Chiefs Brandon Marshall benched for Chiefs-Broncos game - Page 2

baitism · 01-01-2010, 10:43 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4788055

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Just when they finally patched things up, Brandon Marshall and Josh McDaniels are back to square one, and another reconciliation appears farfetched.

McDaniels announced Friday he's benching Marshall, his Pro Bowl wide receiver, for the team's pivotal season finale against Kansas City on Sunday.

"Our word for the week has been accountability. And we're looking to put the 45 guys on the field on Sunday that want to play together, want to help us try to win and qualify for the playoffs," McDaniels said. "... And anybody that showed any indifference to that, we'll play without them.

Marshall suggested he couldn't have played anyway after pulling his right hamstring at practice this week.

In an extraordinary half-hour at Dove Valley, McDaniels insinuated on the podium that Marshall was exaggerating the extent of his injury and was unaccountable to the team. The Pro Bowl receiver responded from his locker by noting McDaniels never played in the NFL and hinting he might be getting called out by his coach because the Broncos' season is unraveling.

Since a sizzling 6-0 start, the Broncos have gone 2-7.

They'll try to make the playoffs Sunday without their 100-catch receiver or tight end Tony Scheffler, demoted to the scout team, and maybe minus wide receiver Eddie Royal, who has a head injury.

Marshall was voted to his second straight Pro Bowl on Tuesday after becoming just the fifth wide receiver with three consecutive 100-catch seasons. He spoke Wednesday about how fulfilling it was to bounce back after a tumultuous offseason that included a rocky start to his relationship with McDaniels, who rejected trade requests and demands for a new contract. McDaniels also suspended him for nine days during training camp for insubordination at practice.

Minutes later, Marshall was clutching his right hamstring after pulling up lame on a route and hopping to the sideline.

Marshall said an MRI showed no structural damage, "but when you try to explode and take off, if you don't have it, you don't have it."

He missed Thursday's practice, and when asked if his star receiver would work out Friday, McDaniels said Marshall would be deactivated for the game and noted it was "a coaching decision," not an injury issue."

"There's a number of players that are going to play on Sunday with things that are much more difficult to deal with than what he has," McDaniels said, a phrase he repeated three times during his news conference.

"It's never going to be acceptable while I'm here and while this staff is here and while we're trying to build our staff with this philosophy. I don't know if it was acceptable before, but it isn't going to be now and it never will be. And this isn't about sending a message, it's about fielding a team that wants to go out there and win and give us the best opportunity to do that."

Co-captain Daniel Graham said that while Marshall has been a good teammate this year, McDaniels was doing what was in the team's best interests.

Marshall said he respected his coach's decision, but couldn't play effectively with his tweaked hamstring. He also couldn't believe McDaniels was questioning his toughness.

"I don't think coach ever played in the NFL, so for my hamstring to be feeling the way it felt, it's tough for me to go out there and expect to play at a high level," Marshall said. "I've battled through a whole lot of injuries before. I played the whole year last year with a tear in my hip. So, I don't think my toughness is in question here."

Marshall also took offense to the suggestion he wasn't buying into McDaniels' program.

"I'm a guy who's been giving it up a lot for this team," said Marshall, who has 101 receptions for 1,120 yards and 10 touchdowns. "I approached this year in a professional manner and I'm going to continue to do that. If he decides to take some personal shots because of the way the season's unfolding, it's not my fault. "I've made big plays when I'm supposed to."

What about accountability?

"Well, accountability and injury is different, you know?" Marshall said. "I pulled, well, I wouldn't say I pulled my hamstring, it's definitely not that bad, but it's tough."

Marshall said he hopes he's available next week if the Broncos make the playoffs, which would make for an awkward situation given all the accusations flying around Friday.

Are the Broncos laying the groundwork for a separation? Will the sides ever be able to patch up their differences?

Marshall is in the final year of a contract that pays him $2.2 million this season. His earnings power might be limited this offseason if there's no new collective bargaining agreement, leaving him as a restricted free agent. That means the Broncos could offer only a modest raise of about $1 million -- providing they want to keep him.

McDaniels said he didn't know if contractual issues were at the root of his latest dustup with Marshall, but suggested the receiver was putting selfish interests ahead of the team's.

Asked if Marshall will even be in the stadium Sunday, McDaniels said: "I don't know."

