The Bears Offseason Thread

[Handlebar McSkullet]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

If the Raiders decide to sign David Carr, and go with Calvin Johnson for the #1 pick, and chance Russell would fall to #6?

 

I doubt it, but I think it very much makes it possible that Quinn is there.

[Chocolate Milk]

What do the Bears do with the 6th pick?

 

Scenarios seem to be:

 

a. They have a player targeted at the top of the draft who they expect will be there at #6 (Akobi, Landry, Willis)

 

b. They wait and see if Joe Thomas, Calvin Johnson, or even possibly Quinn slip to #6 and take him there.

 

c. They look to trade down almost immediately for more picks. I wonder if Houston would trade up to get Peterson if he is there, but they don't have much else to offer, picks-wise.

 

I would bet they wait, but eventually trade down.

 

Yeah, this is what I think they would do as well.

[Banedon]

If the Raiders decide to sign David Carr, and go with Calvin Johnson for the #1 pick, and chance Russell would fall to #6?

 

I doubt it, but I think it very much makes it possible that Quinn is there.

 

Yeah, I just like Russell better...but of course so do the other 5 teams at the top I'm guessing.... :P

[goonys evil twin]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

 

I didn't miss the point. The point is it's not very smart to let your best players walk just so you can fit into some arbitrary LB salary cap.

[texascub]

If the Raiders decide to sign David Carr, and go with Calvin Johnson for the #1 pick, and chance Russell would fall to #6?

 

I know Carr is from California, but if he willingly goes to Oakland with a worse O-line than Houston had then he truely had the sense beat out of him. Miami is clearly very interested and that would be a much better situation for him.

[rawaction]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

 

Congrats on a childish comeback. That's not necessary. His point was that you are worried about spending that much money at the LB position, when it's not just 1 person. They would be spending the money on 2 of the top 3 players on the defense, the strongest unit in the NFC. Whether they spend it on 1 LB and 1 DB doesn't make a difference, if they are spending on the DB who is a worse player than the LB. They both play at the same time. It's not like the Atlanta situation with Vick and Schaub where they could only play 1 of them.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

If the Raiders decide to sign David Carr, and go with Calvin Johnson for the #1 pick, and chance Russell would fall to #6?

 

I know Carr is from California, but if he willingly goes to Oakland with a worse O-line than Houston had then he truely had the sense beat out of him. Miami is clearly very interested and that would be a much better situation for him.

 

Plus the Miami team as a whole is in a much better place.

[CubColtPacer]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

 

Congrats on a childish comeback. That's not necessary. His point was that you are worried about spending that much money at the LB position, when it's not just 1 person. They would be spending the money on 2 of the top 3 players on the defense, the strongest unit in the NFC. Whether they spend it on 1 LB and 1 DB doesn't make a difference, if they are spending on the DB who is a worse player than the LB. They both play at the same time. It's not like the Atlanta situation with Vick and Schaub where they could only play 1 of them.

 

Actually, which position they spend it on makes a huge difference. Briggs position in that scheme is the most easily replaceable position. To pay big money to a player who could be replaced by a 4th-6th round pick after one year and get close to the same production (which has been done plenty of times in that scheme across the league) and losing an impact player on the defensive line for example would be a really bad scenario. People who can make an impact on the line are rare-weak side linebackers in the Cover 2 who can make a significant impact are not rare at all, so that position becomes one that should be one of your lower salary positions, not one of your higher salary positions.

[Soul]

 

I think what Briggs would be hoping for by holding out is choice #3: hold out, cause enough stress on the situation to force a trade, then sign a long-term deal with a huge signing bonus with the new team. Just like Ogunleye did with us.

 

That's not his choice. He can't force anything. The Bears have to choose to trade him.

 

I'm a figurative guy. 8-) I didn't literally mean "force" it. Just cause enough pressure that the organization gives up and does a trade.

 

Rosenhaus is also Ogunleye's agent. Is it really so hard to buy into the possibility that the same tactic is being employed here?

[Handlebar McSkullet]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

 

Congrats on a childish comeback. That's not necessary. His point was that you are worried about spending that much money at the LB position, when it's not just 1 person. They would be spending the money on 2 of the top 3 players on the defense, the strongest unit in the NFC. Whether they spend it on 1 LB and 1 DB doesn't make a difference, if they are spending on the DB who is a worse player than the LB. They both play at the same time. It's not like the Atlanta situation with Vick and Schaub where they could only play 1 of them.

 

I responded to an arrogant comment, at least it came off that way to me.(linebacker is one position in the context that cornerback and offensive lineman are one position) Im getting incredibly frustrated with the kind of arguing this subject is producing. Goony could have responded "I disagree, you cannot think of this in terms of allocating by position, you need to sign your best players." I wouldn't even have commented because I agree(I just think Tommy Harris is the least expendable, and if signing briggs means you cant sign harris...)

