the locker room is a choice, because he went down that road last year and was dealt with accordingly.
by DW76 on Mar 3, 2010 2:15 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Amen, brother. We’re not talking about a contract for the best player Brandon Marshall can possibly be. We’re talking about a contract for the frequently injured headcase who owns that talent. The single thing I like most about the new regime is its aversion to risk.
I'm not generally a Florio/PFT fan...
…but I thought this was pretty hilarious and insightful. The reality is that Marshall is a far bigger legend at MHR (and Bronco Country in general) than he is through the rest of the league. Like any business decision, he isn’t/can’t be viewed just in terms of best case scenario, and its not a total reach to suggest that he won’t get a single bite at just a 1st round tender. I think Bronco fans naturally underrate the attrition the headache factor has on a guy’s overall value. This is the same league, after all, where the physically transcendent Randy Moss was had for a 4th rounder. Brandon Marshall isn’t even in Moss’ zip code when it comes to pure talent, game planning impact, and game changing production.
He might be gone…but its hardly done deal. Denver still sits squarely in the diver’s seat.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 3:18 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, but
for a 1st round pick would you rather have Dez Bryant or Brandon Marshall?
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 3:32 PM MST up reply actions
Marshall. but if we had the first rounder, we probably wouldn’t pick Bryant.
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 3:34 PM MST up reply actions
I'd rather have Brandon Marshall...
…but I don’t have to pony up my money or my career. Nobody will hold it against a GM if Bryant busts, but they will if Marshall goes out and gets suspended indefinitely or quits on his next team in the stretch drive because the coach was a meany butt to him.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 3:40 PM MST up reply actions
Backwards if you ask me, which you didn't =)
Ridding the team of a 2nd young pro-bowler for a single pick that busts is bad news for the GM, HC, and everybody in the room.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
From a fan perspective perhaps...
…but not necessarily from an owner’s perspective— especially since the Cutler and Marshall situations are completely unrelated. Remember, JC made his first trade demand before a new coach was even hired, and BM had a similarly strained relationship with the previous regime. Its fashionable to blame all this on McD or his philosophy, but its not entirely accurate.
This is one of those debates that could continue endlessly with strong points made from every direction. BM is a complicated situation. I’d hate to see the good side of Brandon go, but I can’t fault Broncos management for being wary…and I guess my whole view of this situation is driven by the idea that Brandon Marshall isn’t just a quandary to Denver. If it was as simple as paying him for his talent and production, he’d be under contract, as the Broncos have a long and storied history of taking care of players and paying for talent.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 5:44 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Honestly
I didn’t really care if BM was going to stay or go. I thought he would be traded, but just barely leaned that way. I don’t blame Coach for Marshall’s situation, but I absolutely question the way he’s handling it now. We should have kept more control of the situation and left the better possibility of getting more picks and/or players.
But yes, as to your point, I was speaking more about the fan perspective, the media, etc..
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Why do you keep blaming the HC?
He may have had been asked his opinion or had given his thought’s on this but I think this is all on Xanders/Ellis/Bowlen. There are to many variables to for me to decide if this is bad or good. Only time will tell and we will probably know or have a good idea of how this will play out within 2 weeks.
JMO
Do you really think X or Ellis is calling the shots?
Bowlen said he wouldn’t override his coach. Sure, things can be misdirection or lost in translation, but do you really have doubts about who’s steering the ship?
I gave McDaniels credit for Dawk and the FA signings, for the 6-0 start, for Oton’s progression, etc… I also give him blame for strategic errors, whether real or perceived.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
One other thing
Sorry it seems as tho you are catching all my thoughts. Who knows what type of feelers were put out at the scouting combine? I mean what type of interest did they see in all of this? And this is the decision that they thought was the best one. I understand what you are saying and like I said there are to many variables with this one.
The difference is age. Moss was much older at that point. Marshall is in the prime of his career.
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 3:33 PM MST up reply actions
He'd have to be about 45 to be...
…three rounds less valuable than Marshall.
