Brandon Marshall· Page 4

DakotaT
Select Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

What Foster said (several posts earlier).

IMO the only priority lower for this team than WR is getting a starting quarterback. Sorry, Dakota, the team should no more be spending serious attention to Brandon Marshall than it should be spending serious attention to Sam Bradford.

Some times I just want to stamp my feet and throw a tantrum. If Greg Jennings goes down, that's a major blow. But right now, if that happens, the team has two stud receiving threats (Driver, Finley), and two reasonably good ones (Jones, Nelson). On the other hand, the OL has one stud (Sitton), one up and comer who hasn't yet proven himself as a starter (Lang), a solid center (Wells), and....

A RT who is on the decline.
A LT who is even more on the decline.
And a bunch of guys.

I'd rather have to rely on Jones AND Nelson starting at WR than have to rely on Spitz, Colledge, et al to start.

And I'd definitely be content with Jones/Nelson fighting it out for #3 than have to depend on any current "depth" on the OL.

The only way Marshall should get a look is if, when Ted Thompson says "you'd be no higher than our #3", he said, "That's cool!"

"Wade" wrote:

Who said anything about needs? I know perfectly well what our needs are, and it's in this order Safety, OLB, corner, punter, and an offensive line COACH. There's plenty of players on the current O-line to get the job done.

I'd love to see us put a receiving corp on the field that couldn't be defended.

tonyagnese
Registered

15 years ago

#32

Marshall wore out his welcome in Denver with ownership, coach and teamates. Shanahan had the same issues with him while coaching Denver and, privately, has said he wont even consider bringing him to Washington. Cutler had similar sentiments while playing with Marshall in Denver and does NOT want to see him in Chicago.

See a trend here?

blank

Brandon494
Registered

15 years ago

#33

Are you kidding me? You really want T.O. Jr in Green Bay? Anyway it would cost us atleast a 1st rounder, no way are we getting him for Nelson/Jones and 3rd round pick.

blank

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 years ago

#34

Maybe we should address the concern that we have one of the worst offensive lines in the league, and a secondary that gives up 50+ points in the playoffs? If we added Marshall to our team, we're just wasting talent...

We'd have 5 great wide receivers, but at the same time our offense is being killed by sacks and penalites. We need to fix the OL. We don't need another WR.

"Packers_Finland" wrote:

That's why I like this trade: we retain our 1st and 2nd round picks to help us fill other needs.

You give up a 3rd rounder - it's highly unlikely you'll get a rookie that can come in right away and contribute at the level Marshall could. You give up a WR (admittedly, I'd rather give up James Jones) and get a better one in return. In addition, you give up an ILB (I'd only be willing to part with Bishop here). You get a WR in return that is a pro-bowl level player - which is more than what Jones and Bishop are.

Yeah, I get we need secondary and OT help in the worst way. A rookie to compete at OLB and DE would be welcome as well, but our primary concerns can be addresses with the top two picks. Even if you disagree with what our needs our (OLB and OT), fact remains you have two picks in the top 55 to fill those needs.

The fact is, though, there will be things to consider if we were to go out and get Marshall. IF you trade for him, you certainly have to give him a long-term extension. That means you show him the money. Which means, there is no way you have your top three WRs (Driver, Jennings, Marshall) play on STs. So, you have to take 6 WRs, if for nothing else than to have a couple of fast guys (Nelson, Swain?) that can contribute something on special teams. Keeping 6 WRs means that you accordingly have to keep a player from another position. Perhaps you keep only 2 FBs, but fact is trading for Marshall will require us to adjust our roster composition.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 years ago

#35

no way are we getting him for Nelson/Jones and 3rd round pick.

"Brandon494" wrote:

Here is the thing: are the Broncos willing to pay him? Doesn't seem like it. The market for a top WR has been set: see the Anquan Boldin trade made by the Ravens.

With a 3rd, Jones (WR who would fill a need for them created by trading Marshall) and Bishop (ILB that would provide competition at a position of need, where DJ Williams is the only starter) ... these aren't simply random players thrown together.