 

I am all for civil discussion, I.E. "I disagree". But everytime, and its been going on for the last month, I make the suggestion that the bears cannot allocate two much of their cap on one position "set". I get hostile responses, as if I dont like Briggs or I dont appreciate him, or undervalue. I love Briggs, he is a HOFer if he stays here. Signing him to what he wants is unrealistic, its fantasy, its child mentality(meaning that I want what I want at all costs, without thought to the future).

 

Since FA began, good teams have lost good players that didn't want to lose because they realize that they need to allocate their cap space to all of the positions. You think steeler or patriot fans would be arguing this to this extent. They lose player after player, good players, young players, because they recognize that the cap is everything. For Example, The pats didnt want to trade Deon Branch, im sure they would have loved to sign him for what he wanted, but that means they lose the ability to sign other players at different positions.

 

The Bears lost Rosey Colvin to free agency. He was arguably the second best player on defense. He was young, just entering his prime. The bears let him go, and put in his place a 3rd round pick, who most draft experts and scouts said was too slow and unathletic to be a difference maker. And here we are....

[rawaction]

The Bears have a lot of interesting decisions to make-they have drafted really well over the last few years, and that is going to cause the dilemma. Taking a quick look at the roster, in the next 2-3 years starters such as Briggs, Berrian, Tommie Harris, Tillman, Vasher, and Benson will all want to be compensated. The Bears won't be able to keep nearly all of them, especially since Grossman is either going to get a big deal after 1 year or 2 years if they pick up the club option or else the Bears will bring in somebody else to play QB and give them a big deal. It's going to be very interesting to watch.

 

This what I have been saying the last month to you crazy kids. The Bears cant CANT cant invest 120 plus million at the linebacker position with Tommy Harris, and the starting cb all due for extensions in the near future. Has nothing to do with how good Briggs is. So moving up to a top ten pick for a guy who does not want to be here is gravy, IMO. 7 million gets freed up, we draft a young impact player...

 

LB is not one position. It's 3. They should invest heavily in their best defensive players.

 

LINEBACKER IS 3 POSITIONS????? DEAR GOD THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER KNOWN ABOUT FOOTBALL!!!! congrats on missing the point completely.

 

Congrats on a childish comeback. That's not necessary. His point was that you are worried about spending that much money at the LB position, when it's not just 1 person. They would be spending the money on 2 of the top 3 players on the defense, the strongest unit in the NFC. Whether they spend it on 1 LB and 1 DB doesn't make a difference, if they are spending on the DB who is a worse player than the LB. They both play at the same time. It's not like the Atlanta situation with Vick and Schaub where they could only play 1 of them.

 

Actually, which position they spend it on makes a huge difference. Briggs position in that scheme is the most easily replaceable position. To pay big money to a player who could be replaced by a 4th-6th round pick after one year and get close to the same production (which has been done plenty of times in that scheme across the league) and losing an impact player on the defensive line for example would be a really bad scenario. People who can make an impact on the line are rare-weak side linebackers in the Cover 2 who can make a significant impact are not rare at all, so that position becomes one that should be one of your lower salary positions, not one of your higher salary positions.

 

It's not either or though. The Bears can re-sign Briggs AND keep Tommie Harris. And what 4th-6th round pick has replaced an All-Pro and got close to the same production? Not saying it can't happen, but I think it takes a lot more talent than what you are giving and it definitely takes a similar caliber player in order to uphold one of the best defenses in the league.

[Chocolate Milk]

Listening to Bors and Bernstein and they seem to be taking the "Let Briggs sit out because he can't dictate what the organization is going to do." I'm not sure what the point of this would be, assuming he's going to hold out. Why let Briggs go for nothing in a year just to make some sort of stand? Seems pig headed.

[CubColtPacer]

 

Actually, which position they spend it on makes a huge difference. Briggs position in that scheme is the most easily replaceable position. To pay big money to a player who could be replaced by a 4th-6th round pick after one year and get close to the same production (which has been done plenty of times in that scheme across the league) and losing an impact player on the defensive line for example would be a really bad scenario. People who can make an impact on the line are rare-weak side linebackers in the Cover 2 who can make a significant impact are not rare at all, so that position becomes one that should be one of your lower salary positions, not one of your higher salary positions.

 

It's not either or though. The Bears can re-sign Briggs AND keep Tommie Harris. And what 4th-6th round pick has replaced an All-Pro and got close to the same production? Not saying it can't happen, but I think it takes a lot more talent than what you are giving and it definitely takes a similar caliber player in order to uphold one of the best defenses in the league.