Was this the last straw?

"Anything I do moving forward is going to be in a professional manner," Marshall said. "I'm not going to get into any he said/she said like we've done in the past. I think that's childish, and like I said, I don't think there's any question about my toughness, the way I play the game. It could be first-and-10 and if I gain 15 yards, I'm still fighting for 16 yards."

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press

Sounds like McDaniels needs 53 Lance Longs.

keg in kc · 01-02-2010, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 58kcfan89

Uh, doesn't Denver need to win to have the best/easiest scenario to get into the playoffs?

His point may be that they're having to depend upon the generosity of other teams in order to get in.

ClevelandBronco · 01-02-2010, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

His point may be that they're having to depend upon the generosity of other teams in order to get in.

Yes, that.

Also, let's get real: The Broncos have little or no business being a part of the playoff discussion at all at this point. Come on. A team that lost to the Redskins and the Raiders when it counted? Please. The Raiders? The freaking Raiders? At Invesco?

At any rate, this past season's record was something of an enjoyable fluke. Let's not spoil a better than expected record by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that they were always more of a 2-7 team than they were a 6-0 team.

ClevelandBronco · 01-02-2010, 01:51 AM

I should probably say that I think the Chiefs are actually a bit worse than their record, so the Broncos should be able to mail this one in.

But I would have said the same thing about the Raiders. In Denver. The Raiders, for ****ing Pete's sake.

mdstu · 01-02-2010, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

I should probably say that I think the Chiefs are actually a bit worse than their record, so the Broncos should be able to mail this one in.

But I would have said the same thing about the Raiders. In Denver. The Raiders, for ****ing Pete's sake.

So the Chiefs and Raiders are worse than their records.
Are the Broncos better or worse than their record?

keg in kc · 01-02-2010, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdstu

So the Chiefs and Raiders are worse than their records.
Are the Broncos better or worse than their record?

Well, he did say At any rate, this past season's record was something of an enjoyable fluke. Let's not spoil a better than expected record by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that they were always more of a 2-7 team than they were a 6-0 team.

58kcfan89 · 01-02-2010, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

Yes, that.

Also, let's get real: The Broncos have little or no business being a part of the playoff discussion at all at this point. Come on. A team that lost to the Redskins and the Raiders when it counted? Please. The Raiders? The freaking Raiders? At Invesco?

At any rate, this past season's record was something of an enjoyable fluke. Let's not spoil a better than expected record by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that they were always more of a 2-7 team than they were a 6-0 team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

I should probably say that I think the Chiefs are actually a bit worse than their record, so the Broncos should be able to mail this one in.

But I would have said the same thing about the Raiders. In Denver. The Raiders, for ****ing Pete's sake.

That's kinda where I thought you were heading. Most of my friends are pretty delusional about Denver's season and didn't think that maybe you're more realistic about it.

Anyway, I love the mini-meltdown. Wish the Denver fans I knew were this reasonable. They all seem to think that Denver should have won the division after the 6-0 start and didn't even think about the possibility that they were just overachieving at the beginning of the year.

I'm a believer of the theory that you're never as good as your best game and never as bad as your worst. I think that pretty much fits Denver this year (not so much the Chiefs... I think we're just slightly better than our worst game and considerably worse than our best game).

mdstu · 01-02-2010, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Well, he did say At any rate, this past season's record was something of an enjoyable fluke. Let's not spoil a better than expected record by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that they were always more of a 2-7 team than they were a 6-0 team.

I love the doubt. I remember the weeks leading up to the Indy massacre. Deja Vu

ClevelandBronco · 01-02-2010, 02:30 AM

Okay, now that we're in general agreement about the relative suckiness of three quarters of the AFC West, can anyone tell me why I see the profanity in my post, but not in the quoted text in yours?

EDIT: I'm going to leave it like that for now. I've reported the possible glitch in the profanity filter to the mods. If they haven't investigated and changed it by morning, I'll change it myself.

**DaFace** · 01-02-2010, 02:47 AM

You can turn on or off the profanity filter by selecting either "Full Featured (unfiltered)" or "Full Featured" from the dropdown in the lower-left. You must've changed it to the former somehow. See the FAQ for a little more detail.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/faq.p...aq#faq_filters

ClevelandBronco · 01-02-2010, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

You can turn on or off the profanity filter by selecting either "Full Featured (unfiltered)" or "Full Featured" from the dropdown in the lower-left. You must've changed it to the former somehow. See the FAQ for a little more detail.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/faq.p...aq#faq_filters

That's it, then. Proof the mods never sleep.

