Should the Niners make a move for Brandon Marshall ?
by 9erguy on Jun 16, 2009 11:29 PM PDT
Email
Print
Recently, Brandon Marshall has made a big fuss about not being paid adequately and has made it known that he wants out of Denver. He even went so far as to bid farewell to Denver fans in his blog. The 2.198 million he is set to make this year is a bit low for someone who averaged over 100 catches and a 1000+ yards the last couple years. Being that the Niners have some cap room, the question becomes, should we make a move for him?
Keep in mind that while he is incredibly talented and put up some big numbers that he comes with some several negatives. First off, he is coming off hip surgery. Not the biggest turnoff considering he is only 25. Second, he has had a number of run ins with the law, including alleged domestic abuse. Third, he lied to his team about a cut to his arm he received during wrestling. If that wasn't bad enough, he also was suspended for violating the NFL's personal conduct code and could get suspended again if he gets convicted this summer on some charges he has pending before the courts.
After taking all that into consideration, should the 49ers makes a move to acquire him and if so, what should we part with. I have read that he'd want to make $9 million and that Denver would want at least a first rounder. We currently possess two first rounders for next years draft. I'd imagine that they'd want Bruce and our original first round pick. Is the gamble worth it (believing Singletary can reign him in) or do you believe like I do that this guy is just another T.O type that racks in the numbers but doesn't really improve the team he's on? Though the idea of him and Crabtree lining up for the Niners would definately be fun to watch.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
231 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Marshall is talented, but...
I just don’t think that he would add that much to the team, given the state of the Niners WR position. As Maiocco mentioned just the other day, the team has plenty of depth. If Marshall had become available last year or the year before, and if the team hadn’t drafted Crabtree, then yes. But not at this point.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Why not more talent?
The positives far outweigh the negatives.
With that said, I don’t think we should give them a 1st rounder….I would be willing to give them a combination of players or something.
McC should at least look into this, any opportunity to improve the team should be looked into.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 6:26 AM PDT up reply actions
The positives do not outweigh the negatives
If that was the case then you’d be bending over backwards to trade your first pick for him and if you’re only willing to trade a combination of players than you obviously don’t think he’s very valuable. Marshall is baby TO although apparently TO with a violent mean streak.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Let's see.
Positives: 100 receptions each of the past two seasons with limited playing time (was suspended for one game I believe), gives us an instant upgrade at WR1 (like it or not, Marshall is an upgrade over Bruce)
Negatives: Wants to be paid like a No. 1 WR, has a history of getting in trouble.
I’m not saying that we HAVE to pursue him, but if a talented WR is available, and he can upgrade the team…then why not at least “kick the tires”
I don’t want to give them a 1st rounder because Denver doesn’t have that much leverage….they already said that they’re trading Marshall.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Ok
Yes, Marshall is an upgrade over Bruce. However, Marshall is about as unreliable as they come, he’s always in trouble and is one more screw up from major suspensions and guys that unreliable no matter how productive do not deserve to be paid like a #1 WR. The offensive scheme the Niners run is also important to consider. The Niners aren’t running a spread offense where the WR is a premier possible, instead they’re going to run first and pass second so the upgrade at WR is less important for the Niners than say someone like the Chiefs who are going to a spread offense. The Niners are also going to have to pay Crabtree like a #1 WR and frankly I would hate to see the Niners spend that kind of money at a position that is hardly integral to the offense.
When has Denver come out and said that they would trade him? I’ve seen nothing of the sort and they’d be idiots to do so because it does tip their hand. All that I’ve heard is something from Marshall’s agent about Denver willingness to cooperate but who knows how much of that was just lip service.
As it stands know I don’t think there is any way he gets dealt, unless Jerry Jones gets a wild hair up his ass again, as Denver can’t possibly get equal value for him.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Totally agree Chikmagnet....BRING US BMarshall!!!
There are so many dreamers on this site. It’s amazing to me. Acting as if we’re just stacked at WR. It’s ridicilous. We have ONE (againg) proven WR in Bruce. Most of the folks we have at wide out are athletes but haven’t proven jack at the pro-level. And once again I read through the site and see everyone saying they want to pass, bad character, etc. Such idiots.
Fact: If you’ve ever actually played football you’ll understand this. Brandon Marshall opens the field wide the fkuk open. He alone will make Frank Gore a 1500 yard rusher and 10TD’s mimimum. He’ll also take any form of double coverage off Bruce and precious Josh Morgan. I’ve noticed a lot of Morgan groupies on this site. Amazing. Bottom line: If we want a running game we’ve got to have a Marshall type player. My bet is, we’ll fail to close the deal on him like every other FA star we’ve passed on.
If muumy and daddy handed me a pro team you better believe I’d be ALL over a talent like Marshall. PLEASE JEB-put the dude in Red and Gold!!! I want to win now. Not next season “when we build through the draft.”
by Forttyner4life on Jun 17, 2009 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Easy there.
I know Brandon Marshall brings a lot to the field (Double coverage, red-zone threat), but I’m just talking about looking into the situation.
I like our WR group right now, but we only have 1 proven player…Morgan, Crabs, Hill, and Jones all have a lot of upside but we still don’t know what’s going to happen with them.
I’m hoping for the best but when a talent like Marshall is available, you have to at least inquire.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
No
If you’re going to have to give up players/picks, at this point it should be at a position where they need help.
The marginal benefit isn’t great unless they give him up for nothing.
You're actually satisfied with the 49ers WR situation?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
It's better than the Seahawks....
LOL
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Not a chance.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Really?
So your 6th WR is a proven athlete?
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Because a 6th WR is SO much more important than say...
the talent level of your starters?
I’d take Housh and Branch over Morgan and Bruce, as much as I love our squad.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
ninja
Ill take our offense minus the offensive line over Seattle any day. bunch of ran down overrated scrubs. And hasselback is going to die again this season. either week 4 or during one of the games they play the 49ers. Manny lawson is going to assassinate him.
Because Manny Lawson has such a proven track record of assassinations before.
If anything, it’s far more likely Patrick Kerney will feast on Hill/Smith.
The only starting player I’d rather have from the 49ers is Frank Gore, and maybe Eric Heitmann. Crabtree maybe if he shows something.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Our 6th WR is nearly a world-class sprinter.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions
And what the hell kind of stupid statement is 'a proven athlete'?
They’re NFL players so it’s sort of obvious that they are proven athletes.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Is Marshall a long-term improvement?
Quite possibly no. There’s plenty of reason to expect Crabtree and Morgan to be just as good as he is, if not better.
We have positions of much greater need.
Crabtree, I understand. His college career speaks for himself.
But Morgan? Why, because of a good preseason vs. z-string competition and some limited touches in the regular season?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions
You really haven't seen him (Morgan) play.
But I don’t care.
The 49ers don’t have to prove anything to YOU.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Have you watched him play?
Note that I said “quite possibly” no. Not that Morgan was definitely better. Not that Morgan was clearly just as good.
But Morgan clearly has loads of potential, and only an idiot would make drastic changes to our WR core without seeing what he can deliver over a full season, first. As others have pointed out, getting Marshall isn’t costless, so given that we have Crabtree and Morgan, if you’re willing to track picks and/or players to upgrade one position, doesn’t it make MORE sense to do so at a position where we don’t have potentially great players already?
Maybe in a year we’ll realize Morgan isn’t all that, and we need further WR upgrades. Fine. But isn’t there also a risk that Morgan IS that good, and that if we trade for Morgan we find ourselves with more WRs who we can really use?
WRs really don’t make that big a difference, anyway. Casual NFL fans go gaga over WRs because they rack up stats. “oh, look, he had 100 catches!” I’d rather see us upgrade at NT or S.
+1
WHY DONT WE INVEST IN A POSISTION WE NEED
by Italian King on Jun 17, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions
No
I spent a lot of time watching Marshall last year and he is much worse on the bench than TO ever was. He’d have melt down every other game. The only guy who could talk him back into the game was Cutler and by McDaniels infinite wisdom they got rid of him too.
If we didn’t have so much talent at WR than maybe, but we already have a potential No. 1, a retiring No. 1 and emerging No. 2 in Morgan.
Now, let's assume Crabtree and Morgan become a fantastic WR duo.
What happens if either gets injured, even for a short period of time? Are you going to rely on Jason Hill to step up and do something?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions
No
The likeliness of the Niners having to rely on any WR is minute. Their offensive system just doesn’t call for that kind of WR dependency. If Crabtree and Morgan go down Hill, Jones and Battle (if he makes the roster) are more than adequate replacements for a run first style offense.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Thank You for ur comment FORTTYNER4LIFE! Finally someone with some football knowledge finally speaks truth to light! Im tired of these so called niners fans that claim that we are stacked at wide receiver! I mean… was I the only one watching the niners games last year? Im tired of the so-called holy fans that dont wanna take a player that had a questionable past… I mean, these guys are comparing Marshall to TO… R U SERIOUS? Marshall is no TO… he will not disrupt a team! TO was not a team player… he was all about himself! And yes, adding Marshall will definitely improve our team 10 folds! What receivers on our team right now that can come close to what Marshall can offer us? Bruce is 35 yrs old and on his last legs… Crabtree is a freaking rookie! I dont care what potential this guy has… he still hasnt produced anything on an NFL field yet! Morgan showed flashes but he was hurt most of the time last year to prove me wrong! Now you nay-sayers are literally telling me that those guys that I just mentioned are better than a guy with back 2 back 100 reception years and 1000 yard seasons? Are we still talking about football here? I mean do these so-called fans want to win or to show the league that we have all the goodie to shoes on our team? I mean… no one is perfect! Adding Marshall will stretch opposing defenses so much that Gore will be gauranteed 1500 yards minimum! Can any of these nay-sayers tell me if any of the receivers on our team now scares opposing defenses? Cuz i really dont think so. Football is a gigantic chess match! Its a game of strategy and mismatches! U have to force defenses to play your game! And your not gonna achieve that when opposing defenses are stacking 8 or 9 in the box against Gore! They dont respect our passing game! We have to make them respect us! Do you realize that Im a huge 49er fan and I had to painstakingly watch our team (with the highest available cap room of all teams) just let player after player after player slip right by them because of some few transgressions this past off-season. This is absolutely ridiculous! People… we need to wake up and open up our eyes here and get some of these talented players! This is an opportunity of a lifetime! And yes i do believe we should give up a 1st round pick for this player! We have two 1st round picks… why not use one of them for a proven player thats young! DUH! I also believe that we should pursue Michael Vick because the QB’s on our team now is not good enough to take us to the big game! He wasnt the HIGHEST paid player in the NFL for nothing! But thats another story!