 

They can probably keep both of those players, but at some point some of those key players will have to be released. It will be hard to sign Briggs to a large contract, Harris to a large contract, Grossman or another QB to a large contract, and Benson to a large contract-and even if you get those 4, you probably lose practically everybody else.

 

There are more examples than this of the Cover 2 and replacing weak-side linebackers, but let me go to the Colts here for an example.

 

Mike Peterson-2nd round pick-2002 in the cover 2 system at weak side linebacker-137 tackles including 113 solos, 9 PD, and 3 INT.

David Thornton-5th round pick in 2002-entered the lineup at weak-side in 2003, had 145 tackles including 112 solos, 2 INT, 5 PD

Thornton was so good in 2003 that the coaches decided not to waste him at the easy weak-side position, so they promoted him to strong side.

Cato June-6th round pick in 2003-entered in 2004, 110 tackles including 84 solos, 2 INT, 9 PD-better numbers at weak-side then Thornton had at strong-side that same year, and that continued in 2005. Thornton's numbers went up when he got out of Indy in 2006.

June made the Pro Bowl in 2005 with 103 tackles, 5 INT, 2 TD, and 7 PD. In 2006, June had 142 tackles, 3 INT, 2 FF, 4 PD, and 1 sack.

The Colts plan to replace June with Freddy Keiaho, a late 3rd round pick that is 1 year into the league.

 

The Cover 2 inflates the numbers of the weak-side linebacker and deflates the numbers of the strong-side linebacker. Weak-side linebackers drafted in the middle rounds can usually enter the lineup after a year and be almost as good as the high-priced player they are replacing.

[Banedon]

From Yahoo:

 

Bears general manager Jerry Angelo, who has publicly stood firm on his stance of not trading Briggs, wasn't buying the rumors.

 

"I'm not buying that until I hear it straight from the horse's mouth," Angelo said.

 

That's the first quote I've seen from Angelo on the topic. I think Rosenhaus is doing a really good job of stirring this up...

[Handlebar McSkullet]

They can probably keep both of those players, but at some point some of those key players will have to be released. It will be hard to sign Briggs to a large contract, Harris to a large contract, Grossman or another QB to a large contract, and Benson to a large contract-and even if you get those 4, you probably lose practically everybody else.

 

There are more examples than this of the Cover 2 and replacing weak-side linebackers, but let me go to the Colts here for an example.

 

Mike Peterson-2nd round pick-2002 in the cover 2 system at weak side linebacker-137 tackles including 113 solos, 9 PD, and 3 INT.

David Thornton-5th round pick in 2002-entered the lineup at weak-side in 2003, had 145 tackles including 112 solos, 2 INT, 5 PD

Thornton was so good in 2003 that the coaches decided not to waste him at the easy weak-side position, so they promoted him to strong side.

Cato June-6th round pick in 2003-entered in 2004, 110 tackles including 84 solos, 2 INT, 9 PD-better numbers at weak-side then Thornton had at strong-side that same year, and that continued in 2005. Thornton's numbers went up when he got out of Indy in 2006.

June made the Pro Bowl in 2005 with 103 tackles, 5 INT, 2 TD, and 7 PD. In 2006, June had 142 tackles, 3 INT, 2 FF, 4 PD, and 1 sack.

The Colts plan to replace June with Freddy Keiaho, a late 3rd round pick that is 1 year into the league.

 

The Cover 2 inflates the numbers of the weak-side linebacker and deflates the numbers of the strong-side linebacker. Weak-side linebackers drafted in the middle rounds can usually enter the lineup after a year and be almost as good as the high-priced player they are replacing.

 

Good post CCP.

 

Off to a different topic, kind of, Briggs is still here, and the trade hasnt happened.

 

Todd McShay has the Bears drafting Dwayne Bowe. I dont know much about him, but isnt he like a rookie version of Moose. Which brings me to my question, if they do draft a WR, do they want a fast reciever or a big possession receiver(or both like Calvin Johnson... dream)?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

They can probably keep both of those players, but at some point some of those key players will have to be released. It will be hard to sign Briggs to a large contract, Harris to a large contract, Grossman or another QB to a large contract, and Benson to a large contract-and even if you get those 4, you probably lose practically everybody else.

 

There are more examples than this of the Cover 2 and replacing weak-side linebackers, but let me go to the Colts here for an example.

 

Mike Peterson-2nd round pick-2002 in the cover 2 system at weak side linebacker-137 tackles including 113 solos, 9 PD, and 3 INT.

David Thornton-5th round pick in 2002-entered the lineup at weak-side in 2003, had 145 tackles including 112 solos, 2 INT, 5 PD

Thornton was so good in 2003 that the coaches decided not to waste him at the easy weak-side position, so they promoted him to strong side.