Thanks, DaFace. I switched devices. Perhaps that explains it.

mylittlepony · 01-02-2010, 03:09 AM

Marshal is seeing that Free agent green. An injury against the chiefs then its alot of money to be lost. I think he is being tactical, with that said he is ME first and McDaniels is calling him on it. Its a buyers beware to any potential teams who are thinking about getting him. Marshal has pushed the post season contract negotiations forward and McDaniels is just answering back.

Ugly Duck · 01-02-2010, 03:27 AM

NFL Films featured last year's Bronco team as one of the 10 Greatest Meltdowns of All Time. Wouldn't it be great to have them repeat the disaster? From 6-0 to out of the playoffs... its up to you, KC. Make history, me buckos...

michaelj_58 · 01-02-2010, 04:42 AM

i think denvers coach is a damn fool. you play your best players to win the game, so i think the chiefs have a shot at this game and mcdaniels will have the whole offseason to think about this one.

ClevelandBronco · 01-02-2010, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelj_58

...you play your best players to win the game...

Sounds vaguely familiar. I can't quite put my finger on it. Anyone?

Kerberos · 01-02-2010, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stinger

To the Dingy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .............

Stop playing with your Dingy.

01-01-2010, 10:43 PM
baitism Starter Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Overland Park, KS Casino cash: $3599551	Brandon Marshall benched for Chiefs-Broncos game http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4788055 ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Just when they finally patched things up, Brandon Marshall and Josh McDaniels are back to square one, and another reconciliation appears farfetched. McDaniels announced Friday he's benching Marshall, his Pro Bowl wide receiver, for the team's pivotal season finale against Kansas City on Sunday. "Our word for the week has been accountability. And we're looking to put the 45 guys on the field on Sunday that want to play together, want to help us try to win and qualify for the playoffs," McDaniels said. "... And anybody that showed any indifference to that, we'll play without them. Marshall suggested he couldn't have played anyway after pulling his right hamstring at practice this week. In an extraordinary half-hour at Dove Valley, McDaniels insinuated on the podium that Marshall was exaggerating the extent of his injury and was unaccountable to the team. The Pro Bowl receiver responded from his locker by noting McDaniels never played in the NFL and hinting he might be getting called out by his coach because the Broncos' season is unraveling. Since a sizzling 6-0 start, the Broncos have gone 2-7. They'll try to make the playoffs Sunday without their 100-catch receiver or tight end Tony Scheffler, demoted to the scout team, and maybe minus wide receiver Eddie Royal, who has a head injury. Marshall was voted to his second straight Pro Bowl on Tuesday after becoming just the fifth wide receiver with three consecutive 100-catch seasons. He spoke Wednesday about how fulfilling it was to bounce back after a tumultuous offseason that included a rocky start to his relationship with McDaniels, who rejected trade requests and demands for a new contract. McDaniels also suspended him for nine days during training camp for insubordination at practice. Minutes later, Marshall was clutching his right hamstring after pulling up lame on a route and hopping to the sideline. Marshall said an MRI showed no structural damage, "but when you try to explode and take off, if you don't have it, you don't have it." He missed Thursday's practice, and when asked if his star receiver would work out Friday, McDaniels said Marshall would be deactivated for the game and noted it was "a coaching decision," not an injury issue." "There's a number of players that are going to play on Sunday with things that are much more difficult to deal with than what he has," McDaniels said, a phrase he repeated three times during his news conference. "It's never going to be acceptable while I'm here and while this staff is here and while we're trying to build our staff with this philosophy. I don't know if it was acceptable before, but it isn't going to be now and it never will be. And this isn't about sending a message, it's about fielding a team that wants to go out there and win and give us the best opportunity to do that." Co-captain Daniel Graham said that while Marshall has been a good teammate this year, McDaniels was doing what was in the team's best interests. Marshall said he respected his coach's decision, but couldn't play effectively with his tweaked hamstring. He also couldn't believe McDaniels was questioning his toughness. "I don't think coach ever played in the NFL, so for my hamstring to be feeling the way it felt, it's tough for me to go out there and expect to play at a high level," Marshall said. "I've battled through a whole lot of injuries before. I played the whole year last year with a tear in my hip. So, I don't think my toughness is in question here." Marshall also took offense to the suggestion he wasn't buying into McDaniels' program. "I'm a guy who's been giving it up a lot for this team," said Marshall, who has 101 receptions for 1,120 yards and 10 touchdowns. "I approached this year in a professional manner and I'm going to continue to do that. If he decides to take some personal shots because of the way the season's unfolding, it's not my fault. "I've made big plays when I'm supposed to." What about accountability? "Well, accountability and injury is different, you know?" Marshall said. "I pulled, well, I wouldn't say I pulled my hamstring, it's definitely not that bad, but it's tough." Marshall said he hopes he's available next week if the Broncos make the playoffs, which would make for an awkward situation given all the accusations flying around Friday. Are the Broncos laying the groundwork for a separation? Will the sides ever be able to patch up their differences? Marshall is in the final year of a contract that pays him $2.2 million this season. His earnings power might be limited this offseason if there's no new collective bargaining agreement, leaving him as a restricted free agent. That means the Broncos could offer only a modest raise of about $1 million -- providing they want to keep him. McDaniels said he didn't know if contractual issues were at the root of his latest dustup with Marshall, but suggested the receiver was putting selfish interests ahead of the team's. Asked if Marshall will even be in the stadium Sunday, McDaniels said: "I don't know." Was this the last straw? "Anything I do moving forward is going to be in a professional manner," Marshall said. "I'm not going to get into any he said/she said like we've done in the past. I think that's childish, and like I said, I don't think there's any question about my toughness, the way I play the game. It could be first-and-10 and if I gain 15 yards, I'm still fighting for 16 yards." Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press Sounds like McDaniels needs 53 Lance Longs.
Posts: 273

01-02-2010, 01:51 AM	#18
ClevelandBronco I'm with the banned. Join Date: Sep 2006 Casino cash: $5658955	I should probably say that I think the Chiefs are actually a bit worse than their record, so the Broncos should be able to mail this one in. But I would have said the same thing about the Raiders. In Denver. The Raiders, for ***ing Pete's sake. Last edited by ClevelandBronco; 01-02-2010 at 02:58 AM..*
Posts: 28,113

01-02-2010, 02:30 AM	#23
ClevelandBronco I'm with the banned. Join Date: Sep 2006 Casino cash: $5658955	Okay, now that we're in general agreement about the relative suckiness of three quarters of the AFC West, can anyone tell me why I see the profanity in my post, but not in the quoted text in yours? EDIT: I'm going to leave it like that for now. I've reported the possible glitch in the profanity filter to the mods. If they haven't investigated and changed it by morning, I'll change it myself. Last edited by ClevelandBronco; 01-02-2010 at 02:44 AM..
Posts: 28,113

01-02-2010, 02:47 AM	#24
DaFace Kind of a mod Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Donkey Land Casino cash: $-1773101	You can turn on or off the profanity filter by selecting either "Full Featured (unfiltered)" or "Full Featured" from the dropdown in the lower-left. You must've changed it to the former somehow. See the FAQ for a little more detail. http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/faq.p...aq#faq_filters
Posts: 53,146

01-02-2010, 03:09 AM	#26
mylittlepony Starter Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Casino cash: $10005855	Marshal is seeing that Free agent green. An injury against the chiefs then its alot of money to be lost. I think he is being tactical, with that said he is ME first and McDaniels is calling him on it. Its a buyers beware to any potential teams who are thinking about getting him. Marshal has pushed the post season contract negotiations forward and McDaniels is just answering back.
Posts: 921

01-02-2010, 03:27 AM	#27
Ugly Duck MVP Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Petaluma, CA, USA Casino cash: $9955920	NFL Films featured last year's Bronco team as one of the 10 Greatest Meltdowns of All Time. Wouldn't it be great to have them repeat the disaster? From 6-0 to out of the playoffs... its up to you, KC. Make history, me buckos...
Posts: 10,146

01-02-2010, 04:42 AM	#28
michaelj_58 Starter Join Date: Aug 2009 Casino cash: $10005231	i think denvers coach is a damn fool. you play your best players to win the game, so i think the chiefs have a shot at this game and mcdaniels will have the whole offseason to think about this one.
Posts: 389