I’m not saying it won’t happen, but if it was as easy as squaring him against his talent, then we wouldn’t be having this debate. McD and X like their jobs as much as anybody. They aren’t just dangling the guy for sport— the Broncos issues with him are very real and they are not just unique to Denver.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 3:45 PM MST up reply actions
Moss was traded for a 4th round pick based on how poorly he played in Oakland for two years, not for how talented he is.
Marshall is coming off a career year and is in his prime.
Moss was coming off and injury and woefully unproductive years.
You are comparing apples to fire hydrants.
In my opinion.
Moss was traded for a 4th round...
…pick because nobody was sure he could be counted on to play hard. BM showed that once he reached his goals, he couldn’t be counted on to play hard. BM’s primary goal is to be rewarded with a big fat contract.
And really, its not an apples and fire hydrants argument when the McX critics hang their hats solely on the talent angle. I wish it were that simple, because if it was, I’d be right with you in being disappointed in the Broncos. The problem isn’t whether he’s good, its whether he’s dependable— and he could just us easily end up being a complete disaster as he could end up being the missing piece.
I tend to think that effects his overall value, but maybe I’m wrong. We shall see, I guess.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 7:24 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I seem to be "Rec"ing
your comments as they bring out some very level headed line’s of thought.
I think there will be a new CBA before the end of the 2010 season.
And as soon as it’s signed, sealed, and delivered, there will be a mad rush by every team to sign players to long term contracts before the next free-agency period starts. I don’t think it makes sense to sign a lot of players now, when no one knows what will be in the new CBA or how it will effect future finances within the league.
Why?
Dumerville’s and Orton’s real market values will now be set by the open market, not some made up perception of their values. They could easily be big winners because of it.
by CompUser on Mar 3, 2010 2:06 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Unlikely. No team is going to want to surrender a 1st for Orton. I sure hope they do, but I don’t see it happening.
Maybe Elvis gets signed, I could see that happening for a 1 and 3. He is a sack MASTER. And he EARNED a long term deal.
In my opinion.
Agreed on Dumervil
I will be surprised if we don’t sign him to a long term contract
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
by Sayre Bedinger on Mar 3, 2010 2:14 PM MST up reply actions
I will be surprised if we do give him a deal – unless we are matching an offer.
I think he plays 2010 on a tender.
This is just a question, but what is stopping another team from putting in Marshall’s contract that he can’t play more than two games per year in Colorado if he signs a deal? I think Minnesota did this with Hutchinson a few years ago and Seattle could not match the offer.
In my opinion.
i think players will be scared to play on a tender though. nobody has any idea what is going to happen in 2011. if a player gets hurt next year, then no season in 2011, they might get squat when they sign for whatever season they do. they will accept less many than usual for a long term contract because of this
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 2:31 PM MST up reply actions
I think it was the revenge deal for the reciever
Branch, I think. Both deals were poisoned, but I think it was the 2nd one that said the guy would have like his entire contract guaranteed if he played more than five games in the state.
Anyway, your point still stands. It’s dangerous to let others contract with our employee if we actually wanted to keep him. They could use the poison pill or they might just guarantee him more money than we would be comftorable with.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Can't do exactly that
The poison pill in Burleson’s contract (the revenge for the Hutchinson contract) guaranteed the full amount if he played five or more games in Minnesota. I’m not sure you’ll see many more poison pill contracts after the carnage wreacked by those two. Though I guess if you were going to do it, this would be the year, because the new CBA will surely close this loophole and limit the opportunity for retaliation. But you are really burning bridges.
Thanks for correcting me
I meant Burleson. I also agree with you that after the revenge move, teams are now far less likely (has happened since) to poison like that again. Still though, guaranteed money is big with Brandon since he’s been suspened and arrested a bunch of times. We would still have to match guaranteed money.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Totally
I’m not dismissing the possibility of a poison pill at all. If someone wants Brandon, that will do it, and the Broncos may never get a chance for revenge. The first round tender probably means they are willing to let him go if someone wants him that bad or is even willing to offer a huge guarantee. I think they are banking on demand not being as high as many anticipate.
I had a typo
I meant to say that I don’t think the poson pill has happened since. Not important, though. The chance still remains. I would think a lesser version of it is more likely though. As in just giving him something we wouldn’t.