I actually took this serious
until I read it. What in the blue hell is this guy blabbering about?
Go get Marshall? Sign Vick? Spend what cap we do have?
Please, dude, don’t act like we aren’t die hard Niners fans just because we don’t want to go and waste all of our money on a wife beating head case WR or a condemned, two year removed QB. When are people gonna realize this is NOT Madden 2010, and you don’t go after every single player that may be available. We are doing smart things with our team and money right now, so let’s see where it goes. And just because Marshall had those stats in Denver doesn’t mean he will have them in a different offense in SF. Any “true, die hard, non nay saying” Niner fan would know that.
And PLEASE Jano, tell me the other story about why Vick was the highest paid player in the NFL. Was it from all of his Super Bowl’s? League MVP Awards? Passing records? Oh wait……Vick was overrated. My mistake. I forgot.
This was way too long a response for this post. It irritated me, so I had to. Sorry guys.
+1 X 1000
No one is doubting his talent, but apparently they are looking for a 1st and a 3rd. Way too much to give up for a complaining trouble maker on and off the field who is a suspension risk. Plus didnt he injure himself slipping on a McDonalds burger wrapper? That doesnt really mean anything I just thought it was hilarious.
+5
hill has stepped up just fine when he’s needed, bruce has another year in him, and if he DOES go down (which doesn’t seem likely) we’ve got plenty of talent to replace him.
a week ago we had people crying about how bruce was going to be stealing time from our younger guys, now we’re lacking depth suddenly?
It isn't likely Bruce won't be injured?
He’s one of the oldest players in the NFL.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions
You took a block of text seriously?
Your mistake, bro.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
It would be my mistake
If what you said made any kind of sense. Luckily for me, it doesn’t. Good effort, tho. I’ll give you an “A-” for the effort.
I actually took this serious.
“This” being a large, unbroken block of senseless text.
You expected an intelligent argument to come out of a long rant that, at no point, showed signs of straying from idiotic babble. This was your mistake.
Does that clear it up?
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Read the entire sentece I wrote............
it says “I actually took this serious UNTIL I READ IT.” This is what is known as “sarcasm”. You see, “sarcasm” is the use of sharp, cutting remarks or language intended to mock, wound, or subject to contempt or ridicule. This is why there was no intent at an argument, which is indeed why is WAS a rant. So the next time you want to talk about “idiotic babble”, which you seem to be such an expert on, please, think about what you are reading.
See, schlecko, THAT is an example of sarcasm. Try to sound important on another post at a later date.
Marshall is baby TO
That’s his nickname and he has it for a reason (go ahead and google “Brandon Marshall baby TO”). The comparisons are just. Marshall is most definately a disruptive force and far from a “team player”.
Bottomline, in a vacuum or on paper Marshall would make the Niners a much better team. But the games aren’t playing in a vacuum or on paper and the reality is that Marshall doesn’t add that much to the Niners run first offense with Shaun Hill at QB.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Jano and Chickmagnet...
Love your responses. The Niners are going 7-9 again and SFGFan, 49er4life, BlankX2, and the Foochs of the world are going to continue to claim we have a great WR crop, we shouldn’t trade #1’s, etc. There self-proclaimed football bloggers who know nothing of the game because they continue to defend a very weak argument that we already have a play-off level team on the field. Yet we pass on every legitamte playmaker that comes our way. And character??? Please, what was wrong with Jay Cutler, Tony G, or Houshmanzadeh? Absolutely nothing.
Here are the sad facts: Jeb is trying to rebuild this team with the money controlled by mummy and daddy. We will not be competitiive until we actually spend money to put P-R-O-V-E-N talent on the field. Josh Morgan, Crabtree, Dre Bly, Shaun Hill, Kentwan Balmer, Scott McKillop, Coffee, Zigler, doesn’t count. Thats the Yorks fooling you that they’re making moves to put a play-off contender on the field. I will never leave this team as it’s in my blood just like all of you, but defending a piss poor argument about having a good crop of WR’s and an imporved team is weak. It’s a mediocore team that will continue to be slapped around until we show some vigor and pick up game changers.
By all means prove me wrong, but I can’t wait to tell all you dreamers I told you so.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 17, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
question...
If this team is in your blood then you’d want them to win correct? If that’s the case, rather than say “I can’t wait to prove you all wrong,” wouldn’t you rather be seeing, “I really hope this team proves me wrong this year.” Maybe it won’t happen, but that would seem to be what a fan of the team would want. Would it really make you happier for the team to suck and you being proven right?
by David Fucillo on Jun 17, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions
That's obviously not what he's saying.
While I understand fans tend to overrate their team, trying to paint a rosy outlook because you hope they pick themselves from the mire of mediocrity they’ve been in the last several seasons is sort of wrong. I mean, they could be a great team next season but in the more likely chance they aren’t, many of the readers here are going to feel ‘let down’ because they had unrealistic expectations.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions
SFGFan, 49er4life, BlankX2, and the Foochs of the world are going to continue to claim we have a great WR crop
Why do you say they said things that they never ever ever ever ever ever ever said. God damn that kind of tactic pisses me off.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions
indeed
The Niners receiving corps isn’t ‘great’—it’s just a spot where the team has a lot of guys who have a lot of potential. These guys don’t develop overnight. Check this out:
Brandon Marshall Rookie year stats:
15 games 20 rec’s 309 yards 15.5 avg 71 lg 2 tds 14 fd 1 fumble 0 fumbles lost
Josh Morgan Rookie year stats:
12 games 20 rec’s 319 yards 16.0 avg 48 lg 3 tds 12fd 0 fumbles 0 fumbles lost
Yes, Marshall is a proven #1 WR, but he’s also 1) a proven head case who 2) wants lots of money and who would take 3) multiple draft picks to get. In this case I think the team would be better served by keeping the 1) very cheap guy who had 2) better stats in less time than Marshall did in his rookie year and who is 3) not only not a head case, but the team MVP of the pre-Training Camp offseason.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
the more I see those numbers, the more pumped up I get (hence the avatar, too!)
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Are you going to be OK?
I’m really scared I’ve upset you ‘howtheyscored’. I’m just trembeling about it.
It’s not a tactic genius, it the truth. There’s a flock of you that sit around and scoff at literally every single FA that becomes available. I’ve never seen anything like it. Your all satisfied with a 7-9 team that might go 8-8 if there lucky next year. Read the posts, the majority of you cling to the notion that we’ve really turned it around in 49er land. It’s absolutley pathetic the talent that we’ve ‘passed’ on in the off season. Our fan base (or at least this site) must be on the York pay-roll. They have pulled the proverbial wool over your eyes. We won’t compete without play makers. All there is too it. It’s that simple.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 18, 2009 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions
There’s a flock of you that sit around and scoff at literally every single FA that becomes available.
Maybe because there’s a reason they’re, you know, free agents? They’re not on a roster because, currently, none of the teams in the league want their services for whatever amount of money it is they’re peddling it for.
As for being “satisfied with a 7-9 team,” get over yourself. Everyone here is a fan of some team, and as a fan, you want your team to win. However, what defines a winning team? Signing some beat-up corner who is obviously past his prime (i.e. McAlister)? Signing an (at least) almost over the hill POSSESSION WR to a big deal (Housh)? Please. Building a winning football team takes more than plucking a bunch of other team’s rejects and expired players off of the market.
If you’ve been watching football at all, most (if not almost all) of the teams that CONSISTENTLY win in the NFL were not built in a day. They were not built by signing other team’s cast-offs. Most of those rosters were generated by years of smart drafting and calculated signings. Everyone would love for the team to win now. Your assertion that fans don’t want that is utterly ridiculous.
Just like you’re entitled to your opinion, other fans are entitled to theirs. If you disagree with their stance, that’s fine, disagree with their argument, but don’t attack the people. It brings very little to the discussion and just makes your arguments look weak (as you have to rely on name-calling and attacks to get your point across).
by sfgfan on Jun 18, 2009 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
But this is the team that drafted Alex Smith and Vernon Davis.
You can’t expect the 49ers to be drafting their way into the next dynasty. This team is not loaded with talent, and even people like Housh or McAlister could count as upgrades, and the 49ers had money to burn.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 18, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
But this is the team that drafted Alex Smith and Vernon Davis.
Same team? Yes. Same people pulling strings? Not necessarily.
This team is not loaded with talent, and even people like Housh or McAlister could count as upgrades, and the 49ers had money to burn.
I probably would have been okay with a Housh signing, though I don’t think he really would help all that much more than Bruce already would. McAlister, I liked as a safety, but there’s no way he’s looking to play safety right now, which is probably why he’s still unemployed.
I’m not saying the 49ers front office is 100% right on all their picks or anything like that. I, however, understand it if they want to believe Scot McCloughan will be better at building a team than Nolan is. As I told you before, I don’t expect this team to be great right now. I do, however, think they’re at least average with some potential there to be better than that. Will they realize that potential? Who the heck knows. One thing I’m pretty certain of, though, is the McAlister and Housh don’t really help them get to that realization.
