The Bears Offseason Thread

[goonys evil twin]

I'm really getting annoyed at the media talking about the franchise tag like it's a bad thing that is unfair. First off, it was agreed upon in negotiation. Second of all, it gives a player significant guaranteed money, and a chance to hit free agency again in one year.

 

If a guy ends up having a great career, he can actually make more with the franchise system than otherwise. The only ones who are hurt are the guys who get hurt and can't come back. But even those guys would be in similar boats with or without the system, because if they get hurt to the point of being worthless, teams will negotiate injury settlements and they won't see all of that big contract. I understand why a player would prefer to sign taht contract now instead of later, but there is nothing unfair about the system. Guys get paid for performance in the NFL, it's the ultimate in fair pay for sports.

[Soriano12]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

[goonys evil twin]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

[RichHillIsABeast]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

At this point I don't even want him back next season. I empathized with his situation going into the offseason, but so far he's handled it without class.

 

If I publicly roasted my employer like that, I'd get fired.

[CubColtPacer]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

At this point I don't even want him back next season. I empathized with his situation going into the offseason, but so far he's handled it without class.

 

If I publicly roasted my employer like that, I'd get fired.

 

Unfortunately, in this case that's exactly what Briggs wants-to be fired.

[Soriano12]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

Briggs is more valuable than a mid-to-late 2nd rounder. Late 1st round or very early 2nd round (or late 2nd rounder from Minnesota with Chad Greenway)

[goonys evil twin]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

At this point I don't even want him back next season. I empathized with his situation going into the offseason, but so far he's handled it without class.

 

If I publicly roasted my employer like that, I'd get fired.

 

I don't see the point in talking about how this would work at our jobs. Briggs is doing this for a reason. He wants the Bears to just let him go. He wants the fans to let him go, because that would help him the most. It would not be what is best for the Bears, however. Giving him away would simply vindicate Briggs' outbursts. It would be giving in to his demands and would just cause more players to try it.

[goonys evil twin]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

[Soriano12]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

 

or 6, draft A linebacker in X round and not miss a beat.

 

Tommie Harris, Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, those are the jugguarants on this defense, not Lance Briggs.

[rawaction]

The Bears don't have to trade Briggs. Like I said, a guy who hasn't made $1M in any single season to this point is not gonna give away $7.2M out of spite. He'll play. Heck, if he doesn't he's probably throwing away a chance at a big payday next year. I'm sure he can make more money by playing next year, than by taking a chance someone will guarantee him a whole bunch of money when he hasn't played in over a year.

 

The Bears shouldn't settle for less than a 1st and 2nd/high 3rd rounder this year. Or 1st this year and 2nd next year. No matter what Briggs says, the Bears don't have their backs against the wall. They have 100% of the leverage here.

Edited March 13, 2007 by rawaction

[goonys evil twin]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

 

or 6, draft A linebacker in X round and not miss a beat.

 

Tommie Harris, Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, those are the jugguarants on this defense, not Lance Briggs.

 

Mike Brown? Briggs is much more integral than Brown. You're talking about giving away an asset, and that's just not smart. The Bears have to do what's best for the Bears, which does not have to jive with what's best for fans who are annoyed at greedy players.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

 

I'd go with #5.

[rawaction]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

 

or 6, draft A linebacker in X round and not miss a beat.

 

Tommie Harris, Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, those are the jugguarants on this defense, not Lance Briggs.

 

Mike Brown? He's in no way more important than Briggs.

[Soul]

Trouble is, now that Briggs has made the situation public and nasty, teams will really try to fleece us in a trade.

 

To hell with that. Actually, to hell with Briggs. Let him rot. Don't want to play, PLUS want to ruin our chances to get value for you? Fine, sit and wither away at home while real men play football.

 

If I were Angelo, I'd let Briggs sit all year, then franchise him again next year.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Soul

[Soriano12]

You're talking about giving away an asset, and that's just not smart.

 

Trading an assest for a draft pick. Our GM has been pretty good with 2nd picks of late.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I'd take a 2nd rounder right now for Briggs, in a heartbeat.