I think they’re banking on the demand being there. I think they’re aiming to quickly get him out of here to move forward. I just wish they would have been more patient by using the 1 and 3 to stay in the driver’s seat and negotiate directly with teams.
It’s now more likely than it was yesterday that BM leaves for a single first-round pick.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
The sky if falling by McGeorge
Did you get that Orton, Elvis, Scheff and Kuper want out next year from a crystal ball or did you pull that out from some where lower, butt also round? I like your logic most time McGeorge even if we see things differently but no logic in that statement. I do know how to spell.
by pastordan on Mar 3, 2010 1:53 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
I think a lot of players that get tendered will want to move on from their teams. That is not a Bronco specific guess on my part.
I think this uncapped year is going to leave a lot of players really chaffed at their current employers.
In my opinion.
To that logic then,
there are 200 and some players who we can pick to sign from.
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
by Sayre Bedinger on Mar 3, 2010 1:56 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
+100....good way of looking at it Sayre!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
Very true. And some good ones too.
How generous will Bowlen be and what will our cap look like.
In my opinion.
I won't claim to know that
But look at it this way: If we are re-signing these guys now with tenders with the intent of not re-signing them, then we might as well just cut them. Okay, that’s extreme, but essentially by placing high tenders on Orton, Kuper, and Scheffler, we are saying we want them around (though Scheffler’s case may be a bit murky, because we had no choice BUT to tender him a 2nd round pick contract).
In Marshall’s case, his surprisingly low tender is an open invitation for teams to sign him. If Baltimore offers, I think we should match. THat would be suicide in the AFC to give them the missing piece. Like selling the other blue piece on Monopoly to someone while getting the whole set of pinks or something, if that makes sense. I say get our first back from Seattle, if anything.
A vision without a plan is just a dream. A plan without a vision is drudgery. But a vision with a plan can change the world.
by Sayre Bedinger on Mar 3, 2010 2:05 PM MST up reply actions
We are not saying we want them around. We are saying we want them around cheaply – we want to under pay you.
JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER TEAM that does this with there RFA.
I’m not picking on Denver. I believe there will be a lot of angry RFAs in 2010 looking for new teams in 2011.
In my opinion.
Why would Orton want out?
Colorado is a leader in green technologies and recycling.
"No more my bad just make the play"-McJedi
by RockyMountainThunder on Mar 3, 2010 3:48 PM MST up reply actions
LMAO...nice!
This is the first time I’ve ever laughed out loud while on MHR.
"A man can fail, but he is not a failure until he blames someone else." J. Paul Getty
by SteveAssassin on Mar 3, 2010 4:54 PM MST up reply actions
Yeah but McG...they have their players association to blame as much as their current team, if not more...
If they even have one bone of maturity in them, they will understand this is business and ANY team would have taken the same approach!
Those that cant coach, compete!
Failing to plan is planning to fail.
All I want is 53 Rod Smiths. Is that asking too much????
"Peyton Hillis didn’t rip the sleeves off his jersey, they flew off out of fear."
Calijoefornia.
by boydy2669 on Mar 3, 2010 1:56 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Of course, notice I never said this will be a Bronco specific problem. It will be a problem for every team with RFAs that feel they got screwed out of a year of earning potential.
Most UFA that were RFA will want to test the market. I see no home town discounts to any team in 2011 for the formerly RFA..
In my opinion.
why? nobody wants to give anybody long term offers right now. to players on other teams or to their own players.
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 1:57 PM MST up reply actions
agree. any player that has to play under a tender contract will go nuts. they will probably play really well b/c it is a contract season for them again, plus they may want to get out if they feel screwed by the CBA
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 2:06 PM MST up reply actions
Pastordan
Keep it civil, please.
McGeorge expressed an opinion as is his right.
No reason for the tone of your first sentence.
We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough
by Brian Shrout on Mar 3, 2010 1:56 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Adam Schefter via Rotoworld
Is reporting that Doom has been tendered a 1st and 3rd round..
The Broncos assigned a first- and third-round tender to restricted free agent OLB Elvis Dumervil.