What defines a winning team???
I won’t use bad words anymore SfGfan. I didn’t realize your that big of a panzie. So what defines a winning team you ask: THAT WOULD BE WINS! Who are you??? Does anybody else on this site need to know what defines wins? That would be actually winning games. I don’t care if it’s with the pope or satan. I want to win. I don’t watch the NFL with my friends to comment on our long-snappers charater or how great Morgan looked in pre-season. WHO CARES? Dude your comical.
And what McAlister argument are you making? I’ve never mentioned him. I want Cutler, Gonzo, Housh, Marshall, and Haynesworth (I realize he scares you so calm down.) None of those guys were cast-aways. My arguement the entire time has been that we have worthless owners. It doesn’t matter how much you like Scotty because he doesn’t control the purse strings. Nor does Jeb. We have owners, who have apperently created fans like you, that actually revolt against worthwhile FA signings.
Lets take Housh for example just to expose your pathetic claim that he’s an over the hill possesion reciever. Dude goes for 1000 yds and 8+ TD’s (pretty much) every season. Are you trying to tell the world that Hasslebeck to Housh and Branch… is less of a threat than Hill to Bruce and Morgan. I’ll talk Hassel and the hawks wide-outs any day of the week right now. Not next season…but right now becasue the give the hawks a better chance to win in 2010.
Mark my words…Seattle will finish above us this year because they have a owner who spends money. Plain and simple. Allen wants to win and when you have big balls you do what ever you can to impose your will to win. He’ll do anything in his power to finish above .500 and thats why Seattle will continue to get repsect while Frisco gets none. The Yorks are a joke. They have proven they’re content with losing season after season. We are still one of the biggest jokes in the NFL and it sickens me.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 18, 2009 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
worthless owners?
First off, calling him a “panzie” hurts your own credibility in the eyes of most people (whether you care or not).
Second, the team has in fact opened the purse strings. Justin Smith and Nate Clements didn’t come cheap.
Third, as far as Housh is concerned, please be more accurate in your numbers. He’s had two seasons of 1,000+ yards and also only 2 seasons of more than 7 touchdowns. Maybe the numbers are close, but when your so emphatic, make sure you’re more accurate with the numbers.
by David Fucillo on Jun 18, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Are Fooch and SfGfan are in bed togather???
Fooch…are you defending SfGfan?! ?How cute. Thing is, I didn’t ask for your opinion. So, yea, I really don’t care when you physo-analize my argument style. It’s a football blog dude…I’m writing this from bed watching TV.
Clements and J.Smith…is that what you consider the Yorks legacy to this franchise? Really? Is that the best you can come up with the support why your on the Yorks nuts constantly? I mean you about jumped for joy when we re-signed the long snapper. So lets play a fun little game called “How worthless is our FO” Try and name a few more FA’s that have contributed to a winning season in the past 7 years that the Yorks have spent money on? Now do the same excercise for the Pats?
Good night Fooch. I hope to see you at a game someday, I really do.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 18, 2009 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions
You're missing the point of this "football blog"--which is conversation
Homoeroticism is the furthest thing from anybody’s mind here—except yours. I would think that if you want to participate in a reasoned discussion, this would mean that you would want others to call you out for
1) factual (re: spending $ on free agents) and statistical (Housh’s stats) inaccuracies,
2) juvenile name-calling, which actively hinders understanding (since it makes one feel as if one needs to defend oneself rather than one’s position), and
3) the inability to consider seriously whether the reasons others give for their positions.
If you want to treat ninersnation as a place where you can get up onto your soapbox, then fine—you can do that. But you’re missing out on something much more interesting, and much less…vomitous.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
by grantmp on Jun 19, 2009 5:58 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Grantmp=Socretes
Thanks for the life lesson there guy!!! I’m touched. So do me a favor while I see a doctor for my horrific blogging techique…can you philosphize on why we’ve been losing for 7 seasons?And lets figure out how we can you fix that instead of fixing me for now. Your a duche dude.face it.
Super, thanks Grant!
by Forttyner4life on Jun 19, 2009 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah grantmPHd
why don’t you figure out how to fix this instead of philosophisizing man. what the hell are you waiting for geez.
and in his 4th season, VD broke through the wall, Niners fan rejoiced and all was well in the kingdom. Singletary 3:42
"Your a duche dude"
That was my favorite part.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions
long snapper?
I wouldn’t exactly calling it jumping for joy. We resigned a guy who is widely recognized as one of the best at his job in the league and I was pleased with that. I’m sorry, should I not have been happy they resigned him?
As far as the York’s legacy is concerned, at this point, there is certainly a negative legacy in the eyes of many fans because the team has struggled. At the same time, I think they deserve credit for putting a front office together that helped get this team out of the salary cap mess they had been left in by Eddie D. They’ve also shown steady improvement as owners. Maybe they haven’t reached the summit, but they seem to be learning from some of their mistakes.
And as long as mistakes are made in someone’s arguments, I’m probably going to try and correct them. I don’t do it to try and shut people up or because I don’t like a certain person, I do it to keep a logical flow to the argument. I’d love it if everybody was able to come out up legit arguments that are 100% accurate and don’t involve childish name-calling.
by David Fucillo on Jun 19, 2009 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions
the shape of the conversation
I’d love it if everybody was able to come out up legit arguments that are 100% accurate and don’t involve childish name-calling.
Look, it’s clear that we aren’t all going to have this kind of perfect conversation because, well, we’re not all Rhodes Scholars here at ninersnation. But that doesn’t mean that that kind of conversation isn’t the goal. I’ve been corrected helpfully quite often here, and see that as a benefit—and that kind of benefit is more likely to be the result of conversation in which people go after others’ arguments rather than at their authors.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Exactly
Just because none of us can reach perfection, doesn’t mean we can’t aspire to it. And even still, as you say, just going after someone else’s argument, rather than the person is a good first step.
by David Fucillo on Jun 19, 2009 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions
I’ve been corrected helpfully quite often here, and see that as a benefit—and that kind of benefit is more likely to be the result of conversation in which people go after others’ arguments rather than at their authors.
This. I’m sure there are plenty of people here who are willing to admit they’re wrong when provided with actual evidence or a solid argument. That’s the whole point: to gain an understanding of the other side. Whether or not you’ll agree with it or “correct” your opinion is entirely up to you, but you should still respect or try to understand the other argument.
5 straight seasons of at least 900+ yards if I remember correctly.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
And the decline is coming
Good luck with that.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 19, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions
If he produced with Ryan Fitzpatrick, he'll produce with Matt Hasselbeck.
But yeah, a very optimistic outlook is something along the lines of 3 or 4 productive seasons out of Housh.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
RE: I want Cutler, Gonzo, Housh, Marshall, and Haynesworth
Classic.
Are you trying to tell the world that Hasslebeck to Housh and Branch… is less of a threat than Hill to Bruce and Morgan.
You’re being pretty selective here. The Niners offense is built (or being built) completely different than Seattle’s and they’re also at completely different stages. A more appropriate conversation would have to include at least the RB. Is Hasselbeck, Housh, Branch, Burleson and Jones more threatening than Hill, Bruce, Morgan, Crabtree and Gore? I’m not convinced that they are but I am convinced that they’re a hell of a lot older and brittle.
Hasselbeck is going to 34 and has played rather poorly 2 of the last 3 years and has serious health concerns. Housh, in my opinion, is not worth the money (I’ll take Crabtree and his upside over Housh and his aging downside) that Seattle gave him and he’s going to be 32. Branch is also going to be 30 and he’s can’t stay healthy. Burleson is mister inconsistency and he too has problems staying on the field.
You’ve got a hell of a case to make if you prefer Seattle’s offensive skill players over the Niners for ‘09-’10 but there’s no way you take Seattle’s for the years beyond next.
Look at the Redskins they spend money on big names year after year and where has that gotten them? Teams need to build themselves through the draft and FA and the Niners have started doing that and to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. I’m not sure why you’re a Niner fan but you might enjoy rooting for the revolving door of big names that Washington houses.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 19, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions
"Hasselbeck, Housh, Branch, Burleson and Jones more threatening than Hill, Bruce, Morgan, Crabtree and Gore?"
With relative ease.
Your points about the Seahawks are all perfectly valid, especially about age but there’s something to say about relying on a 30 year old undrafted QB who has never started an entire season before and has limitied physical tools, one of the oldest players in the NFL, 2 unproven WRs, and an injury-prone RB. That’s probably a recipe for a disastrously bad offense, especially when you take into consideration the 49ers offensive line.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Relative ease my ass
Gore, injury prone? That’s a new one. He’s averaging 15 games a season over 4 years. He does get knicked up but who wouldn’t shouldering the entire offensive load behind an improving but previously shoddy OL. He’s cleary the most talented player for either team.
I’d take Bruce over any Seattle WR other than Housh as Branch and Burleson are incredibly feeble and/or inconsistent.
Like I said, Seattle might have a slight edge this year but after that the scale will more than likely start tipping heavily in SF’s favor.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 19, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions
You still have Shaun Hill or Alex Smith as QB.
And this is almost certainly Bruce’s final season, and doesn’t have either Branch or Burleson’s big play ability.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Ok
Hill’s like 7-2 as a starter, he shown he can at least manage and win games.
Who care’s if this is Bruce’s last season? Crabtree, Morgan and Hill will be ready to step up next year and I’ll take consistency over big play ability.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 19, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I just thought this was funny....
Seeing as how Branch and Burleson had about as many yards as I did last year. (I know they were injured….it just still funny).
