PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Wouldn't it be funny if we signed merriman and marshall


chiefscafan
11-20-2009, 08:25 PM
It would be funny to stick it to the chargers and broncos.

Bane
11-20-2009, 08:27 PM
It would only be funny to me if Priest came out of retirement and took Merriman out in practice!

POND_OF_RED
11-20-2009, 08:28 PM
No. This would actually really ****ing piss me off.

milkman
11-20-2009, 08:29 PM
No.

We'd at least look like we are making a legitimat effort to upgrade the roster for a change.

RustShack
11-20-2009, 08:31 PM
And then trade for Larry Johnson?

DeezNutz
11-20-2009, 08:31 PM
It would be even funnier to beat them. That would be fucking hilarious.

SNR
11-20-2009, 09:00 PM
Nah.

BossChief
11-20-2009, 09:20 PM
No.

We'd at least look like we are making a legitimat effort to upgrade the roster for a change.

If I agree with this, am I therefore nothing but a bitch ass follower without the ability to think for himself?

I agree with it, however it is perceived.

RedThat
11-20-2009, 09:32 PM
Nah. I wouldn't be too pleased.

First off, I don't think Merriman is the same after his injury, he is definately not as explosive and the Chargers know that. Imo I think that is why they drafted Larry English?

Marshall Im 50/50. I think he is a talent, no doubt. However, Im learning more towards the "no" side because of his character issues. I'd rather have players who are smothered with a team-first attitude. Adding players with outstanding class, and character is a step in the right direction towards building a winner, and makes the organizations journey towards success alot easier.

I just feel that good charactered football players with great ethic have a lot more value and bring more to a team than players with exceptional talent and porous attitudes .

ClevelandBronco
11-20-2009, 09:42 PM
...Marshall Im 50/50. I think he is a talent, no doubt. However, Im learning more towards the "no" side because of his character issues...

Well, that and he's "over-targeted" or some shit.

BossChief
11-20-2009, 09:48 PM
Merriman has 4 sacks in the last 3 games. He is getting back to being a dominant pass rusher after starting slow. His injury takes two full calendar years to fully heal and he is about a year and a half into it. If he is available and isnt at least brought in for a chitchat I would be very disapointed (unless he is looking for a massive payday similar to Haynesworth)

Marshall would give us a big physical target that is very talented and it would drastically hurt Denver as well and that is worth overpaying for. It's like being able to buy your opponents guns in a war.

They are both still young and have shown they possess an elite talent level, they are rare players.

Neither is gonna happen, but I would be happy if we did add them.

Bwana
11-20-2009, 10:21 PM
No

-King-
11-20-2009, 10:47 PM
Marshall, yes.


Merriman, no.

Redrum_69
11-20-2009, 10:49 PM
Thats what we need...more PEDs

TrebMaxx
11-20-2009, 10:58 PM
Ahh...no.

chiefzilla1501
11-20-2009, 11:34 PM
It would be even funnier if the Chiefs signed a Federal marshall and a merry man. Those two guys would have driven LJ crazy.

Mile High Mania
11-21-2009, 05:17 AM
If those two were the missing links to consistent success in KC... sure. But, I think you need more than those two, lots more.

Rausch
11-21-2009, 05:17 AM
I think it'd be funny as hell if we did anything other than look pathetic and completely disorganized...

Von Dumbass
11-21-2009, 06:02 AM
If Brandon Marshall isn't a Denver Bronco next year I will be shocked.

But if Brandon Marshall did leave I seriously doubt he would go to a small market team like KC. A team would also have to surrender their first round pick with him being a restricted free agent.

milkman
11-21-2009, 06:23 AM
If those two were the missing links to consistent success in KC... sure. But, I think you need more than those two, lots more.

Well, aren't you an observational genious (cps)?

Mile High Mania
11-21-2009, 06:24 AM
Well, aren't an obseravational genious (cps).

That was probably a shot fired my way, but you left out a key word... likely the target. And, boom... got that in before you edited. Ha!

milkman
11-21-2009, 06:25 AM
That was probably a shot fired my way, but you left out a key word... likely the target. And, boom... got that in before you edited. Ha!

Bastard!

Tuckdaddy
11-21-2009, 08:23 AM
No. This would actually really ****ing piss me off.

FUGG THAT! I would have a street parade.

Consistent1
11-21-2009, 08:53 AM
On one level, those are great players if they are on their game. However, they both have had some problems. This team needs to keep building, so I would be for avoiding as much stuff like that as possible.

LaChapelle
11-21-2009, 09:19 AM
Merriman is overrated and Marshall is a cancer
who's this suppose to be funny to

DaneMcCloud
11-21-2009, 01:33 PM
2011 is a long way off

Raised On Riots
11-21-2009, 02:24 PM
I think it'd be funny as hell if we did anything other than look pathetic and completely disorganized...


LMAO

Crush
11-21-2009, 03:00 PM
The free agent pool is going to be extremely small due to the fact an uncapped year is approaching.