While there is nothing whatsoever to indicate such talks have even taken place, DakotaT's proposed trade seems very fair - based on the market that has been set.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

Brandon494
Registered

15 years ago

#36

no way are we getting him for Nelson/Jones and 3rd round pick.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

"Brandon494" wrote:

Putting way too much value in Bishop and Jones. Marshall caught 20 passes in a game last season and has caught 100+ balls 3 years in arow, they arent going to just trade him for a couple of backups and a mid round pick. Boldin is 4 years older than Marshall and has had injury issues in the past few years.

blank

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 years ago

#37

Putting way too much value in Bishop and Jones.

"Brandon494" wrote:

Indeed I am, and my thinking the Broncos would do this trade is based entirely on the assumption that the Broncos front office / coaching staff over-value Jones and Bishop.

To be honest with you (and myself), any aspiration of the Broncos overvaluing Bishop and Jones would be because of the pathetic depth they have at those respective positions (ILB and WR).

After DJ Williams, the next two ILBs are a career ST player in Woodyard, and a FB/LB hybrid in Larsen. They need help in that position, badly. It is also of note that their OLB draft pick last year Ayers has struggled to see the field.

After Marshall, their WR crop is weak. Gaffney is okay, but Stokley is old and mediocre, Royal regressed BADLY having only 345 yards receiving in 14 games after a great rookie year, and behind them are a practice squad player signed at the end of the season and a Special Teams player (McKinley and Willis respectively). Oh, they also have Brandon Lloyd, who has done nothing of note the past few years after breaking out the last year he spent with the 49ers.

Basically, my reasoning is that the Broncos know they are not going to pay Marshall to retain him. As a result, they are going to decide to get what they can for him at this point in time, because when the CBA comes back Marshall in all likelihood will be a UFA. Seeing their lack of depth at WR and ILB, they decide to pull the trigger and do the trade.

I'm all for it from a Packers perspective; it is true though there is little incentive to do the deal from the Broncos outside of them panicking.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

15 years ago

#38

+1 to Dakota for an interesting thread during a non-interesting time.

+1 to dfosterf because, in this instance, I agree with him.

I think Marshall's a fantastic talent, and I don't know that he's the "problem" he's made out to be - there's been a lot of turmoil in Denver over the past 2-3 years, and it's hard to say how much fault the guy deserves. He could be the next T.O., or he could be more like an Ochocinco type - weird to be sure, but not a bad guy. Strictly looking at his talent, he's off the charts.

I see the "Driver's out of gas" arguments every off-season, but I have yet to see him show this lack of gas on the field. Until I do, I'm not in favor of getting rid of him. There's something to be said for treating players the way we would like to have those players treat our teams and us as fans - we love to complain when they act in a way we see as selfish, but we'll sell 'em out in a heartbeat if we think we can get a younger/better guy. In this case, we're talking about one of the real good citizens of the league and a guy who's been nothing but loyal to the Packers. I'm staying loyal to him.

OL is a real need, and I'm in no way sold that College will ever be a left tackle - last year he wasn't even a good guard, and he's had time to learn that position. If we acquire an RFA, I'd prefer Gaither.

blank

DakotaT
Select Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#39

Posted Today, 09:07 AM

Is A Trade On The Horizon For The Packers?
(Joe Arrigo)

There is a rumor that I have got wind of a while ago and it could make the Packers offense almost unstoppable. I have learned through two different sources that that Packers have contacted the Denver Broncos about All Pro wide receiver Brandon Marshall.

From what I gathered the Packers have made an offer to the Broncos. It is unclear exactly what the offer is, but according to my source James Jones name is included in the package.

From what I heard, the Packers feel that Greg Jennings is the #1 WR and Marshall will become the possession receiver. Donald Driver will actually stay in his area and be the #3 in the 3 wide set.

This maybe why the Packers declined to even put an offer in for Santonio Holmes. The Steelers called just about every team in the NFL about possibly dealing Holmes to them.

Things are starting to get crazy, so hold on for a wild ride in the upcoming weeks.

I also have to give Patty (over at Packer Chatters) credit for also hearing the rumor and adding to this report.

I found this over at Chatters today. My suggestion came from my ass, cause I thought it made some sense. Thanks Joe.

Dulak
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#40

"DakotaT" wrote:

man I like james jones - good receiver ... and I hate to see drive down on the depth chart. Just watched like 5 games (from last season) during the past week and still love his play making ability.

but then again if we did trade for him wed have too many WRs ...

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Martha Careful (2h) : meh

Zero2Cool (6h) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (6h) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (6h) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (9h) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (9h) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (12h) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (13h) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24