Frank Clark Signed By The Broncos

[Donuts and Doritos]

$5.5 million guaranteed.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/broncos-sign-de-frank-clark-to-one-year-deal

[TheWeatherMan]

9 minutes ago, Donuts and Doritos said:

$5.5 million guaranteed.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/broncos-sign-de-frank-clark-to-one-year-deal

Dare I say this might actually be a good signing by Denver for once?

[wppete]

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

[TOboy]

7 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Dare I say this might actually be a good signing by Denver for once?

Glad he’s not returning to the Chiefs on the cheap either. 
 

Although they likely get one of the last vets on the market. You’d think they have to be interested anyway, and they have the draw of a championship team with Mahomes. 

[billsfan89]

Nice for Denver, there are actually a lot of good pass rushers on the market late in free agency. Odd as usually pass rusher, O-line, WR, and Corners are usually snapped up fairly early in free agency. I can't think of a time when in late May and June there have been several quality pass rushers out on the market. Clark and Floyd are good players signed in June and there are still some other pass rushers out there like Yannick Ngakoue, Clowney, Melvin Ingram and Justin Houston. 

 

Floyd had 9 sacks last year, Clark 5 sacks (but had a nice playoff run with 2.5 sacks in 3 games), Ngakoue had 9.5 sacks, Ingram had 6 sacks and Houston had 9.5 sacks. Even Clowney coming off a down year at 2 sacks still rated highly as a run defender. Also while some of these players are older most are 30 and under. Ngakoue is 28, Floyd 30, Clark 29 (will be 30 in season) and Clowney is 30. Ingram and Houston are a bit older at 34 years old but at DE that's not ancient reasonably a DE can still be productive at 34. 

[DJB]

Ralph is cheap!!!

[billsfan89]

4 minutes ago, TOboy said:

Glad he’s not returning to the Chiefs on the cheap either. 
 

Although they likely get one of the last vets on the market. You’d think they have to be interested anyway, and they have the draw of a championship team with Mahomes. 

 

I can easily see Ingram or Houston chasing a ring there both are 34 but both coming off productive seasons. I could also see Clowney there as well, he is younger at 30 and coming off a down year. Ngakoue is interesting as I have to believe a 28-year-old pass rusher coming off a 9.5 sack season likely wants at least decent money but if he gets desperate could he chase a ring with KC? 

[LABILLBACKER]

18 minutes ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

Of the remaining pass rushers we got the best. Wouldn't mind seeing Clark get to "homies" a few times.

[0017]

2 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I can easily see Ingram or Houston chasing a ring there both are 34 but both coming off productive seasons. I could also see Clowney there as well, he is younger at 30 and coming off a down year. Ngakoue is interesting as I have to believe a 28-year-old pass rusher coming off a 9.5 sack season likely wants at least decent money but if he gets desperate could he chase a ring with KC? 

I really hope Ingram goes to a NFC team we don’t play, for whatever reason the dude kills us! He becomes an All pro against us. 

[billsfan89]

3 minutes ago, 0017 said:

I really hope Ingram goes to a NFC team we don’t play, for whatever reason the dude kills us! He becomes an All pro against us. 

 

I agree, some players just have it against some teams and Ingram is a killer against us. 

[Doc]

Will he play QB for them?

[Dablitzkrieg]

As long as it's not the Chiefs.  Russ is done

[Augie]

2 hours ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

 

If @Airseven disagrees, I have to think you are on to something.  😋

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Of the remaining pass rushers we got the best. Wouldn't mind seeing Clark get to "homies" a few times.

Of Ingram, Clowney, Houston, Ngakoue and Quinn I’d guess all 5 end up in the AFC.  Both KC and Baltimore will ***** one fosho 

[BillsFanForever19]

3 hours ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

 

Especially when you factor in character. Frank Clark is the antithesis of the type of character "The Process" preaches. Would have been a hard sell for me.

[Nelius]

Decent player, but I see the Denver hype is percolating again. Have we learned nothing? Some talking heads had them ranked 3rd in the conference last year and I see that hype building again. Russ isn’t cooking anything but boiled hot dogs, he’s awful.

[GETTOTHE50]

1 hour ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

As long as it's not the Chiefs.  Russ is done

to be fair, he had one of the worst coaches ever in the history sports to start his tenure as the broncos QB.

 

imagine playing for and being coached by one of the better coaches in the league (***** pete carroll, but hes had a good career with the seahawks), and then going to someone who is absolutely clueless of how to run an offense, let alone an entire team.