 

Not me. I'd definitely need more.

Maybe the 1st pick in the 2nd round, but definitely not some mid-2nd rounder. I'd have to get a 2008 pick thrown in.

 

You have to consider the market, the Bears have to find a team that

 

1) Needs a WILL linebacker(or MLB, he could defineltly slide over)

2) Will pay 6+ million for one(Briggs expected contract demands)

3) Will pay this money for a LB with marginal pass rush skills

4) Will be willing to give up a high draft pick

 

 

If Briggs was still under contract for few more years a trade would be easier.

 

Or 5) Keep a player that's far more valuable than a 2nd round pick.

 

or 6, draft A linebacker in X round and not miss a beat.

 

Tommie Harris, Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, those are the jugguarants on this defense, not Lance Briggs.

 

Don't forget Ian Scott, Todd Johnson, and that dude in the 3rd row who paints his face and yells really loud.

[Soriano12]

Mike Brown? He's in no way more important than Briggs.

 

I noticed a pattern the past two seasons...Mike Brown goes down, this D goes south....

[goonys evil twin]

Lance is on ESPN right now, rehashing his case.

 

He's pushing up the "they have no intention of signing me" angle. Right now, that's the only beef I'd have with the Bears as far as what they've done. I'm guessing they are just waiting to start negotiations. If they truly never make any sort of offer or talk about a deal at all, then I'll be annoyed with them. But so far I don't have a problem with the Bears, despite Wilbon's claim that they've screwed up a lot of things already this offseason.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

You're talking about giving away an asset, and that's just not smart.

 

Trading an assest for a draft pick. Our GM has been pretty good with 2nd picks of late.

 

Except that asset is worth a first round draft pick. I'd keep him if I can't get a first round pick, he'll eventually play rather than hold out.

[rawaction]

Mike Brown? He's in no way more important than Briggs.

 

I noticed a pattern the past two seasons...Mike Brown goes down, this D goes south....

 

I noticed Mike Brown goes down, Bears finish with best record in NFC twice and go to Superbowl once.

[Banedon]

Mike Brown? He's in no way more important than Briggs.

 

I noticed a pattern the past two seasons...Mike Brown goes down, this D goes south....

 

I noticed Mike Brown goes down, Bears finish with best record in NFC twice and go to Superbowl once.

 

I would say Tommie Harris had much more to do with the defensive struggles at the end of the year than Mike Brown. Mike Brown's injury only hurt us so far as the safety was one of the weakest areas depth-wise. So long as safety is something addressed in the draft, Mike Brown isn't a huge issue.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

I noticed Mike Brown goes down, Bears finish with best record in NFC twice and go to Superbowl once.

 

Seattle had the best record in the NFC in 2005. I personally think a healthy Mike Brown is more important to the defense than Lance Briggs. Thats more an appreciation of Mike Brown then a knock on Briggs.

[goonys evil twin]

Mike Brown? He's in no way more important than Briggs.

 

I noticed a pattern the past two seasons...Mike Brown goes down, this D goes south....

 

I noticed Mike Brown goes down, Bears finish with best record in NFC twice and go to Superbowl once.

 

I would say Tommie Harris had much more to do with the defensive struggles at the end of the year than Mike Brown. Mike Brown's injury only hurt us so far as the safety was one of the weakest areas depth-wise. So long as safety is something addressed in the draft, Mike Brown isn't a huge issue.

 

That being said, I'd like to see them keep Brown this season. I see no need to cut him for what little cap space he'll provide, especially if they aren't after any big free agents.

[goonys evil twin]

I noticed Mike Brown goes down, Bears finish with best record in NFC twice and go to Superbowl once.

 

Seattle had the best record in the NFC in 2005. I personally think a healthy Mike Brown is more important to the defense than Lance Briggs. Thats more an appreciation of Mike Brown then a knock on Briggs.

 

A healthy Brown isn't a real thing. He might be some what healthy in 2007, but the odds of him returning in 2008 are slim and none. Briggs can provide much more longterm value to the team.