2 of Hill's 'wins' were meaningless games at the end of 2007.
5 last season were against the league’s easiest second-half schedule.
…And I love you’ve automatically assumed that Crabtree, Morgan, and Hill are going to be the epitome of reliable consistency despite the fact that all are largely unproven.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
And while we're on that point, Hill's upside seems to be a competent game-manager
while a healthy Hasselbeck is one of the league’s best passers.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Check that
A healthy Hasselbeck used to be one of the league’s best passers. Hasselbeck has 1 good year out of the last 3, he’s in the twilight of his career.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 20, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions
And Alex Smith has had 0 good years out of his career.
Shaun Hill, less than half of one, if you consider that good.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions
?
Thanks for stating the obvious.
What else are you going to teach me?
That the world is round?
by SportsChicken on Jun 21, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions
And Alex Smitha and Shaun Hill have what to do with Hasselbeck's detiorating career?
And Alex Smitha and Shaun Hill have what to do with Hasselbeck’s detiorating career?
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 22, 2009 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Because it seems likely that Hasselbeck in his twilight years
is still an upgrade over Hill/Smith’s career numbers.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 22, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd hope so
The Seahawks offense is highly more dependant on the pass and thus QB play than the Niners.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 22, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Consistency
I was refering more to Bruce.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 20, 2009 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions
The funny thing is ...
… by all accounts, our offense should be better this year than last year. It’s hard to imagine why it’d be worse.
And yet we weren’t “disasterously bad” last year. We were, aside from turnovers and sacks, a middle-of-the-pack offense last year. And both turnovers and sacks are likely to be much improved with the removal of JTO and Martz.
In other words … you seem like a glass-half-empty kind of guy.
There is no way to look at our roster and get to “disasterously bad.” Yet you seem to want to go there. That, I think, explains just about everything. If one could legitimately look at us and say “disasterously bad” then yes, rushing out and signing aging players and malcontents might be the right strategy, anything to shore things up.
But it’s not 2003 anymore. The Niners aren’t disasterously bad. Not even close.
Please
and Haynesworth (I realize he scares you so calm down.)
I was actually one of the bigger Haynesworth supporters around here. Haynesworth, in my opinion, would have actually improved the team drastically, which is a requirement when you’re shelling out a ridiculous amount of money in guarantees. I think I’ve been through this discussion with you before, but the NFL isn’t like Madden. You can’t just say, “here, take this for X number of years and I sign you.” It takes two to tango in this league, and Washington (the ridiculous owner with the seemingly bottomless pocketbook), risking draft picks (and various other penalties) went after him before free agency even started. Would I have loved to have Haynesworth? Damn straight. I’m not going call ownership useless or be all upset because honestly, no one really knows what went on in those discussions. Unless you can find a direct quote from McCloughan, Marathe, York, or whomever saying the 49ers flat out didn’t even consider Haynesworth, criticizing them for not getting him is jumping to conclusions.
Just like anything else around here, there are varying opinions on things. Some people like Alex Smith, some people like Shaun Hill. Some people like Josh Morgan, some people like Jason Hill. Some people like Haralson, and some people like Lawson. There are differences of opinion around here, and that’s the exact point of a “discussion” blog like this one. You don’t defecate on other people’s opinions just because they don’t agree with yours. As I pointed out above, you just make your opinion known, and understand the counterpoint.
You believe Housh will be worth his weight in gold. I don’t. It’s a difference of opinion.
As for Cutler and Marshall, they had to be traded for. Trades are even more complicated than just signing someone off the FA list. Not only does the team have to want the player, but the other team has to want to give said team the player. Again, find actual evidence that says the 49ers didn’t at least kick the tires, and your complaints will be validated. Otherwise, you can’t chastise the team for failing when they may have tried.
As for below when you ask Fooch for which FAs have helped the 49ers win in recent years and asked him to compare that to the Pats, that’s some serious cherry picking right there. If you want to cherry pick, take a look at the Redskins money spending and see how many championships they’ve won (or even come close to winning).
For the 2-billionth time SFGfan...
I didn’t say the we never go after FA’s or trades, I SAID WE NEVER WIN AT LANDING FA’s or trades. So..yes…perhaps we do kick the tires…but thats not good enough for me. I want to actually buy the sports car. I’m not satisfied wth a look over dude. Furher, I actuallty respect Dan Snyder for breaking his back to put a wining team on the field. He spends money. And, I dont care to access the sports almenac right now, but I’m willing to bet the skins have more wins the the 9ers over the past 7 seasons. My point again, d-snyder tries. He’s a go getter not a reactionary owner. Again back to my arguement that there are people that make things happen and people who wonder what happened. You and I both know where our pathetic FO ranks.
And Eddie, I love Eddie, don’t clown Eddie because we won. He won for a long time. He ran us into the ground doing so..but make no mistake that the Yorks could have pulled us out of this long ago had they genuinely cared about the niners.
Last, about my “childish” name calling with words like “panzie”, “genius,” and “retard”…seriously does that hurt your feelings? Is it “vomitous” like Grantmp says. My god, I’m kidding. We’re talking football here, I had no idea this is to be treated like a kindergarten blog. Wow. Golly gee I’m so sorry. Good bye for the weekend losers.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 19, 2009 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions
And Eddie, I love Eddie, don’t clown Eddie because we won. He won for a long time. He ran us into the ground doing so..but make no mistake that the Yorks could have pulled us out of this long ago had they genuinely cared about the niners.
Yeah, the Yorks could have magically gotten rid of almost half a decade of dead money to players who were either no longer with the team or no longer playing altogether.
Just so we're crystal clear...
SFGFAN-you kill me. I never thought I’d see a niners fan backing the yorks but I’ve seen it all on this site now. So just so I’m clear: you are actually defending the yorks for what they’ve done with this franchise? Just clarify that for me. Not a disertation…just answer the question. I might actually leave the site now (which I’m sure makes you very happy) because your a total toolshed. So please answer the question. I’m dying to hear this.
by Forttyner4life on Jun 22, 2009 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Eddie D and the Yorks
If you do decide to leave, before you do, will you please tell us how the Yorks were supposed to get rid of all the dead money left on the books by Eddie? sfgfan posted about that specific point you made and you chose to ignore it. Please do us the pleasure of at least responding to the issue posed.
by David Fucillo on Jun 22, 2009 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions
+100
I back the Yorks as well in that they have fixed what Eddie-D and others left behind. They have fixed the 9ers money issues and opened up their checkbooks to get the players they need. Can’t ask for anymore than that.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
Back the Yorks?
You act like everything in the world is black or white, as if everything can be answered by a simple yes or no. That’s simply not the case.
In short, yes, I think the Yorks have finally gotten on the right path. Does that mean I think they haven’t or can’t do no wrong? No it does not.
The Yorks have screwed up in the past. They’ve meddled too much with the football side of things when they should have really just tried to let the people they hired do their jobs. That’s how Mooch got fired and how the whole Erickson/Donahue regime came to be.
However, I think that when they hired Nolan, Nolan talked them into how they should run the franchise: and that’s being hands off. Hiring good people to run the team for you and don’t interfere is the best way to approach it. The Yorks have done just that. The results aren’t there, but as I pointed out previously, you don’t just magically make half a decade worth of dead money against your cap disappear.
As for being happy you’re leaving? I can really care less if you come or go. As I pointed out, people have their opinions, and that’s all fine and dandy. If you do go, though, that’s one less person that attacks posters instead of the thoughts those posters are putting up, which should help discussion quite a bit.
You keep me out of this
I said people should stop complaining about the draft. I never said we had a great WR corps.
LoL
Whoa....
how did i miss this whole discussion?! What’s with all your generalizations that lack supporting evidence?
I have NEVER said we have a GREAT WR corps. I think we have a lot of potential at WR and in a few years it may be great, but they are largely unproven at this point. All of the number 1 WR’s in the league right now started out this same way and someone or somehow they got their chance and that’s what I’d like to see. That’s why I was against the Brandon Jones signing because I thought for what we were getting(caliber/price/length) it wasn’t worth impeding the development of the younger more promising players. Then again at that point who knew if Bruce was coming back and Crabtree wasn’t in the mix yet. Maybe if we didn’t have Bruce or Jones, then I’d be open to considering bringing in a number 1, but not Marshall. Sure he’s talented but there are waaaaaaay too many negatives he’d bring along for the price tag we’d have to pay. At this point we need a WR to mentor the younger guys and help them develop, and Marshall isn’t that guy.
And I never said we shouldn’t trade #1’s. If the team is on the cusp of making a super bowl run(which we arent and AGAIN i never said we were) or if we could get a player that we thought would have a POSITIVE impact for years to come and be a key player in the teams success then yes I’d be in favour!!! And like Sfgfan I was in favour of Haynesworth as well, but for the money he got we had no chance of getting him. And how can you say Clements wasnt a huge signing? How often does an elite corner become available in free agency in his prime without being franchised? Practically never!!
And lastly everyone has their own opinions. When someone defends an opinion it’s more about them defending what another person is saying and not the person themself. In this case I think Fooch and Sfgfan have more common ground in disagreeing with what you’re saying, than actually agreeing with each other. So there isn’t this collusion like you’re implying. I’ve agreed and disagreed with both Fooch and Sfgfan on different things.
I’ve agreed and disagreed with both Fooch and Sfgfan on different things.
And I’ve disagreed and agreed with Fooch on a lot of things, especially on whether or not Jay Moore will make the 53-man roster.
Unless he shows some crazy skills on ST, I don't think Moore is gna make it.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
He's been injured
So we don’t know what we’re going to get from him.
It’s better not to predict when it comes to players like these because there is nothing on which the predictions can be based.
by SportsChicken on Jun 21, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Prediction is based on that he's been injured
If he doesn’t perform outstandingly in TC I think he’s gone.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
Why are people against upgrading a postition?
I remember before the draft I mentioned the idea of drafting Crabtree (in some other forum) and people went all crazy and got pissed off saying that we didn’t need Crabtree and that it would be waste of a pick….?
If a talented player is available, why not look into it?
Yeah, wasn't it a Niners Nation fanpost that proclaimed Crabtree a bust?
And the ensuing commenters all agreed? I’ll try to pull that up.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Are you talking about this post?
http://www.ninersnation.com/2009/4/10/829465/upon-further-review-michael
If it is the right Fanpost, some people agreed, but most did not appear to.
by David Fucillo on Jun 17, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
That's Me!
And I am fan poster, not a sanction NN blogger. Oh, I think I ended up arguing with 100 different posters with only 1 maybe 2 in mild agreement.
I still hold my reservations about Crabtree and I hope I am wrong. I still don’t see him as a Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald type receiver because his measurements don’t suggest he possess those physical tools. A rich man’s Laveranues Coles is probably a better comparison. A big, tough possession receiver who might become impossible to stop on mid range patterns (that would be Michael Irvin). Than again apart of my thesis for not drafting Crabtree so high was it’s unconventional to take a possession receiver so high unless he has superior size 6’5 height or above.
I don't think anyone is claiming Crabtree to be Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald
But even as a rich man Laverneus Coles he was worth the #10 pick.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions
exactly
hes gonna be better than fitzgerald and calvin
by Italian King on Jun 17, 2009 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.
I was drinking the Crabtree kool-aid from the start, but his ceiling seems to be a very good #1 WR, probably borderline elite. But the fact of the matter is that he’s not going to immediately produce and be a game-changer.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions
There might not be anybody in the league who is better than Fitzgerald. it’s like method said, “I don’t think anybody’s going off the deep end about Crabtree,” and you said, “did somebody say something about going off the deep end???”
If Crabtree is half the receiver Fitzgerald is, we’ll be glad that we drafted him.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Or even a...
… Michael Irvin-esque player would be worth a top 10.
Quoting myself from that thread:
I disagree with the main argument of this post, and a lot of the comments here are just dumb
Why is it that I seem to agree with a Seahawks fan more often than I do my own peers? This is kind of starting to bug me.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Or, they could do like they have for half of this decade, and
watch as the rest of the division tanks like usual.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Because the cost is too high
I’d much rather sign TO to a one year deal then trade for Marshall, give up picks and have to sign him to an extension.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 17, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Theoretically, Carolina's pick that you guys obtained will be in the mid to late twenties.
That would seem like a fair price for a very talented WR.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions
He might be worth that pick
But he’s not worth the pick and money it’ll cost to lock him up, especially when Crabtree could cost a pretty penny.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 18, 2009 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions
more like
will cost a pretty penny. Way back in ‘05, Troy Williamson commanded $13.5 M in guarantees at the #7 spot, and in ’07 Ted Ginn Jr. got $13 M guaranteed ($19 M over 5 years total) at #9. You’ve got to figure Crabtree will be looking for similar dollars.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Not to mention..
… his agent is going to push the fact he was (almost) the consensus #1 WR in the draft that should have gone quite a few picks earlier.
Because there are other positions which need bigger upgrades.
Duh.
And because upgrading a position isn’t costless. You have to give something up.
Double duh.
Talented player...
… vs talented headcase are two VERY different things. As you pointed out at the top, Marshall wants top tier money. He may have the talent that warrants it, but is he really worth it? Can he guarantee that he’ll be available week in and week out without being subject to the wrath of the Commissioner for something stupid he might do?
No one is against an upgrade, especially if it’s a significant upgrade that doesn’t cost very much in terms of picks or players traded away. However, when you start speaking about guaranteeing money to said upgrade that has a history of boneheaded actions, questionmarks will more than definitely have to arise.
Using Crabtree in the comparison is just wrong. Crabtree, by most accounts, was one of the surest bets in the draft. Marshall, taking into account his entire package (or burden?), is far from any kind of a sure bet.
Heck YES!
I would go after Brandon Marshall in a heartbeat, and if we could get him, I would cut Bruce in the process! You may ask "Why cut Bruce?" Well easy answer, he was a no show for voluntary workouts, and said he would be a role model to younger receivers by showing (not talking) because that’s how he learned. WTF, doesn’t sound like a very good role model to the younger WRs! Also, he is getting old and slowing down. So, I say we send that Lamb back to Lamb Land! In addition, I would go after P. Burress and J. Peppers! Wow, now that would be nice, Marshall and Burress as WR while having Willis and Peppers on defense. Teams would be scared of us on both sides of the ball if we had those combinations! Oh and as far as those who say "but they are trouble makers", I have faith that Coach could keep them in line! Now for Vick talk. Now way, he was never a very accurate passer, more of a rushing QB, and we have Gore so not much need for him here! Well, I’m just dreaming because I don’t see us making any of those moves and spending that money. But I would be happy if we acquired one of those three players. And really, I am not cheering for anyone because of their character off field, I cheer for them based on their performance and the uniform they wear on the field!
we should probably go try and get....
Boldin too right? LOL….‘honestly you sound like a crazy person right now’(anyone get that reference?). But seriously…have you thought of who or how many draft picks we’d have to give up to get Peppers and Marshall. Peppers is unhappy with his contract and being in Carolina, which isn’t the issue…that doesnt really make him a trouble maker cause a lot of guys hold-out, The issue with him is what we’d have to give up for a guy who is unproven in the 3-4! As far as Marshall goes, just read my post earlier!
Burress may go to jail and be suspended all year if he doesn’t!! So what you want is to cut Bruce(a great mentor, teacher, and role model) and have Burress and Marshall lead, be role models, and help(hinder) the development of Crabtree, Hill, Morgan, and Zeigler. Don’t even get me started with how this will affect their development with the decrease in playing time, not to mention we’d have to cut or trade one or two of them for roster space. And what about cap space implications with Peppers, Marshall, and Burress. And people have to stop suggesting we take every reject because Singletary is our coach. He might be able to turn over a new leaf with one or two trouble makers (keep in mind we already have VD) but he cant control a whole team of egomaniac ‘me-first’ type guys.
Hey Dreaming is just that!
First off, hell yes on Boldin Too!, Not saying any of that would happen would ever happen, but bottom line any of those guys I mentioned before Improves our team!!! I remember when everyone laughed at the Pats for taking Moss, oh but now no one questions that move now! As for Bruce, your dreaming if you think Bruce has been a good role model, But hey everyone one has their own Opinion!
What?
I remember when everyone laughed at the Pats for taking Moss
I don’t remember anyone laughing at the Pats. I’m pretty sure you’ve got them confused with the Raiders, at whom everyone had a good chuckle for agreeing to that trade.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
I was actually mad over that trade
We got Darrell Jackson for a 4th (I think), which is the same (again, I think) that the Pats gave for Moss. We couldn’t call the Raiders and offer them something better in the draft or a player that runs a 4.3 40 yard dash?
Moss
No one really knows if he would have produced anywhere close to what he has for New England if he had ended up in SF instead. A big part of Moss’ “personality disorder” has to do with him not playing for a winning team. The 49ers weren’t a winning team then, and still didn’t look like they’d become one. I honestly don’t think Moss would have acted any different in SF than he did in Oakland.
THe problem with this analysis is ...
… that Moss’s time with the Raiders pretty much proved that getting Moss wouldn’t do you any good, unless Moss wanted to be there.
The Niners were a team with QB questions, and nobody who could get the ball downfield to Moss with any accuracy. Had we traded for him, do you really think we would have gotten the Moss who showed up in NE? I think we would have gotten the same guy we saw in Oakland.
And that guy isn’t worth more than a 4th. Heck, he might not be worth a 4th.
While you're at it, don't forget to propose trading a bag of pretzels for Peyton Manning.
….And inheriting Burress, Peppers, Marshall cap figures.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions
sigh
"I'll be honest with you, I love his music, I do, I'm a Michael Bolton fan. For my money, I don't know if it gets any better than when he sings "When a Man Loves a Woman"
Yeah.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Marshall = TO = It doesn't matter because....
We have Sing as HC, I doubt even TO would stand up to Sing, because he would get beeyotch slapped back to the 1800’s, so any undesirable personality traits any player could have like Marshall, are irrelevant.
I say go get Marshall
Marshall – Bruce – Morgan – Crabtree (2009)
Marshall – Crabtree/Morgan (2010)
Baby T.O
It would be nice to see the next Terrell Owens in a niners uniform but it’s true we have too much upside at this one particular position. Being Crabtree, Hill, and Morgan.. I think censensus believes Morgan will breakout this season with Bruce starting opposite to him, which would leave the 49ers nursing Crabtree the beginning of this year. If the 49ers were to send Morgan to Denver along with a 1st or 2nd rounder. I’d be suprised McC picked up the phone and made a good move, there’s no one in this NFC West Division that has a chance against Marshall. What I fear at this point is what if the Rams make a move on Marshall. Marshall could of easily had 1300 yards back to back seasons if he wasn’t suspended for the 1st game.
OK
You know you have to give something up in order to get him, right?
It’s not like we’re saying “No, more WR cuz ourz is da best!”
If Marshall could magically vanish from the Broncos and reappear with the NIners, sure, make it happen,
If the Niners have to give up something, it should be for a position where they need help the most. That isn’t WR.
The niners would have to cut two of Hill/Battle/Zeigler, while guys like Mark Roman are almost sure bets to make the roster. Not balanced.
We have enough WR's but 1 more couldnt hurt
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
If Marshall wants out...
then the bronco’s should trade to the Card’s him for Q, I know this trade won’t help us but hey it makes a lot more sense for those 2 guys to be traded since they both want off of their teams. It’s not like we need anymore recievers, if anything we need some corners or a big d-lineman
same position, same problem
While you’d be putting them in a new situation in terms of geography, you’d still be dealing with receivers who want more money. Not sure if that’s really improving it for either Denver or Arizona.
by David Fucillo on Jun 17, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Problem with this is...
that such a deal would be monstrously lopsided.
Q for Marshall? If I were the Broncos, I’d take that deal in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, if I were the Cards, I would just laugh.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
If you don't like Vernon Davis act, you will hate Brandon Marshall
If Marshall was on our team last year Sing would have booted him from at least 6 games. He’s a beast on the field but has been penalized for mouthing off, he throws a sideline fit after every bad possession, finally he’s got more off field baggage than any other player except for Pacman. I cringed having him on my fantasy team last year because at every turn he looked like he was on his way to a suspension.
Except Marshall can catch.
And in a grander scale, can walk the walk.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I know you're not a ninersnation regular (though you seem to be becoming one), but...
the notion that Davis can’t catch has been definitively debunked in an article by our resident stat hound, Florida Danny (and I quote: “For all the crap VD takes about his stone hands, he actually had a better catch rate than every WR except for Hill”). Given this, you’ll probably say that our entire WR corps sucks, but, I’m not sure a Seahawks fan can throw stones here (though Carlson is a stud and a guy I wish the Niners had fwiw).
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Okay, let's assume that Davis has good hands.
That still hasn’t helped him become a competent receiving threat. He’s not a good route-runner either. For all that size, he seems to be afraid to take hits.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 18, 2009 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I think he'll be better
if he isn’t injured and isn’t playing in a Martz-esque offense which relies on the TE cathing passes about as much as offensive linemen.
I hope anyway. He has so much potential it’s frightening.
Sort of.
Davis’s potential lies within his physical attributes and match-up problems. But so far, he hasn’t shown any knack for the finer points of football (something which greatly explains John Carlson coming in as a rookie and having a season comparable to Davis’ career best). Injuries and playcalls weren’t why Davis didn’t produce. It’s up to him to pull it together or he becomes trade bait.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh, I'm sorry
I thought a broken leg would slow you down a little bit, and maybe effect your production. (Hope the sarcasm was clear enough).
You can’t deny injuries and Martz’s system hurt his production. It didn’t totally destroy his production, but it definitely slowed him down.
He broke his leg?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions
I was referring to last season.
Davis was not significantly injured to the best of my knowledge.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Carlson was in a much better situation than Davis last year.
How did you expect Davis to be successful last year if he only had like 45 passes thrown to him all year
It was mathematically impossible for Davis to have more success than in 2007.
by SportsChicken on Jun 21, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions
"Carlson was in a much better situation than Davis last year."
Not really. I mean, the offense doesn’t shy away from throwing to a TE but the fact that for much of the season there was no other target to take pressure off him and he still produced (as a rookie, mind you) shows some considerable skill and even more potential for the future.
“How did you expect Davis to be successful last year if he only had like 45 passes thrown to him all year”
But he wasn’t making much of his limited opportunities.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 21, 2009 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions
This can be looked at two ways:
Yeah, you can make an argument that opposing defenses knew that he was the primary weapon for most of the season, and thus shifted coverage toward him accordingly.
However, you can also say that anyone getting that many balls thrown their way is going to put up some decent numbers. Eric Johnson is a good example of this: 82 catches for 825 yards in 2004 with the 49ers. I loved the guy to death, but he really wasn’t all that good – just the target of a lot of passes due to an inept group of WRs on the team that year. One could arguably place Carlson in the same category.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
“But he wasn’t making much of his limited opportunities.”
This perception is pretty widespread, but it’s actually hard to back up with solid evidence.
Davis’s percentage of passes thrown to him caught was one of the highest on the team. I’m not sure what else people expect of him.
Confirmation bias is a b****: when you believe someone has hands of stone, you remember their drops, and forget all of their good catches. When you believe somebody has great hands, you forgive the occasional drop, because “he catches so many other ones.”
It’s also very difficult to evaluate a receiver without understanding the context of the passing attack they’re playing in. Davis has, when healthy, has either been on teams (like last year) where the offense doesn’t throw to the TE, or on teams with epicly bad QBs.
His numbers over his first 16 games (over two seasons, due to injury) aren’t that different from, say, Tony Gonzales’ (over only one season).
rather than upgrade WR
I’d rather upgrade NT, RT,FS. WR isn’t as big as a need as other positions. Maybe a year ago it would have been more pressing. RT to me is the biggest need so if we could get a solid RT for 5-10 years it would be way better than trading for Marshall.
Pizza is the best. Also, go 9ers!
BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT.......
Marshall do have his issues but how often do you see him act out on the field? “when hes in the game he’s in the game.” lol as oppose to Davis, Davis faithfully make bone head decisions. Decisions that put us in bad situations. Im not saying Id prefer off the field issue over on field issues just stating the fact. also eff that niners 11-5 “By all means prove me wrong, but I can’t wait to tell all you dreamers I told you so”.
It doesn’t matter if he doesn’t act out on the field because his off-field actions are going to get him suspended for ridiculous amounts of time. He can’t help the team when the league won’t let him play.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions
HELL NO! And let me explain why...
1) He’s a headcase and a cancer – Singletary has better things to worry about than teaching this kid how to behave
2) The cost is too much – why not spend that kind of money on resigning our own guys (Willis, others destined for a contract year sometime soon)
3) We’re currently loaded (over the limit) at the position
4) Crabtree/Hill/Morgan/Jones is the future of this team and that group has plenty of talent
5) Did I mention Marshall is an idiot?
From what I've heard, Marshall hasn't been much of an on-field distraction.
His suspension ranged from off-field things like beating his wife or something.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions
That’s not really a critical distinction. You can hurt your team on the field just as easily by acting like a subhuman jerk when you’re off the field as you can by acting like a douche on gameday.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:23 PM PDT up reply actions
He would have been suspended on most other teams. Shanahan ignored a lot of his antics on the sideline. Many of times no one on Denver’s coaching staff could get a handle on him either. Jay Cutler was often the one dealing with Marshall. He would ignore his position coach and would go scream and plea with Cutler. To be honest, Jay did a masterful job of handling him. It’s mind boggling listening to Bronco fans say Jay had no leadership. He was the only guy who could calm Marshall down and get him focused on the next series.
Another reason Marshall escaped team penalty is he already had a target on his back from Roger Goodell. Team punishment would have only shed more spotlight on his bad behavior. Of course, Brandon was on his last straw with Goodell begining last season and he only got himself into more trouble this offseason. Expect him to be suspended for a few games. He’s a great football player, but he stands a good chance of being kicked out of the league for at least awhile.
I'd give them Battle and Ziegler and a 4th for Marshall.
We don’t have a bonified number 1. And since we don’t which niner WR is better than Marshall? Yeah I’m speechless too. But you have to consider he is a disgruntled player like Moss was who went for a 4th. Marshall is no Moss so a 4th and 2 of our WR’s (No Crabs, Morgan, or Jones.) Hill Ziegler and Battle
M. S. #50
A trade like Moss for a 4th will never happen again.
Ziegler and Battle probably aren’t worth more than 7th rounders individually, adding a 4th to a package like that would just be insulting Pat Bowlen’s intelligence.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Well my whole point is
Marshall is disgruntled and doesn’t want to be with his team which IMO he’s not worth a 1st or 2nd because he doesn’t want to be there. Marshall had two great seasons but he lost his qb and is in a contract year. He wants to get a contract built off of what he did in a system that’s changed and most importantly a change at QB. He’s definitely a talent, but not one we desperately need (giving up a 1st and 3rd). If it’s not Merriman or C Johnson (calvin not chad) I’m holding on to the pick and proceeding forward.
M. S. #50
Who would trade an all-pro level WR
for training camp fodder and a mid-round pick?
Even with Marshall’s off-the-field problems, a trade like that is just stupid.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
TOO MANY OF YOU
are living in a fantasy land
wer not gonna get marshall nor do we need him… if we picked him up it would stop the development of our young talent in crabs and morgan which is exactly what we dont want
give this a couple years and itl be the nastiest WR tandem in the league. watch.
if we picked him up it would stop the development of our young talent in crabs and morgan which is exactly what we dont want
This is neither true, nor is it a reason that the team might not potentially pursue something like this. You don’t forego a long-term solution just because you want to get somebody less talented more playing time.
You either want Marshall because you think that he will stay on the field. Or you don’t want Marshall because it’s a huge investment for a guy who the league won’t let play. There’s not a whole hell of a lot more to it than that.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 17, 2009 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
marshmellow
lets give our rookie a chance and with old timers to teach him, i rather deal with a rookie
than some thug
It would be foolish to
go after Marshall. We have Crabtree and Morgan as our go-to guys and Hill rapidly improved last season. Add to that the woefully underrated Brandon Jones, and we have a battle for #5 with Bruce, Zeigler, Spurlock and perhaps Battle.
Kezarvet
"We have Crabtree and Morgan as our go-to guys "
They haven’t proven anything yet. And while Brandon Jones might be decent, I wouldn’t go as far as to call him ‘woefully underrated’ – even the Titans didn’t bother keeping him, and they have as sorry a WR situation as any.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 18, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions
No, they haven't ...
… but they’re a rookie and a second-year player who was hurt much of his rookie year.
Doesn’t it make sense to find out what they bring to the table BEFORE committing a lot of resources to replacing them?
You might not go so far as to call him "woefully underrated"
but Jeff Fisher speaks very highly of him and anyone who saw the OTAs saw a man with great speed and very strong hands. Shaun Hill was impressed.