The move was an obvious one for Denver, as Dumervil just turned 26 and led the NFL in sacks a year ago. The sides will ideally work out a long-term deal. Dumervil would make a $3.168 million 2010 salary if he signs the tender.
Correct me if I'm wrong
Does not a tender mean that if a team makes an offer, Denver has the opportunity to match it?
This sounds like Denver putting these guys out there to see what other teams see as their fair market value.
It would not surprise me to see Denver match any and all offers, and only pull the trigger on anything else if a team makes a totally outrageous offer.
We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough
I think you play with fire when you do this..
Why not keep the offers away by tendering the players at the highest possible level and sign them based on the Denver Broncos budget and not another teams.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
I’d like to see them get offers for Marshall, make it clear to him that they are finding a value in this very strange financial situation for the league, and then match the offer plus 10% (if the total package is still sensible). Maybe this is a way to pay him a fair amount and make sure he knows we value him.
"My job description is to win football games. I'm a hard worker. I'm not flashy by any means, but my job is to play football and win and I plan to do that." Kyle Orton
No olive branch for Scheffler
Denver did give Scheffler original round trender
http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=9894
Slapping my arm....
Ah….Broncos News. Sweeeet Broncos news. That’s the stuff. Keep it coming. LOL
Don't argue with fools. It's how they reproduce.
These tenders appear to be good news for the mock drafters on our board....
so many more potential draft picks to play with and trade partners :) Or maybe that makes it more of a nightmare to deal with…
"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!
Does that mean that the next 20 posts will be Mocks?
Say it ain’t so……….
If Taylor Swift were to try and tackle me, I'd let her.
PS3 ID: broncomaniac6
by Troy Hufford on Mar 3, 2010 2:38 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
I do learn a lot about college players through these mocks...
but I’m guessing mocks are formulating in their minds as we speak.
"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!
The college players could be presented in a different manner
Instead of pie in the sky mocks, why not present a series of articles on the players at a given position? It would take a little more research and effort, but mock burnout has long since set in for a lot of us. WAGs have limited value.
Don't say rebuild - say reload...
by Doc Bear on Mar 3, 2010 11:29 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
i’d say for the next week its a nightmare. we need free agency/trades to clear up and then we can mock much more accurately.
i think the only thing we may have learned is that Kuper is almost certainly going to be a Bronco next year.
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 2:46 PM MST up reply actions
good observation
not wholly surprised except for Kup. Glad we’re commiting (even if it is short term). Now, what do we do for the C and left OG positions?
another perspective
I’m not saying i believe this is the case, but it is another point of view worth considering. As much as various people like to attack Bowlen and McDaniels, it is possible that they meant what they said about wanting to keep Marshall and make things work.
So they chose this tender as a way of throwing Marshall a bone. Obviously not giving him a lower tender because if they are to lose him then they still want something of some significance for him.
However, this tender could be a way of saying: “alright Brandon, you want to get paid like you think you deserve, this tender will increase the number of teams interested in you….and now you and your agent can go out there and find out exactly what your worth.”
If it ends up being that he is worth fitzgerald money then they would have to let him walk, but if he is worth what Bowlen and McDaniels probaly suspect (7 million a year or whatever it is), then they can decide what they want to do.
This way if management is right, then they can choose to match the offer and keep a very good WR at a fair price.
If they are wrong then they get a first round pick.
by DW76 on Mar 3, 2010 2:48 PM MST reply actions 6 recs
DW76 - I rec'd that
He’s an unusual talent, highly productive over the course of a season, and one bad move away from a major suspension. It’s an unusual situation and this will give them both – Denver and Marshall – an understanding of the market.
Don't say rebuild - say reload...
I do want whats best for him though and if he feels he needs a fresh start I hope we accomodate that.
If the best thing for him and the team is for him to leave, I see it being done in a matter where all sides are happy, just like with JC(HaHa, Never noticed those were his initials before). Jax would be where BM would want to go. He’s buddys with Simms-Walker and they need another WR. We could have the 10 and the 11. Oh, the irony. We have been putting 10/11 all year until the coin flip. LOL
quick question and then a funny take on Gin & Juice
So if X team signs Brandon to an offer, and Denver matches it, the only way for X team or any team to get Marshall then is to trade for him, as he’s no longer a free agent? Right?