Cato June-6th round pick in 2003-entered in 2004, 110 tackles including 84 solos, 2 INT, 9 PD-better numbers at weak-side then Thornton had at strong-side that same year, and that continued in 2005. Thornton's numbers went up when he got out of Indy in 2006.

June made the Pro Bowl in 2005 with 103 tackles, 5 INT, 2 TD, and 7 PD. In 2006, June had 142 tackles, 3 INT, 2 FF, 4 PD, and 1 sack.

The Colts plan to replace June with Freddy Keiaho, a late 3rd round pick that is 1 year into the league.

 

The Cover 2 inflates the numbers of the weak-side linebacker and deflates the numbers of the strong-side linebacker. Weak-side linebackers drafted in the middle rounds can usually enter the lineup after a year and be almost as good as the high-priced player they are replacing.

 

Good post CCP.

 

Off to a different topic, kind of, Briggs is still here, and the trade hasnt happened.

 

Todd McShay has the Bears drafting Dwayne Bowe. I dont know much about him, but isnt he like a rookie version of Moose. Which brings me to my question, if they do draft a WR, do they want a fast reciever or a big possession receiver(or both like Calvin Johnson... dream)?

 

Possession receiver to replace Moose in a year or two. Berrian and Bradley are younger and entering their prime (yeah, Bradley needs to actually stay healthy).

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Take the pick and draft an impact LB to replace Briggs, and groom that player into Urlacher when Urlacher retires.

 

As of now, I don't think a LB at 6 is likely - Willis would be a reach, imo.

 

The Bears can trade down - especially if Quinn or AD falls (I think one of them will) - and get the extra picks that most of us would like.

[Chocolate Milk]

Take the pick and draft an impact LB to replace Briggs, and groom that player into Urlacher when Urlacher retires.

 

As of now, I don't think a LB at 6 is likely - Willis would be a reach, imo.

 

The Bears can trade down - especially if Quinn or AD falls (I think one of them will) - and get the extra picks that most of us would like.

 

Willis may be a reach at 6, but not much of one. It seems like in the top 10, people are usually trying to fill their biggest need. I wouldn't be too upset if the Bears took either Landry or Willis at 6. Trading down would probably be the best option though, assuming the deal is reasonable.

 

I'm still not sure about the deal as it really doesn't make much sense for the Skins.

[Soul]

From Yahoo:

 

Bears general manager Jerry Angelo, who has publicly stood firm on his stance of not trading Briggs, wasn't buying the rumors.

 

"I'm not buying that until I hear it straight from the horse's mouth," Angelo said.

 

That's the first quote I've seen from Angelo on the topic. I think Rosenhaus is doing a really good job of stirring this up...

 

It's not a suprise. Rosenhaus is a master at these kinds of tactics.

[Banedon]

The Redskins message boardgives an update on what NFL Live is saying on this....

 

Mort said the Bears were sort of upset the 'Skins were talking in the media before formal talks between the teams began.

 

But he said the two sides are now officially talking....

 

#6 for Briggs and #31.

 

Schlereth says this would be a great deal for the Redskins. He thinks getting a Pro Bowl LB like Briggs and still keeping a 1st rounder is big time for the 'Skins.

[Chocolate Milk]

The Redskins message boardgives an update on what NFL Live is saying on this....

 

Mort said the Bears were sort of upset the 'Skins were talking in the media before formal talks between the teams began.

 

But he said the two sides are now officially talking....

 

#6 for Briggs and #31.

 

Schlereth says this would be a great deal for the Redskins. He thinks getting a Pro Bowl LB like Briggs and still keeping a 1st rounder is big time for the 'Skins.

 

Redskins fans look to be talking themselves into liking the trade.

 

I do not like this deal one bit, but the guys resume is impressive. If he can actually live up to the FAT paycheck he's about to receive, then i'll be happy.

[BigSlick]

I honestly don't like the trade. Its not that we aren't getting value for Briggs...its just that I don't really figure that we need someone at the 6th pick.

 

Although Alan Branch would be hilariously awesome.

[rawaction]

I honestly don't like the trade. Its not that we aren't getting value for Briggs...its just that I don't really figure that we need someone at the 6th pick.

 

Although Alan Branch would be hilariously awesome.

 

Branch and Harris would be sick.

[BigSlick]

I honestly don't like the trade. Its not that we aren't getting value for Briggs...its just that I don't really figure that we need someone at the 6th pick.

 

Although Alan Branch would be hilariously awesome.

 

Branch and Harris would be sick.

 

I think we would be awarded the Lombardi trophy after the preseason.