Chiefs weren’t prepared to commit long-term to Marcus Peters, obviously

Getty Images

For the second time this month, an effort to fulfill one of our primary objectives — to share with anyone interested in the NFL information regarding the things we hear from people we trust about topics people in the NFL are discussing — was met with cries of #fakenews! and not-so-subtle suggestions of flat-out fabrication. For the second time this month, the facts ultimately confirmed the accuracy of what we were hearing.

But even if Josh McDaniels hadn’t jilted the Colts or if the Chiefs hadn’t traded cornerback Marcus Peters, that wouldn’t have changed the fact that we were hearing those rumors from people we trust. And it should serve as a reminder to anyone who wants to doubt what we write that: (1) we’re not making it up; (2) we’ve systematically built a network of people we trust over the past 17 years; and (3) if you want to learn what we’re hearing about things that could happen (not necessarily will happen, but could) you should bookmark this page and visit it every day, multiple times throughout the day.

People throughout the NFL do; owners, coaches, General Managers, scouts, front-office, employees, players, agents, media. That’s how we built the network. People we trust share information, trusting that we won’t compromise them.

Sure, you can wait to get the head’s up from someone else five minutes before the official announcement. Or you could actually be ahead of the curve, finding out about things that could happen well before they do and/or learning about potential developments at a time when the teams or players involved don’t want anyone to know about it.

As to the Peters trade, it’s now clear that the Chiefs opted to flip Peters in lieu of exercising the fifth-year option (due on May 3) or signing him to a long-term deal. It also suggests that there were plenty of things happening well beyond the incidents that culminated in a one-game team-imposed suspension in 2017.

We haven’t heard any specifics (yet) about the specific reasons for Kansas City’s decision to cut the cord on Peters. If/when we do, we’ll share it. And someone undoubtedly will dismiss it as FAKE NEWS!

25 responses to “Chiefs weren’t prepared to commit long-term to Marcus Peters, obviously

  1. Many Vikings fans were upset that the Vikes took Waynes instead of Peters in the 2015 draft. Now that doesn’t look quite so stupid, as it is obvious that Peters is just as much trouble now as he was in his college days. You can’t blame the Vikings hierarchy for wanting to avoid the Peters the head case with their 1st round pick.

  2. Wasn’t he part of the 21-3 debacle at home? Remember when they were up 21-3 over the Titans, at home, in the playoffs? Yet it turned out to be another one and done for the Dallas Texans.. 21-3, geez

  3. Coming out of Washington, his scouting report was that he was as talented as in cb in the draft, but that he was a head case. So, live and learn for the Chiefs.

  4. I as a Viking fan i wanted Peters! He is a much better Corner than Waynes but when you suspended Waynes is a much better player because hes on the field. Peter was know to be a head case guess second chances and loads of money doesn’t change you outlook. Good Luck in LA

  5. Trae Waynes vs was then and is now, still a no-brainer.

    Peters nickname should be ‘toast’. He takes too many gambles. Sure it pays off but there’s a time and a place for it. Not every moment.

    Peters was a loose cannon in college. Still is. Will probably always be. Mental illness or mental midget. Your choice.

    PS: I now have to hear this STUPID term “FakeNews” for the rest of my life. The Trump base are some of the dumbest people on the planet.

  6. Trae Waynes is not the CB Marcus Peters is. Not close. Trae Waynes has had one good season on a VERY good defense. To even think he is on Peters level is just silly and is really pointless in this conversation.

  7. Everybody calm down. Marcus Peters was the 18th pick in the first round. All three years he was a top 5 CB who forced turnovers making game changing plays. Everybody knew he was a headcase, that’s why he was picked 18th not in the top 5. They got high level production from him for three years and managed the personality. They grew tired of it and got something in exchange for him. Would you rather have 3 years of Peters and get something for him OR ended up with Cameron Erving, Cedric Ogbeuhi, Phillip Dorsett, or Stephone Anthony? Like I said, calm down. He wasn’t a bust. The Chiefs could have done much worse in 2015.

  8. What about, ‘Colts make it official on McDaniel’. Or, ‘McDaniel to follow through with the Colts’?

  9. Realizing the main purpose here was to do your self-congratulation schtick, I wonder if you could take time to tell us why the Chiefs needed to activate the team fifth-year option on Peter’s rookie contract before the beginning of his fourth year.

  10. A broken clock is right twice a day. Throw enough crap at the wall, something sticks eventually. Golf clap…

  11. bleedingfacemask says:
    February 23, 2018 at 2:23 pm
    I used to think that the fakenews thing was just a fad that would get old and fade away after a few months. Now it seems to be a religion…
    It’s not a fad, it’s a strategy. The goal is to alter American culture, so as to eliminate the once widely held notion of an established fact. This is the clearest example of how our democracy is under attack, by enemies foreign and domestic.

  12. So they traded a locker room cancer who completely vanished in the second half of that playoff game. Good move

  13. LOL! Ok, NOW I’ve seen everything… patting yourself on the back to say how connected you are to show how you’re able to scoop everyone BEFORE you have any actual information to share. Just… wow!

  14. Peters takes to many chances that cause him to give up way to many receptions and yards, until he can lock a guy down say Patrick Peterson who ranked #1 giving up the fewest yards, receptions, and receptions per coverage snap, he wont be considered in that elite top 3 cornerback tier. It would help if he actually traveled and covered #1 WR’s full time like other top cb’s, then we will see how good he really is.

  15. tedmurph says:
    February 23, 2018 at 3:33 pm
    What about, ‘Colts make it official on McDaniel’. Or, ‘McDaniel to follow through with the Colts’?

    The Colts DID declare it official so the sports reporting was accurate to report that they had. The sports reporters also reported when the info came out that once again Luck was not as far along as the Colts were saying and did pick up that McDaniels was rethinking after that news came out. A lot of people said at the time they were wrong. But they were not. And even if those people were surprised when those stories proved true you cant say the sports reporters were not on top of it just because folks didnt believe them.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.