Kezarvet
RE: Shaun Hill's comments
Any comments made by a teammate or a coach, especially any assistant coaches, have to be taken with a grain of salt. They’re not going to openly rail or complain about their teammate before they know if that teammate is going to be an ex-teammate.
Shaun Hill also spoke highly of Dominique Zeigler too, if I recall.
And there’s a somewhat good possibility he won’t even make the final roster.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Zeigler will make it ahead of Battle
Battle is DONE!!!
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
One could argue that Battle is the second most consistent receiver on the roster as well.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 19, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Battle is a much better receiver than Zeigler will ever be.
Unfortunately, he also commands a lot more money. In the unlikely event that Battle doesn’t make the roster, it won’t be because of talent.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
than Zeigler will "ever" be?
That’s a bit of a conclusory statement. What makes you think Zeigler would never become a better receiver?
by David Fucillo on Jun 19, 2009 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Lol Battle will not make the team
Since 02 Battle has been the only consistent and reliable WR we’ve had until last year. That’s not saying a whole lot since our WR corp sucked donkey balls from when TO left to last year. We had LLoyd, Woods, Gilmore…..yea out of that crowd ofcourse Battle is great. Not saying much. He’s not making this team. Zeigler is bigger, faster, and younger.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
Neither is making the team
There’s no reason to carry 6 WR in a Jimmy Raye style offense. Bruce, Jones, Hill, Morgan and Crabtree are the WR. Battle and Zeigler simply aren’t needed. I’d rather carry a 4th RB over a 6th WR.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 22, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
This.
I’d rather carry a 4th RB over a 6th WR.
Sheets > Battle > Zeigler
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Reword
I feel Zeigler is going to make the practice squad barring injury to another player. I’m sorry when I said team I meant team/practice squad. Battle will be cut.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
I don’t think Zeigler is practice squad eligible anymore. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 22, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions
zeigler
I believe somebody said he actually was, thus the reason he would get to stick around. I’ll see what I can find on it.
by David Fucillo on Jun 22, 2009 9:44 PM PDT up reply actions
here's the answer
From Barrows’ blog:
Zeigler has another year of practice-squad eligibility. Battle does not.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Ah, thanks. Just goes to show you, sometimes you can really think you’re right and still be the exact opposite.
I hope everyone who is wrong will take this as a valuable lesson.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 23, 2009 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions
From my perspective
the ideal WR and RB corps would look like this:
WR
Morgan, Bruce, Crabtree, Jones, Hill
RB
Gore, Coffee, MRob, Sheets
Because we know that Ziegler has PS availability, I don’t see any danger in him being squadded, given that a) Raye’s offense will require fewer WR’s and b) if there happens to be an injury at some point, they can bring him up as a guy they trust.
The team will miss Battle’s toughness, but it looks like the end of the line for him.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
RE: WR/RB Corp
Basically what I was thinking. Robinson doesn’t really excite me but he’s very versitle and if Sheets can return kicks (I have no idea if he can or can’t) then he should be locked into a roster spot.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 23, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions
word is that Sheets has some KR ability
MRob doesn’t excite me as a HB or a FB; he excites me (theoretically) as a wildcat QB, and as a guy who blows up guys as a lead blocker and ball-carrier-killer on ST. On the return that Rossum took back against Ari on MNF, Robinson took out two guys. He basically sprung Rossum by himself. Awesome.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
This is for all you Starbucks GM's.......
The Niners won’t even consider getting Marshall. Here’s why……First off, anyone who plays Franchise mode in MADDEN will understand that 1st RD draft picks EARLY in the season are worth …..NOTHING! An owner like Pat Bowlen understands the value of B. Marshall on his team (whether he’s a basketcase or not) and getting a 1st rounder simply isn’t worth it.
Secondly, 1st rounders become MORE valueable the longer the NFL/College season goes on. You are then able to evaluate the talent coming in and are able to pick and choose the best players available for your teams needs. Just imagine for a second, if we traded 1 of our 1st rounders this year, and then guys like Sam Bradford, Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, and a GREAT prospect at Defensive End become available during next year’s first rd. Those who chose to get rid of the extra pick will feel really stupid.
Thirdly, true to form “IF” we acquired Branden Marshall, he might make or WR corp “good”. But “Great” WR corps take time. If anyone thinks that Fitz and Bolden became a great tandem simply by walking onto the field one day……you’re dreamin. They had to work together as a team, with the same coaching staff for a couple seasons and then bust through the ceiling to become what they are now. It was the same for all the great tandems. Rice and Taylor, “The Fun Bunch”(Redskins), Harrison and Wayne. It takes time. Period.
Lastly, and most important…….THIS AIN"T WASHINGTON/NEW YORK!!!!! Just because a supposed “Great” player becomes available, DOESN’T mean we should run like chickens w/ our collective heads cut off to acquire them. Just look for instance at the Redskins. Since Dan Snyder took over the team, he has paid BILLIONS of dollars to high priced players, and hasn’t even sniffed the post season. From Deion Sanders, to Mark Brunnell. Lavernious Coles to Jason Taylor……non of them have gotten him to the playofs. Much less the SuperBowl. The Yankees have been the same way in baseball. Every year, they have the highest payroll for players, yet, they CAN’T beat the Red Sox, they CAN’T stay competative in the post season, and they still are looking to remain consistant. If we are griping and bitching now, with a team that has heart and is currently turning the corner to respectability…….what do you think this fan site would look like if we spent their kind of money and STILL remained in the cellar of the league? I for 1 wouldn’t just be mad, but PISSED! Moreover, think of the price hike in ticket sales?! AND I DON’T EVEN LIVE IN SF! Here’s a better team to think on……Dallas anyone?
So….for those who are willing to mortgage the future of the franchise on a “me first”, “team last”, good WR…..be my guest. But this turtle would much rather take the slow road, and finish in high fashion, as opposed to gunning from the gate, and finishing dead last. And as much as I hate to bring them up……the Pats….seem to do QUITE WELL without mortgaging everything. Marinate on that a while.
P.S.: For those of you who think so highly of the Moss trade……remember, the Raiders wanted rid of Moss because of his malcontent, and NE was able to get him for a 4th rd pick. I repeat what was said earlier……IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN!!!!!!!!!
K.C.Edwards -AKA- "THE" DarkkStarr
by DarkkStarr1 on Jun 18, 2009 10:46 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
If we could get Marshall for a 4th ...
… and not have to commit a lot of long-term money to him until we saw how he fit, I think everybody would be in favor of picking him up.
But we can’t. Instead we’ll have to give up a higher draft pick, and commit a lot of money to a position where the upgrade may actually end up being rather small. (eg, in two years will he be clearly better than Crabtree and Morgan?).
This isn’t really that complicated.
Last time I checked Crabs didn't have a contract
Marshall wants money, period!! But every team should have a WR of that size for the redzone. EVERY team. However we are slightly ahead of those who don’t because our TE can line up at WR with Bear able to be a blocking TE. I can’t wait to see the packages Raye uses. I posted before about our offense being as good as the Cards and maybe I should have said more effective, and i had comments saying the niners would not go 4 wide or 5 wide but they’re doing it in OTA’s. We can’t jump on Marshall, Hampton is a FA next year, Merriman and some other great players.
M. S. #50
not worth it
we need those 2 first rounders more than we need another receiver.
unless, of course, we’re happy with the nose tackles and secondary we have.
I take full responsibility for my irresponsibility.
Boldin
We might as well trade for Boldin rather than Marshall (sorry if said somewhere but I was too lazy to read 100+ comments). Or heck, trade for both and get Peyton Manning and run the spread.
Pizza is the best. Also, go 9ers!
To everybody that is railing for the Marshall pickup, I offer simply this:
Dallas had both TO and Roy Williams, and couldn’t make the playoffs.
Randy Moss has been in NE the last couple years, and they haven’t won one either.
Speaking of NE, the three they did win were with WR’s named Patten and Brown.
Tennessee had the best record in football for a good stretch and has exactly ZERO “gamebreaker” receivers.
And if we’re honest with ourselves, the Niners aren’t in Super Bowl contention this year. I’d be thrilled if we got there, but being realistic, I’d be satisfied with a season over .500. I’d be ecstatic for a 10 win season and a playoff berth. Personally, we don’t need Marshall, not at the cost of a #1 pick. I’d like to see us be more like Tennessee. Very good defense, more than capable offense that can make a big play or two, and be physical enough to smack you in the mouth.
Another thing….Even at his best, and with Cutler as his QB…what has Denver won lately?
Enough said.
by ronniemac03 on Jun 20, 2009 7:21 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
What?
Randy Moss was a huge reason the 2007 Patriots were the best offense of all time, and a larger reason why Matt Cassel looked competent last season.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
Best offense, but no ring
Nothing against Moss (who’s a near HoF lock), but the point I was making is that having a superstar WR doesn’t guarantee you a championship. Mind you, Moss has been a model citizen, something you can’t say about Marshall. And for what Denver may be asking to move him(I’ve heard a 1 and a three, or a high pick and decent players), he’d have to be a model citizen, two #1 picks in our possession or not.
Okay.
But having a superstar anything doesn’t guarantee you a championship, either.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 20, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I totally agree. Hence my being against this idea of Marshall. There are more pressing needs (secondary, o-line depth, consistent pass rush) that we need to jump back into contender status.
So the logic is that having a superstar doesn’t guarantee a Super Bowl, so that’s why I don’t want one?
There’s a flaw here.