 

russ is strange af, but its hard to believe he fell off that much of a cliff in one year. if payton cant fix him, then yes, he is cooked.

[Aussie Joe]

4 hours ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

Hard to believe that Airseven doesn’t agree with you…

[Freddie's Dead]

Dang, would have loved Frank in a Bills uni.

[JerseyBills]

4 hours ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

Oh ya. Clark has been super inconsistent the last 3 few years. He came up big in a couple post seasons though. Floyd is on a different tier right now for sure. 

AJ Epenesa and Groot have been better the last 2 years

[John from Riverside]

Would take Floyd over Clark all day every day

[NewEra]

36 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Would take Floyd over Clark all day every day

No question.  Superior in all aspects.  While clark has been a stalwart in the playoffs, floyd has been very good as well, just in fewer games. .79 sacks per game for Clark-  .72 for floyd

 

jerry Hughes .77 btw

 

 

[PrimeTime101]

5 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Dare I say this might actually be a good signing by Denver for once?

I would firmly agree, ... to boot he not on a really good dynamic team.. good for us good for them yes?

[maddenboy]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

Would take Floyd over Clark all day every day

. . . I gotta be thinkin Most teams would

 

which is why Floyd got signed first.  Clark was the consolation prize among his peers.

[78thealltimegreat]

Floyd is a way better player…but Frank  ain’t no slouch and shows up in the playoffs . Nice move by the donkeys if only Russell wasn’t a has-been with a contract that they are stuck with could actually make the the AFC West interesting. 

Edited June 9, 2023 by 78thealltimegreat

[Nelius]

1 hour ago, GETTOTHE50 said:

to be fair, he had one of the worst coaches ever in the history sports to start his tenure as the broncos QB.

 

imagine playing for and being coached by one of the better coaches in the league (***** pete carroll, but hes had a good career with the seahawks), and then going to someone who is absolutely clueless of how to run an offense, let alone an entire team.

 

russ is strange af, but its hard to believe he fell off that much of a cliff in one year. if payton cant fix him, then yes, he is cooked.

It wasn’t really one year though. He hit a wall during his final Seattle year, and hasn’t had the wheels he’s known for since about 2020, and that may even be generous. Not crazy to think a QB could lose their abilities over 2+ years. Hackett aside, Russ passed nobody’s eye test last year. He was flat out bad.

[Sierra Foothills]

7 hours ago, wppete said:

Good for Denver but Leonard Floyd a better DE. 

 

Beyond the playing field, Frank Clark:

• In the following offseason leading up to the season opener for the 2012 team against Alabama, Clark was suspended from the team for felony second-degree home invasion, for alleged theft of a MacBook Air.
• On November 16, 2014, Clark was arrested for domestic violence and dismissed from the Michigan football team.
• During the offseason on May 9, 2017, Clark was criticized for a tweet he directed at Bleacher Reportjournalist Natalie Weiner. Weiner had previously written about Clark's domestic violence arrest. Clark told Weiner that "People like you don’t have long careers in your field. I have a job for you cleaning my fish tanks when that lil job is ova."
• On June 20, 2021, Clark was arrested in Los Angeles for felony firearm possession. He was pulled over by police on suspicion of a vehicle code violation. Police noticed a bag with an uzi sitting in the backseat. He was released the following day on bond.[54] After the arrest, it was reported that he was also arrested on a gun charge in March 2021.

 

[Prospector]

but Clark rhymes with shark, which is a predator, that is an NHL team, that sounds like NFL scheme... there is some shenanigans going on!

[HardyBoy]

39 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Beyond the playing field, Frank Clark:

• In the following offseason leading up to the season opener for the 2012 team against Alabama, Clark was suspended from the team for felony second-degree home invasion, for alleged theft of a MacBook Air.
• On November 16, 2014, Clark was arrested for domestic violence and dismissed from the Michigan football team.
• During the offseason on May 9, 2017, Clark was criticized for a tweet he directed at Bleacher Reportjournalist Natalie Weiner. Weiner had previously written about Clark's domestic violence arrest. Clark told Weiner that "People like you don’t have long careers in your field. I have a job for you cleaning my fish tanks when that lil job is ova."
• On June 20, 2021, Clark was arrested in Los Angeles for felony firearm possession. He was pulled over by police on suspicion of a vehicle code violation. Police noticed a bag with an uzi sitting in the backseat. He was released the following day on bond.[54] After the arrest, it was reported that he was also arrested on a gun charge in March 2021.