If that’s the case, maybe a team will do us a favor and offer Brandon less than we think he’s worth (I’m dreaming, I know) and save us a bundle while we sign Brandon to a long term deal without spending a truckload.
I guess what I’m saying is that X team is going to have to consider what Denver thinks Brandon’s worth (I’d think that it would be A LOT, as we really don’t have a better player on offense) and either offer Marshall more (very risky considering his past) or offer the team more picks/players as compensation inculding their #1 pick. If they aren’t willing to pay though their noses, why would they make an offer?
Who knows…I mean, maybe Denver was never considering giving Marshall anything. Maybe they just wanted to be guaranteed SOME compensation for him and that’s why they tendered him w/ just a #1. I’m sure McD and Xanders have been trying to get the right tender level for Marshall figured out for months and I would think they’d have been talking to other GMs and owners. Denver could also end up signing Brandon to a big contract too, so you never know. Maybe this is just a way to test the waters for a MEGA-deal and if not, sign the guy.
The following is in the tune of Gin & Juice
So much drama in the 3-0-3.
It’s kinda hard being a coach just like Josh Mc-D
But he, somehow, some way
Has a bunch of sh#t to deal with like every single day
I hope w/ keep the beast, but I trust McD and Bowlen. I’m not married to the idea so long as we are fairly compensated.
Yup
So if X team signs Brandon to an offer, and Denver matches it, the only way for X team or any team to get Marshall then is to trade for him, as he’s no longer a free agent? Right?
That’s it. We can always retain Marshall’s rights by matching his offer. We could also tag him (but not now) if we really want to keep him here.
I don’t think Marshall will sign a low ball contract but yes we could keep him at that rate. It’s an interesting thought.
no goats, no glory.
Marshall getting a first is a great idea.
VERY good idea from McX!!!! Keep it low enough for teams to care, but not low enough to screw themselves! Nice work!
John Clayton is the head Dean at Fail University (known as F.U. in short)
Formerly known as Calijoefornia
i think that was before we found out that we gave him the original round tender. it was thought we gave him the second round tender, which would have paid him more
by black_knight101 on Mar 3, 2010 3:31 PM MST up reply actions
yeah I dont think you guys understand how tenders work
an original rounder tender nets a 2nd or 3rd for a 1st or 2nd round pick respectively
Not true.
a second round tender for Scheffler means if anyone wants him, they will give up at least a second rounder for him. That’s what a second round tender means.
John Clayton is the head Dean at Fail University (known as F.U. in short)
Formerly known as Calijoefornia
read my post again
i said an “original rounder tender nets a 2nd or 3rd for a 1st or 2nd round pick respectively”
thats why they had to use a 2nd rounder tender, not the original round tender. it was nothing to do with a olive branch
?
He wasn’t given a second round tender but an original tender. Where did Air get his info because I always been under the impression original tender got the original pick. Which would be a 2nd. Prove me wrong and I’ll believe it Air.
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 3:46 PM MST up reply actions
2nd = original tender, because that's where he was drafted
Here’s a Q & A from the DP on this subject.
http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14197178
There are four levels of tender offers for restricted free agents, and teams set the level for each player.
If they don’t tender an offer to the player, they won’t get compensation for him.
There is the “low” tender, which is the right to match any offer the player gets. If the offer is not matched, the current team would get a draft pick equal to the player’s original draft pick.
If the player was originally a third-round draft pick and had been tendered at this level, the team would receive a third-round draft pick as compensation.
The low tender this season would have a one-year salary of roughly $1.3 million attached for the 2010 season.
The “middle” tender would be the right to match any offer or a second-round pick as compensation. That would come with roughly a $1.8 million.
A “high” tender would be the right to match and a first-round pick as compensation. The one-year salary with this tender would be roughly $2.5 million.
The highest tender would include the right to match to go with first- and third-round picks as compensation. This one would come with a one-year salary of about $3.04 million.
no goats, no glory.