Mr. Laz
11-21-2009, 03:17 PM
I'd rather sign the 2 best NFL college scouts tbh.

chiefzilla1501
11-21-2009, 03:32 PM
2011 is a long way off

What's interesting is that if players paid any attention, they'd realize that an uncapped year is a shitty deal. The only players that take it to the bank are the superstars. Meanwhile, the vet minimum all but disappears, bonafide free agents will become RFAs and play for their old shitty salary, and teams will be allowed to tag three players (even though players hate having just 1 franchise tag).

I think there's an unfortunate reality that an uncapped year in 2010 will happen. It's too bad players don't realize what it means for them.

milkman
11-21-2009, 05:52 PM
What's interesting is that if players paid any attention, they'd realize that an uncapped year is a shitty deal. The only players that take it to the bank are the superstars. Meanwhile, the vet minimum all but disappears, bonafide free agents will become RFAs and play for their old shitty salary, and teams will be allowed to tag three players (even though players hate having just 1 franchise tag).

I think there's an unfortunate reality that an uncapped year in 2010 will happen. It's too bad players don't realize what it means for them.

How much input do players actually have in the negotiating process, really?

This is on the union leadership.

As with most unions, the herd will just simply sit back and wait on the negotiations and vote to ratify an agreement when one is finally reached.

I'd imagine about 98% of the players have no idea what the actual implications are.

chiefzilla1501
11-21-2009, 06:07 PM
How much input do players actually have in the negotiating process, really?

This is on the union leadership.

As with most unions, the herd will just simply sit back and wait on the negotiations and vote to ratify an agreement when one is finally reached.

I'd imagine about 98% of the players have no idea what the actual implications are.

We'll have to see.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/06/27/players-are-starting-to-figure-out-that-uncapped-year-is-a-mirage/

I know. Consider the source. But my guess is that as March approaches, there are going to be a LOT of players who quickly realize the implications. I'm just saying that some people are acting like it's a given that 2010 will be uncapped. Regardless of which way the two sides lean to, it won't go down quietly.

DaneMcCloud
11-21-2009, 06:12 PM
How much input do players actually have in the negotiating process, really?

This is on the union leadership.

As with most unions, the herd will just simply sit back and wait on the negotiations and vote to ratify an agreement when one is finally reached.

I'd imagine about 98% of the players have no idea what the actual implications are.

Each team has a player rep that votes for his team's wishes.

The biggest issue is Roger Goddell versus DeMaurice Smith. The players want the owners to open up the books, which they refuse to do. The players want more (I believe it's currently 64% of the total revenues) but the owners say they can't operate by giving up more and actually want a reduction, back to 60%.

There's also the issue of owners versus owners. The wealthier owners in the larger markets (Dallas, NY, Baltimore, etc.) are tired of sharing merchandising revenues with the smaller markets (Kansas City was specifically mentioned by Jerry Jones). There will be some in-fighting between owners for sure.

According to everything that I've read and heard, a 2011 lockout by the owners is not out of question.

And there is NO way in hell a new CBA is ratified before the 2010 free agency period.

Mr. Laz
11-21-2009, 06:19 PM
some people are acting like it's a given that 2010 will be uncapped.

i doubt it ... both sides are using leverage but i don't think either wants a uncapped year.

The players lose alot of stuff in an uncapped year and a pretty sweet CBA.

The owners risk the atomic bomb of not being able to get a salary cap back at all.

milkman
11-21-2009, 06:19 PM
Each team has a player rep that votes for his team's wishes.

The biggest issue is Roger Goddell versus DeMaurice Smith. The players want the owners to open up the books, which they refuse to do. The players want more (I believe it's currently 64% of the total revenues) but the owners say they can't operate by giving up more and actually want a reduction, back to 60%.

There's also the issue of owners versus owners. The wealthier owners in the larger markets (Dallas, NY, Baltimore, etc.) are tired of sharing merchandising revenues with the smaller markets (Kansas City was specifically mentioned by Jerry Jones). There will be some in-fighting between owners for sure.

According to everything that I've read and heard, a 2011 lockout by the owners is not out of question.

And there is NO way in hell a new CBA is ratified before the 2010 free agency period.

I know the player reps have a better understanding of the whole process, but that is one out of roughly 65 players (give or take with PS and IR included) that have some idea.

As the article zilla posted idicates, the players, and only a minority at that, are just now beginnning to understand the implications that an uncapped year actually has.

DaneMcCloud
11-21-2009, 07:32 PM
I know the player reps have a better understanding of the whole process, but that is one out of roughly 65 players (give or take with PS and IR included) that have some idea.

As the article zilla posted idicates, the players, and only a minority at that, are just now beginnning to understand the implications that an uncapped year actually has.

Yeah and that was back in June.

But from all indications, there's no way a new CBA goes into effect before March.

From what I've read and heard, both sides are ready for an uncapped year.