 

 

He sounds like a mess and that's being kind (without understanding any context)... but how exactly did the police see there was an uzi in what I would imagine was a closed bag after a stop for a suspected vehicle code violation? 

[BillsFanForever19]

On 6/9/2023 at 12:01 AM, HardyBoy said:

 

He sounds like a mess and that's being kind (without understanding any context)... but how exactly did the police see there was an uzi in what I would imagine was a closed bag after a stop for a suspected vehicle code violation? 

 

A cop can search a car without a warrant if they feel there is a reasonable suspicion that the occupant poses a threat to the officer's safety. Ergo, if they saw a bag that they thought possibly contained a firearm, they can search it and secure it. If you have a license for it and a license to carry it, you'll get it back after the traffic stop, no harm no foul. Obviously though, that was an illegal firearm.

Edited June 10, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[John from Riverside]

3 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

A cop can search a car without a warrant if they feel there is a reasonable suspicion that the occupant poses a threat to the officer's safety. Ergo, if they saw a bag that they possibly contained a firearm, they can search it and secure it. If you have a license for it and a license to carry it, you'll get it back after the traffic stop, no harm no foul. Obviously though, that was an illegal firearm.

Yeah, there are many reasons why whenever police stop a car they can go into the car and search it with her without your permission if something is done illegally that is handled in court on the back end, but it doesn’t stop the police from doing it at the time

[HardyBoy]

8 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

A cop can search a car without a warrant if they feel there is a reasonable suspicion that the occupant poses a threat to the officer's safety. Ergo, if they saw a bag that they possibly contained a firearm, they can search it and secure it. If you have a license for it and a license to carry it, you'll get it back after the traffic stop, no harm no foul. Obviously though, that was an illegal firearm.

 

No, that's not how it works.

 

I often have a backpack in my car with my work laptop in it, they can just pull me over for any arbitrary reason and then search my bag? 

 

A gun can be under a seat of a car too... so they can just search every car for a gun then?

[The Jokeman]

I hope Clark has vengeance in his blood against the Chiefs and unleashes it on Patrick Mahomes.

[John from Riverside]

7 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

I hope Clark has vengeance in his blood against the Chiefs and unleashes it on Patrick Mahomes.

Good call
I hadn’t even thought about the fact that he went to a division rival

[BillsFanForever19]

9 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

No, that's not how it works.

 

I often have a backpack in my car with my work laptop in it, they can just pull me over for any arbitrary reason and then search my bag? 

 

A gun can be under a seat of a car too... so they can just search every car for a gun then?

 

Yes, that is how it works. Give it a Goog.

 

They do not need a warrant to search your vehicle if they see something inside of it that presents either a danger to them or obvious criminal activity, such as drugs in sight. Why do you think they flash their light and look around your car when you get pulled over? The only thing they need is "probable cause".

 

So, are they going to search your bag or under your seat for no reason? No, probably not. But if they have reason to believe that bag contains drugs or a gun or they see something peaking out from under your seat, they absolutely could. And obviously in the case of Clark, they did have probable cause and they were correct in their assumption.

Edited June 9, 2023 by BillsFanForever19

[Donuts and Doritos]

20 hours ago, HardyBoy said:

 

No, that's not how it works.

 

I often have a backpack in my car with my work laptop in it, they can just pull me over for any arbitrary reason and then search my bag? 

 

A gun can be under a seat of a car too... so they can just search every car for a gun then?

 

11 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

Yes, that is how it works. Give it a Goog.

 

They do not need a warrant to search your vehicle if they see something inside of it that presents either a danger to them or obvious criminal activity, such as drugs in sight. Why do you think they flash their light and look around your car when you get pulled over? The only thing they need is "probable cause".

 

So, are they going to search your bag or under your seat for no reason? No, probably not. But if they have reason to believe that bag contains drugs or a gun or they see something peaking out from under your seat, they absolutely could. And obviously in the case of Clark, they did have probable cause and they were correct in their assumption.

 

In NY the police need Reasonable Suspicion that they can articulate to stop a car (ie: speeding, fail to signal, or they have a reason to believe the car has something wrong with it, among other possible reasons). Then they can speak with the occupant.

 

They can't search the car, it's passengers or contents unless they then have developed further Probable Cause. This can come from something said by the occupants or something observed. For example if they see drugs or a gun in plain view they can search the car or if the person says they have them (yes people are dumb enough to do this) then they can search.