Here is an article by a member of the media who actually read the CBA
http://sea.scout.com/2/950805.html
Read the portion about Chris Spencer. It shows what I’m talking about when I say an original rounder tender nets a 2nd or 3rd for a 1st or 2nd round pick respectively
that guys writing is a mix and it looks like he made a typo
he states in one place that an “origianl round” tender would net a 1st for Spencer, and than later says an “original round” tender would net a second. He is either confused or made a typo. I’ve read the CBA and there is nothing in there like what you are saying.
But you don’t have to take my word for it…
Precision in thought, concision in style, decision in life.
"That's MR.Styg..."
by Jeremy Bolander on Mar 3, 2010 5:02 PM MST up reply actions
I have too, and I'm sure Colinski has also
Here’s a link to the CBA so that you can read it, too (page 57). Colinski is correct.
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/cba/nfl-cba-2006-2012.pdf
This is what I believe you’re talking about:
Notwithstanding Subsections 2(b)(i) and 2(b)(ii) above, in the
event that a Prior Club tenders any of its Restricted Free Agents originally
selected in a draft round lower than the first round a Qualifying Offer that
requires Draft Choice Compensation of one first round selection (the "©(i)
Upgraded Tender"), the Prior Club shall only be eligible to receive Draft
Choice Compensation of one second round selection for any of its Restricted
Free Agents originally selected in the first round of the Draft, unless
such Restricted Free Agents have each received a Qualifying Offer of at
least the amount of the ©(i) Upgraded Tender.
Scheffler wasn’t given an “Upgraded tender”, so this rule doesn’t apply to him. At least that’s how I interpret it. It’s on page 60.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I should clear up...
RFA stuff starts at 57, 60 is where I got that paste. Same link as Jeremy’s it looks like
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
Yes
The section that elvisalex is referring to talks about 1st round. The section that AirNorval speaks of is referring to 2nd round picks. I believe AirNorval IS right.
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 5:59 PM MST up reply actions
Read it again
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
I think
you need to continue reading Elvis, The wording is almost exactly the same but it speaks of second round draft picks instead of first. Thank you Air for correcting my view.
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 6:11 PM MST up reply actions
Here's a link
From the Chicago Sun Times, it talks about a 2nd round pick receiving the original round tender.
http://www.nflhuddle.com/2010/03/01/bears-appears-will-tender-manning/
Explanation of how I interpret it...
The excerpt above relates to RFA’s drafted in a round LOWER than the first-round. Tony was drafted in the 2nd round, so this section would apply to him. The section you’re talking about discusses players drafted BELOW the 2nd round, which would not include Tony.
It is complicated, though, so if you’re seeing something that I’m not then let me know.
Anyway, it’s saying that if we drafted Schef lower than the 1st, but place a 1st round offer on him, then blah, blah, blah. But we didn’t place an upgraded tender on him. We drafted him lower than the first (2nd), and kept a lower than first-round tag on him.
That’s my interpretation anyway. Hopefully I’m not having a blonde moment =)
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
(c)(ii) makes me think 3rd round
©(i) Notwithstanding Subsections 2(b)(i) and 2(b)(ii) above, in the
event that a Prior Club tenders any of its Restricted Free Agents originally
selected in a draft round lower than the first round a Qualifying Offer that
requires Draft Choice Compensation of one first round selection (the "©(i)
Upgraded Tender"), the Prior Club shall only be eligible to receive Draft
Choice Compensation of one second round selection for any of its Restricted
Free Agents originally selected in the first round of the Draft, unless
such Restricted Free Agents have each received a Qualifying Offer of at
least the amount of the ©(i) Upgraded Tender.
