ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Well, OK, if you want to put him in an imaginary top 5 or a "projected top 5", I'm with you. Those 89 catches and 9 TD's in 12 games last year are from from "imaginary." Marshall was just aquitted in August on the only remaining charge against him. What is the "impending suspension for his off-field activities"? Oh, that's right. A true "thug" gets off scot-free yet again. Good thing he was only beating up women and didn't have a gun in the trunk of his car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Those 89 catches and 9 TD's in 12 games last year are from from "imaginary." Oh, that's right. A true "thug" gets off scot-free yet again. Good thing he was only beating up women and didn't have a gun in the trunk of his car. Again, he had an incomplete season, so he's not in the actual top 5. I'm not disagreeing the claim that he is amongst the best in the league. As for Marshall, you didn't answer the question--what is the impending League suspension that you are referrng to? ML had the opportunity to claim he was innocent. He plead guilty. Marshall did the opposite and a jury of his peers agreed with him. He was found innocent of any crime in that matter. What can you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Considering Trent doesn't like to throw deep Boldin for Evans would make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Considering Trent doesn't like to throw deep Boldin for Evans would make sense. Yeah for whoever has Evans. Boldin is far better than Lee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Yeah for whoever has Evans. Boldin is far better than Lee. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 ML had the opportunity to claim he was innocent. He plead guilty. Marshall did the opposite and a jury of his peers agreed with him. He was found innocent of any crime in that matter. What can you do? He can continue to B word and moan about Lynch's suspension in threads that don't have anything to do with Lynch. The Jets getting Marshall would not be a good thing. He is a very dangerous WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 He can continue to B word and moan about Lynch's suspension in threads that don't have anything to do with Lynch. The Jets getting Marshall would not be a good thing. He is a very dangerous WR. Jet drfense will be great once Pace gets over his suspension. Thir offense if questioanble right now. Marshalll with Cotchery would be scarry. Let Marshall goe outside the AFC to the NFC,. Rather him on the Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstencel Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Why wont any team trade for Boldin? The Cards were asking for a 2nd for him in April. He is better than Marshall and in no trouble with the law/league. The price tag on a new contract would be comparable too. Don't really think that Cards were actively trying to trade Boldin. Not positive, but I thought I saw some reports of them being offered a 2nds for him a few times, but them not really making much of an attempt to negotiate anything once offers were made. Marshall is a bit on immature side, but if he gets a trade to a stable team, think he would fall in line and become a good pickup. Think allot of the issues are partly due to the environment on the team over last couple of years, and the new managements issues with dealing with people. Hoping he goes to the NFC myself. He doesn't have the greatest hands, but boy can he get open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteamRoller67 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Again, he had an incomplete season, so he's not in the actual top 5. I'm not disagreeing the claim that he is amongst the best in the league. As for Marshall, you didn't answer the question--what is the impending League suspension that you are referrng to? ML had the opportunity to claim he was innocent. He plead guilty. Marshall did the opposite and a jury of his peers agreed with him. He was found innocent of any crime in that matter. What can you do? He is currently suspended by the Broncos until opening day for conduct detrimental to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Again, he had an incomplete season, so he's not in the actual top 5. I'm not disagreeing the claim that he is amongst the best in the league. So...Randy Moss isn't a top-5 WR. Right? Boldin had more catches and yards, and the same number of TD's (not 9 as I erroneously said, but actually 11). What's your definition of a top-5 WR? Is it catches and/or yards? As for Marshall, you didn't answer the question--what is the impending League suspension that you are referrng to? I forgot that Marshall had the assault and battery charges dropped against him. How convenient. Poor Marshall seems to get into all these problems that just are someone else's fault. ML had the opportunity to claim he was innocent. He plead guilty. Marshall did the opposite and a jury of his peers agreed with him. He was found innocent of any crime in that matter. What can you do? It's not what I can do, but what Goodell can do. But didn't. Or did. Maybe after Marshall's next transgression, convicted or not, Goodell will have the balls to do what he should have done already. Which is reason enough to stay away from him, much less trade a 1st and 3rd (and reports are that the Broncos are NOT looking to trade him, or at least aren't looking to trade him like the Cards weren't looking to trade Boldin) and the huge salary he'll want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 It's not what I can do, but what Goodell can do. But didn't. Or did. Maybe after Marshall's next transgression, convicted or not, Goodell will have the balls to do what he should have done already. I don't have much of an opinion on this guy one way or the other, but had to comment on this. So you are saying that the mere fact that he was charged with a crime is reason enough for the NFL to suspend him? He doesn't have to be convicted (or plead guilty which amounts to the same thing)? So the whole innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't apply to the NFL? Hmmmm new gameplan for the Pats game ... we get 10-15 female Bills fans to press charges against the top Pats starters and get them suspended for the first game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 He is currently suspended by the Broncos until opening day for conduct detrimental to the team. Which has no impact on the season. His point was that for all the bluster, Marshall is apparently not facing any disciplinary action by the league. I forgot that Marshall had the assault and battery charges dropped against him. How convenient. Poor Marshall seems to get into all these problems that just are someone else's fault. Translation: No, I can't support my prior statement so I'll just write some pointless comments and add an eye-roll smiley instead. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I am supprised nobody has said to trade Edwards for him and play him at QB The Bills can't score any less points on offence with marshall at Qb then with Trent right now Not saying I'd do it, just saying........................................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 So you are saying that the mere fact that he was charged with a crime is reason enough for the NFL to suspend him?He doesn't have to be convicted (or plead guilty which amounts to the same thing)? So the whole innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't apply to the NFL? The fact that he has been charged with the same crime multiple times (domestic violence) is reason to be wary of future incidents, and possibly suspensions. I do believe Goodell has the right to enforce the personal conduct policy regardless of convictions, but I'm not entirely sure (I'm trying to think of a good example....) The innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't really apply to the workplace, employers generally can fire an employee at will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I don't have much of an opinion on this guy one way or the other, but had to comment on this.So you are saying that the mere fact that he was charged with a crime is reason enough for the NFL to suspend him? He doesn't have to be convicted (or plead guilty which amounts to the same thing)? So the whole innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't apply to the NFL? Hmmmm new gameplan for the Pats game ... we get 10-15 female Bills fans to press charges against the top Pats starters and get them suspended for the first game! No, merely being charged with a crime isn't enough to suspend someone. From where did you pull that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Translation: No, I can't support my prior statement so I'll just write some pointless comments and add an eye-roll smiley instead. Well done. What are you going on about? You do realize that Marshall was suspended at the beginning of the 2008 season, primarily for beating up his woman. But he had his suspension reduced by 2 games. Then he gets arrested earlier this year for doing the same, but charges are dropped and it's "no harm, no foul." And magically the assault and battery charges are also dropped. It's all been just a huge misunderstanding for poor persecuted Brandon Marshall. Pathetic. What kind of a "Personal Conduct Policy" does Goodell run, anyway? Lynch OTOH accidentally grazes a drunk chick and gets a ticket for it, yet somehow has to have a meeting with Goodell. Then he's caught with a gun in the trunk of his car and instead of fighting it, asks to have it settled quickly. And for that he gets 3 games with no reduction? Maybe if Lynch had hit a black woman with his car instead... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 The fact that he has been charged with the same crime multiple times (domestic violence) is reason to be wary of future incidents, and possibly suspensions. Precisely. Moreover it sends a message to Marshall that beating his woman is okay, and in some cases, men with history of domestic violence can eventually end up killing their partners. I do believe Goodell has the right to enforce the personal conduct policy regardless of convictions, but I'm not entirely sure (I'm trying to think of a good example....) The innocent until proven guilty thing doesn't really apply to the workplace, employers generally can fire an employee at will. The PCP gives Goodell the authority to suspend any player he sees fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Which has no impact on the season. His point was that for all the bluster, Marshall is apparently not facing any disciplinary action by the league. Translation: No, I can't support my prior statement so I'll just write some pointless comments and add an eye-roll smiley instead. Well done. Sure. Let's just ignore the fact that Marshall has been accused of beating women at leas half a dozen times. Let's also ignore the fact that Goodell has been on record saying that the league's suspension policy happens regardless of a conviction or not. So beating women = OK according to goodell. Is more of the BS where a "star" player gets preferential treatment, while Goodell "lowers the hammer" on less marketable players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 The Jets aren't going to get Marshall. The Broncos are going to want either a first and a good player or a second and a great player. The Jets are either going to have to give up Leon Washington and a second or a First and Kelen Clemens and some other decent player or pick. Also thanks to the Lito Sheppard trade the Jets don't have a fifth round pick and that pick could escalate to a second (It won't unless they resign him but I think that you might not be able to trade away a pick if a conditional pick is contingent on it I doubt it though but its a possibility). Now some here might think well If I were the Jets I would trade away a first and a fourth and a Kelen Clemens for Marshall because Sanchez needs another target. BUT are you going to trade away a future first round pick and other assets for a guy who is one incident away from an 8 or 16 game suspension as well as a problem child. Now some here might think that I would trade a second/third and a Leon Washington/David Harris type player BUT are you going to give up a first day pick plus a player you need (Washington is their only play maker on the offense and Harris is a big part of their D) for a guy who is a problem child and a step away from a 8 or 16 game suspension. To me its stupid to rob Peter to Pay Paul. The Jets won't get Marshall they won't give up what the Broncos want (If it was straight up for Harris or Washington maybe but they are going to want additional picks in order to sell the trade for the fans) and there are just too many question marks about Marshall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Christ Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 ^ agrees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts