Buffalo Barbarian Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 You can't. No team in their right mind would eat that contract the way he's been playing combined with his off-the-field issues. Don't bring logic into this
Numark3 Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Yes he makes us better but so did Sammy, trade the bum. That's a fine opinion. Like I said, there are a million things you can complain about marcell for, him making the team not better isn't one of them.
bobobonators Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 I'd still rather have him than not. I wish his desire matched his talent. Agreed.
Agent 91 Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 It was. They gave up 4.8 YPC today. undoubtedly the best two wrs they played so far this year. we had to play honest. and 1 run was for 32 yards. it wasnt as bad as it seems looking at the stats Let's not forget Denver has a great running game and they didn't run all over us either. Truth
Agent 91 Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Of course this defense is better when he is on the field with his head on straight. But make no mistake, he's been a colossal bust since his big contract. He has been nowhere near worth what he is being paid and has been a huge disappointment. Because of his ridiculous contract (Thanks Whaley) he is stuck with us for the next couple years, I think. Hopefully the old Dareus that we knew comes back because if he does, then this defense will be elite. Don't mean to argue but how is his contract ridiculous. He got McCoy, Suh money. He came off of a monster year. That was his going rate. Remember the epic despair the fan base felt when the deal didnt happen right away. Had we not resigned him, the masses would have called for the mans head. The contract... to me, is not ridiculous. Signed a non-Dareus believer
Sky Diver Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 No morality clause as far as I know. The guy is a bone head. There should have been an out.
Magox Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Don't mean to argue but how is his contract ridiculous. He got McCoy, Suh money. He came off of a monster year. That was his going rate. Remember the epic despair the fan base felt when the deal didnt happen right away. Had we not resigned him, the masses would have called for the mans head. The contract... to me, is not ridiculous. Signed a non-Dareus believer Has he been worth his contract value or anywhere near it? And yes he did have a really good year before he signed but good organizations sometimes have to make tough unpopular decisions to do what's best for the team. Whaley got skittish and overvalued him much like he has with others as well (Sammy). Whaley is a good talent evaluator but he certainly didn't know how to value that talent.
Rob's House Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Don't mean to argue but how is his contract ridiculous. He got McCoy, Suh money. He came off of a monster year. That was his going rate. Remember the epic despair the fan base felt when the deal didnt happen right away. Had we not resigned him, the masses would have called for the mans head. The contract... to me, is not ridiculous. Signed a non-Dareus believer The guaranteed money is what makes it ridiculous. A guy with maturity issues should be given a lot of incentives. Whaley gave him the carrot and the stick.
Bills Fan of St Augustine Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Never understand why we bash our players so much thru the years. Gilmore, Watkins, Lynch, Byrd and the list goes on and on. Having a healthy Dareus in this line up only makes it better. The guy is a stud when healthy. And when he seems motivated to be a stud which isn't every game or even every play.
BringBackOrton Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Would Marcel have value thrown into a trade up for a QB pick?
Magox Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Would Marcel have value thrown into a trade up for a QB pick? Not the way he's been playing. He would need to begin living in the opponents backfield before that could even be a possibility. His contract is what makes it tough.
BringBackOrton Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 (edited) Not the way he's been playing. He would need to begin living in the opponents backfield before that could even be a possibility. His contract is what makes it tough. I don't mean a deal breaker. But a net positive who some coach thinks they can salvage type thing. Like when a good player who underperformed gets traded for a 6th? Edited September 25, 2017 by jmc12290
Magox Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 I don't mean a deal breaker. But a net positive who some coach thinks they can salvage type thing. Like when a good player who underperformed gets traded for a 6th?I don't know, like I always say all it takes is one team to make it happen.
SaviorPeterman Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 I really think Dareus is going to have to be lights out when he returns if there is any slim chance he's back with this team in 2018. He has a golden opportunity to earn his salary next week on the road against a SB team.
TheFunPolice Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Things going well might motivate him
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 Jamal Charles was an issue. Surprised they didn't keep feeding him. He was running up and down on us. Marcella a huge difference maker. Not even a question. I was surprised too. That said, some really suspect no-calls on holds on some of those Charles runs (like the TD run).
BobDVA Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 I am confident that the same people that want us to get rid of Dareus are the same as those that wanted us to get rid of Lynch back in the day.
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 It was. They gave up 4.8 YPC today. It was a mixed bag. They were gashed I think 3 times for big runs that raised that average to 4.8 All in all though I thought it was good though because pretty much 90% of the carries went for 2 yards.
Scott7975 Posted September 25, 2017 Posted September 25, 2017 It was a mixed bag. They were gashed I think 3 times for big runs that raised that average to 4.8 All in all though I thought it was good though because pretty much 90% of the carries went for 2 yards. Exactly. Said this three times today.
Recommended Posts