Chiefs cornerback Marcus Peters’ frustration following the Chiefs’ 38-31 loss to the New York Jets didn’t end immediately after the game, it appears.
According to a report by NFL Network’s Mike Garafalo, Peters also had a verbal altercation with an assistant coach on the bus during the team’s ride to airport following the game. The assistant coach was not named.
The Star reported Thursday that Peters’ suspension was related to his decision to leave the field prematurely following the flag toss. The club viewed that as a team issue, as opposed to the penalty flag toss, which it deemed a league issue that Peters was ultimately fined $24,409 for on Friday.
The NFL Network report cited Peters’ decision to leave the field as a reason for the one-game suspension coach Andy Reid levied on him earlier this week, with the verbal altercation also being a contributing factor.
The Chiefs still had a little over two minutes left to tie the game, and Peters returned to the sideline –– albeit with no socks –– as the offense made its last-gasp attempt. But the drive stalled out, and the Chiefs lost for the sixth time in seven games.
Peters’ suspension means the Oakland native will miss the Chiefs’ showdown Sunday against his hometown Raiders. He was not allowed to practice this week and will forfeit a game check. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good:
Peters is a playmaker and someone who can single handedly win you games. I would be fucking pissed if we traded him. He's obviously a bit of a headcase at times, but i tend to think he will mature a bit as he ages. He's still so young and really has potential still untapped. Unless you are getting a kings ransom I simply would not trade him.
This is the correct take. Trading a player because he's young and doesn't jive with your "mild, genteel Chiefs"- program is utter bullshit. If you want a locker room full of hypocrisy clothed in "character", attend a fucking FCA meeting and leave the professional talent the fuck alone. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
If the Chiefs are intent on trading him, I'm sure they'll take the highest bidder, as long as it's not in the division
I just see this as a huge mistake. He’s still under control for two years before the franchise tag ability. I’ll trust Andy and Veach on this because now that we have Mahomes, I’m not tied to players like I used to be. But they better get a ton of value. [Reply]
I mean theoretically KC could trade Peters and sign Trumaine Johnson. That’s robbing peter to pay Paul but we’ll see what happens. It’s heating up for sure. Not thrilled but I’ll trust the evaluators right now. [Reply]
I don't see how we would possibly get full value back for him. In 2 years won't we have plenty of cap room? I really don't like this idea at all. I guess I don't know the true locker room impact but I don't perceive it as an issue. Seemed like he said and did the right things after his suspension. [Reply]
This reads like offseason clickbait, but I'm in the school that anyone is available for the right price.
If they don't intend to sign Peters to a massive deal while they are still going to be paying Houston's massive deal and Berry's massive deal, then they would be right to flip him for picks now. [Reply]
It would take a 1st round + to get the conversation started. Probably worth 2 first rounders depending on the picks. I'm ok with trading peters though. Like the player but dislike the person.
The team still controls him for 2 seasons considering the 5th year option. He's a top 5 CB when he wants to be. One of the best playmakers to have played the position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
If Clark Hunt has no intention of signing Peters to a long term deal, they're going to take what they can get.
If he does get traded, my guess is that it’s Clark’s decision. And I hate that. Because if Clark is the reason they get rid of him, it likely means it’s purely about business and politics. Fuck that. This guy is a game changer unlike any defender in football right now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
If he does get traded, my guess is that it’s Clark’s decision. And I hate that. Because if Clark is the reason they get rid of him, it likely means it’s purely about business and politics. Fuck that. This guy is a game changer unlike any defender in football right now.
You can't have your cake and eat it too in this case. You want to win? You draft and/or sign winners. Going the opposite direction is futile.
Frankly, I think we're all getting worked up about nothing. As Staylor has said, until we hear something from someone local and trusted, this is off season traffic-generation. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Claysexual:
You can't have your cake and eat it too in this case. You want to win? You draft and/or sign winners. Going the opposite direction is futile.
Frankly, I think we're all getting worked up about nothing. As Staylor has said, until we hear something from someone local and trusted, this is off season traffic-generation.
Yes, so why trade Peters over anything to do with business and/or politics? If the order comes from Clark, you can be sure that is the major reason why. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
Yes, so why trade Peters over anything to do with business and/or politics? If the order comes from Clark, you can be sure that is the major reason why.
I'm tellin' ya man, Clark Hunt will have a problem paying $18 million for Marcus Peters. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
I'm tellin' ya man, Clark Hunt will have a problem paying $18 million for Marcus Peters.
I can totally see it. I just think it’s a big mistake if you aren’t getting his true value in return.
Even if we were able to get a couple of other defensive starters in the draft through a trade, the odds that either impact games like Peters is quite slim.
Odds are he will mature more as the years pass, and he’s a major spark for our team. Wouldn’t get rid of that guy just yet. [Reply]