 

Some states have differing rules on the scope of this, but the basic premise is the same. For example NY used to have the rule that the smell of marijuana means the police can search the car, it's contents (including bags) and it's occupants. That rule changed in the last few years & is no longer the case, unless they are conducting a DWAI Drugs investigation, then that rule applies. However other states may still have the older NY rule.

 

For officer safety searches they have to have an articulable reason to believe there is a danger & usually they will have the person out of the car in that situation to get them away from any bags, start by talking to them & if they have a reason to believe there is a safety issue usually start with a pat down.

 

Finally a driver could always just consent to a search.

 

So in sum no the police can't just pull a person over and search their car, it's contents or them without probable cause, and if they do it will be suppressed in Court and the case likely dismissed. But if they get probable cause then yes they can search.

[MJS]

On 6/8/2023 at 11:19 PM, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Beyond the playing field, Frank Clark:

• In the following offseason leading up to the season opener for the 2012 team against Alabama, Clark was suspended from the team for felony second-degree home invasion, for alleged theft of a MacBook Air.
• On November 16, 2014, Clark was arrested for domestic violence and dismissed from the Michigan football team.
• During the offseason on May 9, 2017, Clark was criticized for a tweet he directed at Bleacher Reportjournalist Natalie Weiner. Weiner had previously written about Clark's domestic violence arrest. Clark told Weiner that "People like you don’t have long careers in your field. I have a job for you cleaning my fish tanks when that lil job is ova."
• On June 20, 2021, Clark was arrested in Los Angeles for felony firearm possession. He was pulled over by police on suspicion of a vehicle code violation. Police noticed a bag with an uzi sitting in the backseat. He was released the following day on bond.[54] After the arrest, it was reported that he was also arrested on a gun charge in March 2021.

How did Kansas City ever let him leave? He is perfect for their carefully crafted culture.

[MJS]

On 6/8/2023 at 9:38 PM, NewEra said:

No question.  Superior in all aspects.  While clark has been a stalwart in the playoffs, floyd has been very good as well, just in fewer games. .79 sacks per game for Clark-  .72 for floyd

 

jerry Hughes .77 btw

Can you explain this a little more? Jerry Hughes has played in 201 games and recorded 67 total sacks, which is 0.33 per game.

 

Frank Clark is at 0.49 sacks per game and Floyd is at 0.46 sacks per game.

 

Were you looking at something different?

 

Edit: Oh, you were looking at just the playoffs. Gotcha.

Edited June 10, 2023 by MJS

[BillsFanForever19]

8 hours ago, Donuts and Doritos said:

 

 

In NY the police need Reasonable Suspicion that they can articulate to stop a car (ie: speeding, fail to signal, or they have a reason to believe the car has something wrong with it, among other possible reasons). Then they can speak with the occupant.

 

They can't search the car, it's passengers or contents unless they then have developed further Probable Cause. This can come from something said by the occupants or something observed. For example if they see drugs or a gun in plain view they can search the car or if the person says they have them (yes people are dumb enough to do this) then they can search.

 

Some states have differing rules on the scope of this, but the basic premise is the same. For example NY used to have the rule that the smell of marijuana means the police can search the car, it's contents (including bags) and it's occupants. That rule changed in the last few years & is no longer the case, unless they are conducting a DWAI Drugs investigation, then that rule applies. However other states may still have the older NY rule.

 

For officer safety searches they have to have an articulable reason to believe there is a danger & usually they will have the person out of the car in that situation to get them away from any bags, start by talking to them & if they have a reason to believe there is a safety issue usually start with a pat down.

 

Finally a driver could always just consent to a search.

 

So in sum no the police can't just pull a person over and search their car, it's contents or them without probable cause, and if they do it will be suppressed in Court and the case likely dismissed. But if they get probable cause then yes they can search.

 

That's the same thing I said. I never said they can pull you over and search your car for no reason.

 

The OP was questioning how they could have searched Frank Clark's bag and found the Uzi during a traffic stop for a vehicle violation and stated "that's not how it works" when told they can when they believe they have probable cause to search. 

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, MJS said:

Can you explain this a little more? Jerry Hughes has played in 201 games and recorded 67 total sacks, which is 0.33 per game.

 

Frank Clark is at 0.49 sacks per game and Floyd is at 0.46 sacks per game.

 

Were you looking at something different?

 

Edit: Oh, you were looking at just the playoffs. Gotcha.

Playoff sacks sorry