Also, saying there are more pressing needs is kind of a fallacy in and of itself. If I need food, and I need water more, that doesn’t mean that I’m going to wait to eat until I get something to drink. Needing to improve in one area more doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t also be improving elsewhere.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 21, 2009 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess the argument is that you can only devote so many resources to just one position. Sort of economics thing – maximum allocation of resources or the law of diminishing returns – the more resources you keep spending on one position, the less the resources are being utilized to their maximum potential – sure, we could keep trying to improve our receiving corps more and more (Crabtree, Bruce, Morgan, Hill, etc. is pretty strong as it is), heck, at the moment, we could technically acquire both Plaxico Burress and Brandon Marshall.
But, if our offensive line can’t hold up long enough for the QB to make it to the WRs, or if our secondary keeps letting other offenses riddle it with holes, well … Our 2 WRs could be Larry Fitzgerald and Randy Moss and we’d still be losing too many games.
I personally would like to see some more of our financial resources invested long term into the offensive line and the secondary. We have some short term solutions for this season that will hopefully work (D. Bly, M. Smith), but if we have to use any more resources let’s keep working on our weaknesses.
and oh yeah, I agree with the general sentiment here – Josh Morgan is underrated
"Those boos really motivate me to make something happen." - Bonds
Well, I think for me I’m looking at it like we actually have quite a bit of money to allocate. Crabtree will be the only receiver making a serious paycheck this season. We don’t have a ton of money tied up in our running backs or in our quarterbacks. Off the top of my head, our big contracts right now belong to to Clements, Justin Smith, Patrick Willis… uhhh… TBC might be making more than he should be… Staley just got a nice contract… maybe Marvel Smith(?)…
I mean, there’s a lot of money that could be allocated to a lot of places. I don’t think that – if you’re confident in the long-term results – putting good money into a receiver is going to stop us from being able to money in places of greater need.
I guess, simply put, I think we have enough to spread around. I’m not saying spend it on stupid things, and I’m not endorsing Marshall specifically (I think the risk comes pretty close to outweighing the reward), BUT speaking in generalities only, we do have plenty of cap room.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 22, 2009 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions
TBC?
Why do we care if the Patriots are paying TBC more than he’s worth?
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 23, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions
But you can't only think about this season.
Morgan is going to be due for an extension fairly soon. So is Staley. So is Willis.
If you look at the cap and say “we have $15, let’s go sign a bunch of FAs!” then in two years you find yourself having to let players go who you want to keep.
Now, if the 49ers were in a position to win a super bowl this year, maybe that’s a sacrifice you make. But we’re not … so the team needs to be thinking 2, 3, 4 years ahead when it comes to the cap.
by Ronaldinho on Jun 23, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
Since the discussion above has concerned the Yorks’ leadership, if there’s one thing I like about it, it’s that they’ve learned from Eddie D’s mistakes and think this way about the cap.
Also, I think that $15M FA pot is going to shrink substantially after Staley’s contract’s signing bonus and after Crabtree gets signed. Crabtree is probably going to command about $15M (over 5) by himself.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
I think...
… Maiocco had a piece today saying that they’re $15M under INCLUDING Staley’s bumped up salary cap hit this year (original bonus + large chunk of future bonus + base).
+1
You never want to spend money for the sole sake of spending money. Unless of course your Montgomery Brewster. It’s my opinion that if Morgan develops like everybody hopes that the Niners will have more than enough money tied up in WR between him, Crabtree and co.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 23, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, like I said, I wasn’t saying to spend it on stupid things or throw it around willy nilly. I’m just saying that our cap space is pretty friendly right now and that dismissing an improvement for no other reason than there there are other places that could use it more isn’t really giving that cap space the credit it deserves.
I’ve been pretty careful to say that I’m not talking about Marshall, or even about any specific player. In fact, I’ve probably gotten myself in trouble by only talking about receivers here. Heck, we could be talking about a tight end or a running back or even a quarterback for the point I’m trying to make, which is a very general one: If you have money to spend and can legitimately improve your team by spending money at a position, regardless of whether or not it is your position of greatest need, you should think long and hard about it. Now, obviously, if the improvement isn’t going to be significant, then there’s no point.
I don’t have any ideas in mind. I’m just a little sick of people essentially saying “don’t sign ANYBODY unless he can get sacks or interceptions.” Because having one dire need doesn’t mean that you don’t also have other needs.
In terms of the receiver position, we don’t have anybody on the team right now who would be the top guy on most every other team in the league. Our receivers are better than they’ve been in a long, long time, but we really have to have both Crabtree and Morgan develop into very fine players to make WR a position that isn’t in need. I see nothing wrong with getting a legit #1 guy if we can. The reality is that there isn’t really anybody available who fits that description. But I’m trying to speak in strictly general terms.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 23, 2009 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Crabtree
He’s going to get paid like a top WR and I do see an issue with paying two WR top WR money in a run first offense. I don’t think the Niners have passed on many opputurnities to add quality FA because their price was too high. It’s better to wait and hold onto your money until the right guys become FA and then spend your money on them. The thing that’s important to remember is that since 1 year deals aren’t routinely signed by quality players that what ever FA you sign in ’09 are going to have a significant impact on who you can sign in ’10, ’11 and beyond.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 24, 2009 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions
I don’t think the Niners have passed on many opputurnities to add quality FA because their price was too high.
This. There just haven’t been many players that would have for sure made any significant improvement over what the 49ers have in free agency this year, at least not as many as many people have implied there to be.
The problem is ...
… again, that spending money ALWAYS has a cost. You say that it’s not about whether we have other positions of need but it has to be.
The team has limited resources. If it commits too many to one position, then it will struggle to find adequate players at others. You seem to be intentionally ignoring this.
There is plenty of reason to be optimistic about Crabtree and Morgan. Are they certain stars? No, of course not. But when you have two good young players with loads of potential at a position, doesn’t it make sense to figure out what you have before adding an expensive player at that position?
Adding another WR would – in addition to being redundant if they pan out – actually make it harder to figure out what we have in them.
I’ve done an extremely poor job of representing my opinion here. I think the points you’re making are very salient and that the way I’ve been expressing myself has been almost irrevocably flawed. Rather than backtrack and stumble over myself, I’ll say that I do understand everything you’re saying and that while our opinions differ on some small points, the comments I’ve made to this point have been too narrow-minded.
Like I’ve said, this whole thing started because I don’t believe that “we can’t improve at all over here because we have to improve more over there” is a valid reason for not spending money. I think that’s lazy reasoning, and I still believe that to be true. When it comes to the 49ers receivers, all of the best reasons I’ve seen, and many of the reasons that you’ve laid out, don’t have anything to do with any other positions of need. Instead of saying “we can’t get a receiver because we need a defensive lineman more,” you’re saying, “we shouldn’t sign a receiver because it wouldn’t be fiscally sound,” or “we shouldn’t sign a receiver because it would stunt the development of Morgan and Crabtree.” Those are not examples of lazy reasoning, in my opinion.
The problem with my comments here has always been that I’ve been trying to show why we should sign a receiver, when that’s not a particularly defensible position. Again, I won’t backtrack over what I said. I said it and a lot of it was wrong. I just should have been saying something else instead if I wanted to actually make the point I had in mind.
What I should have been saying is that I don’t like seeing half-baked reasoning, even when the conclusion is basically correct. And I do understand that the conclusion that we shouldn’t be actively pursuing a receiver is essentially correct. The reason that “we need x more” is half-baked, and doesn’t support the conclusion.
So consider this a retraction and a revision. Yes, I was wrong. But hopefully this represents my ideas a little better.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 24, 2009 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions
So basically....
Instead of saying, “your reasoning is bad and this is why your reasoning is bad,” I’ve been saying “your reasoning is bad and this is why it makes your conclusion wrong.”
Which is a bad way to go when the conclusion is more or less not wrong. And which deserved the criticism it got.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 24, 2009 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Because it has as little to do with the position you’re actually talking about as virtually anything else and because you can use it to argue against virtually any move you want. It requires an extremely small amount of context and it covers an extremely broad base.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 25, 2009 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
It's a philosophical distinction ...
It seems to me that there are two approaches to building a team, and the difference explains why you think that comment is lazy thinking.
One approach is (oversimplified): “If you can improve the team NOW, do it. Sort out next year next year.”
The other approach is: “We’re a few years away. Make moves that you’re sure you’re going to be happy with in three years, and maintain flexibility so that when a great move is available, you can make it.”
I hold the second philosophy. Brandon Marshall might be the best move we could make to improve the team RIGHT NOW (although it might not be), but I’m willing to bet that in 2-3 years we would rather spend those resources on other positions.
Which positions? Well, that depends. But I’m willing to bet, for example, that in two years we’re going to need to spend some resources on RT. Probably on FS and CB. But the truth is, it almost doesn’t matter. We’re going to learn things about this team this year, and what we learn will reveal needs that we don’t currently know about. Since acquiring a player like Marshall doesn’t turn us into a super bowl contender, in my opinion it doesn’t matter what those specific needs are. We KNOW they will exist.
Even at his best, and with Cutler as his QB…what has Denver won lately?
um … go take a look at the Denver Defense last year, and come back
"Those boos really motivate me to make something happen." - Bonds
It's a trap!
You can’t come back from something like that. At least… not whole…
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Jun 22, 2009 9:35 PM PDT up reply actions
for once
WRs are not what we need:
Isaac Bruce – veteran experience
Michael Crabtree – “the rookie”
Josh Morgan – the vastly improving second year player with something to prove
Jason Hill – one of shaun hill’s favorite targets
Arnaz Battle – he’s there when we need him
Dominique Zeigler – up and coming reciever
I’d say were pretty set. and if we were to get any WRs, i definitely wouldnt want the troublesome marshall. or burress for that matter
by nhlogan on Jun 30, 2009 4:00 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Niners Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Peyton Manning’s face on all 32 NFL logos
- Todd Haley could be in for a bumpy ride in Pittsburgh
- Alex Smith caddied for Jim Harbaugh at AT&T Pro-Am
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
