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 arrwheader:
Well the Chiefs would have a blockbuster fleece trade in their favor then dump the best CB in the league for a draft pick or something stupid because Chiefs. However, my instincts say this is bullshit. La canfora is speculating in a slow news period.
This. Total speculation. I'll wait until we hear some names associated with "I keep hearing." [Reply]
No ones giving up a big haul. First there’s the question of why are you willing to trade away a young star on a rookie deal and then we also have to give him a big deal upon trading for him?
Originally Posted by O.city:
No ones giving up a big haul. First there’s the question of why are you willing to trade away a young star on a rookie deal and then we also have to give him a big deal upon trading for him?
Not likely
Probably because you know he won’t resign and/or the organization doesn’t want to pay him huge money with so many questions/character concerns.
Maybe Veach knows that Peters won’t be here soon, so why let him go for a 3rd rd comp when you can get something better now? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Probably because you know he won’t resign and/or the organization doesn’t want to pay him huge money with so many questions/character concerns.
Maybe Veach knows that Peters won’t be here soon, so why let him go for a 3rd rd comp when you can get something better now?
Is a 2nd now better than two more years of Peters and a 3rd?
And if this is really the case, why would another team give up a haul for a guy with so many problems [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Is a 2nd now better than two more years of Peters and a 3rd?
And if this is really the case, why would another team give up a haul for a guy with so many problems
This is a deep corner class. Some very good ones can be had. I think we should acknowledge that first.
IF this report true, it means that Peters is not good for the locker room and he’s not good for our team. It can’t really mean anything else at this point.
It could mean many things, but his 5th year option is coming and I think it’s fair to see why this franchise would not commit any kind of deal money to him. [Reply]
We aren't trading Peters. Top 3 at his position on a rookie deal. We have him cheap next year, will exercise his fifth year option then either franchise or sign to a long term deal. He's here for three more years min. This is Florio drumming up clicks in a dead period [Reply]