« Dolphins taking two-pronged approach to QB issue | Main | Flynn to visit Seattle hoping to increase market value »

Brandon Marshall in another nightclub fracas

Something happened at the Chelsea nightclub that has Brandon Marshall again at the heart of a legal problem and perhaps in the sights of the NFL's personal conduct policy.

More details are necessary but if you trust the New York Post account, Marshall apparently punched a woman at 4 a.m. Monday after he was kicked out of the Marquee Club. The report says Marshall was involved in a fight with another football player who were thrown out.

Christin Myles then headed out of the club and allegedly got punched by Marshall who meant to to hit someone else.

Marshall's lawyer, Harvey Steinberg, released a statement that does not specifically address the allegation that Marshall hit anyone.

"On March 12, 2012 Brandon Marshall was the keynote speaker at a charitable event in New York. After the event was over he, his wife and close friends attended a function at a local club. While at the function a fight broke out NOT involving Mr. Marshall or his friends. While attempting to leave to avoid the melee Mrs. Marshall was struck in the face by a thrown bottle. She suffered serious injury.

While attempting to leave and take his wife to the hospital, the mayhem continued outside. Finally Mr. Marshall was able to take his wife to the hospital where she was treated for serious injuries. Mr. MArshall is hoping to assist authorities in regards to this matter."

Some thoughts:

1. Obviously there was a ton of criticism of the Dolphins Tuesday for trading Marshall to the Bears for two third-round picks considering he cost the team two second-round picks only two years ago. If, and I stress if, the Dolphins knew of Marshall's most recent trouble then it wasn't such a terrible trade. If the Dolphins were ignorant about the fight, then it is fair to say they gave Marshall away in desperation.

2. Conversely, if the Bears knew of Marshall's most recent trouble, they made a gamble move for what seems like a relatively fair price for an Alpha wide receiver that is troubled. If they made the move not knowing of the allegations, they must have thought they ripped off the Dolphins.

3. If the Bears did not know, the possibility of whether this trouble could cause the Bears to request a cancellation of the trade must be addressed. Doesn't mean the Bears will definitely want to cancel the trade, but until they say one way or another, it is an issue.

[Update: Bears GM Phil Emery released a statement on Brandon Marshall: "Both the Bears and Dolphins were aware of what occurred over the weekend. We decided to move forward with the trade. We have high expectations for Brandon as a Bear]

The trade stands.

4. That long-ago acquisition of Marshall? The one meant to "get the team over the top?" It failed to do what it was meant to accomplish. The move will go down in Dolphins history as a reach and a gamble and just another example of the team not being able to identify, draft and develop its own players, thus causing them to have to go outside for players with questionable histories (conduct) or situations (health).


5. I admit that after being vehemently against the Marshall acquisition in 2010 (check the archives) and even calling for his trade at least twice, I warmed to Marshall late last season. I felt sympathy for his Borderline Personality Disorder struggle. I also wanted to believe his recent commitment to attending church might be positive for him. Well, I was fooled.

6. If he is suspended, whatever team that has his rights -- the Bears if the trade sticks, the Dolphins if he returns -- will have the right to dock $6 million from his $9.3 million salary in 2012. That per the contract he signed with Miami in 2010.

7. This trade was obviously and clearly NOT a move meant as the first shoe dropping on the acquisition of Peyton Manning. Had NOTHING to do with potentially acquiring Manning. Zero. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

8. Yesterday I asked a source why this Marshall trade. "Be patient. You'll see," was the answer. Now we see.