(ii) Notwithstanding Subsections 2(b)(i) and 2(b)(ii) above, in the event
that a Prior Club tenders any of its Restricted Free Agents originally selected
in a draft round lower than the second round a Qualifying Offer that requires
Draft Choice Compensation of one second round selection (the
"©(ii) Upgraded Tender"), the Prior Club shall only be eligible to receive
Draft Choice Compensation of one third round selection for any of its
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 7:33 PM MST up reply actions
The end of that anyway
It kind of came out funny but its the end of page 60 after its goes to page 61
... if you have a belief, you will tend to find things that support it. But if you have a prejudice, you’ll move heaven and earth to maintain it. BroncoBear
by 3nS on Mar 3, 2010 7:37 PM MST up reply actions
No offense meant to McGeorge
As I said in the post I like reading his stuff. I even scan the many comments to look for his because they add realism to a koolaide drinker. Everyone’s pretty touchy these days. I have no tone to what I said I was grinning when I wrote it and it was exactly what he said. Back to the subject – I think both sides understand where they are at in the labor dispute and will work through it in the long run. Emmitt be careful pointing out my many faults or I might start preaching at you again. I am joking for those who don’t have a sense of humor . Besides I have never preached to anyone on this sight, I just shared why I think someone would share their beliefs if they believed they had something valuable to share.
Passing game production math
Average QB with Elite Receiver = completely average results
Average QB without Elite Receiver = This is not going to be pretty
Doom will get a multi-year deal at some point in the near future, but if the Broncos tender Orton a single year and require him to prove himself (smart move), but ship out his security blanket and only elite target (not a smart move) they’re setting up an already middling QB for failure.
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted and then used against you.
It's odd you mention that...
considering Orton’s personal best game was against KC when Marshall didn’t even play.
John Clayton is the head Dean at Fail University (known as F.U. in short)
Formerly known as Calijoefornia
by Joe Medina on Mar 3, 2010 8:08 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Outside the box thought
What if X and McD are trying to clean up our books with all the dead weight… By offering one year tenders for these guys we don’t back load any deals and can cut more dead weight from our cap next year. i.e. just wait one year and we will have more money to work with.
Just a thought, and I also think that there may be more to Marshall in the locker room than what is evident. I say if he is a cancer then let him go for good compensation and be done with it.
Where I think Denver made a major tactical error today
Everyone keeps talking about a late round team coming after Marshall, but what if a team drafting early does? Try this scenario on for size before I get to the gist of my arguement….
Seattle offers a heavily front loaded deal for Brandon Marshall in a non salary cap year the the Broncos can never match. Say 15million to sign and 5 mil a year for 5 years. (i’m just throwing out numbers)
What’s to stop this from happening? Certainly Paul Allen has loads of money and accomplish this fairly easily. By giving up only a 1st rounder Seattle can walk away from the 4th and still come back and pick up a great prospect at #14. We’re now stuck with the #4 pick and its extremely high salary. Can Bowlen afford that? The popular argement around here the last day or so was we traded away our first this year to not get stuck paying 2 first roundersthis year.Some of you may say we can trade back but what if we have no takers? The point I’m trying to make is there is absolutely no reason that the 3rd shouldnt have been added to it. Seattle never tries this on if they have to lose their 3rd as well. By “inviting” trade offers we’ve now made our intentions known. Maybe it works out for us but its a risk that shouldnt have been taken.
Its certainly a long shot but if I’m Seattle I’m looking at this thinking I can walk away with Marsh and possibly Claussen or McCoy. Who wouldnt take that?
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
It'll look brilliant..
…if BM responds poorly to his new found wealth, mixes like oil and water in his new lockerroom, or, worse, gets popped for DUI or petty assault after his celebration party. Then Seattle is out $15 mil and Denver is sitting on Sam Bradford, Eric Berry, Joe Haden or whomever.
The whole Brandon Marshall thing is a gamble any way you play it.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-- Oscar Wilde
by PredominantlyOrange on Mar 3, 2010 6:45 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
They have to give their own
Thats the #4. Ours is the #14.
You probably get this a lot. This isn't the real Caesar's Palace is it?....Did Caesar live here?
You know where I wanna go? I'll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I'm talking about a little place called Aspen
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Mile High Report
Related FanShots on Mile High Report
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Video: Tim Tebow asked to Military Ball by Louisiana Airwoman
- We’ll see how Brandon Jacobs’ football skills translate to the squared circle
- Bill Belichick wore a hoodie to a golf tournament
- Eagles reportedly will franchise DeSean Jackson, but should they?
- Wife of Chargers tackle Tommie Harris dies at 29
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
