PDA

View Full Version : 49ers could have had Lance Briggs?


49ersfan_87
12-07-2007, 02:24 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AoqzEOqZFq08etRf6BwX3YVDubYF?slug=jc-tradingrules120607&prov=yhoo&type=lgns


In the days leading up to the NFL trade deadline on Oct. 16, the Chicago Bears (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/chi/;_ylt=Ao.FdRj1Cwdpx3GgClidTyfsYNAF) and San Francisco 49ers (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/sfo/;_ylt=AlMOzcoaiBGdHlpIvFIITUHsYNAF) thought they had struck a great deal.
Chicago was willing to send linebacker Lance Briggs (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6404/;_ylt=AsiaiyutDHfcbfGQbo2WI9fsYNAF) to the 49ers for an unspecified draft pick. The 49ers were going to get a player they coveted, and Briggs, who the Bears expect to lose in free agency this offseason, was finally going to get a long-term contract.
Briggs was willing to give San Francisco something of a discount on the deal for two reasons: First, he wanted the security of a long-term pact. Second, he grew up in Sacramento, Calif., located roughly two hours from San Francisco.
The deal worked for all parties. But before it could be finalized, the new contract had to be approved by the NFL. That's where it hit a snag, according to two NFL sources. That snag may prove to be a catalyst for change this offseason in some of the rules regarding trades.


Wow, did anyone know about this?

Smokey Joe
12-07-2007, 03:16 PM
Lance will stay a bear for several more years, plain and simple.

bearsfan_51
12-07-2007, 03:28 PM
Whenever I want reliable information I always go to Yahoo sports.

SFbear
12-07-2007, 03:28 PM
I guess hypothetically we could have gotten Patrick Willis which would have been awesome given Urlacher's questionable future status. Id assume it would have been for the 11th overall pick straight up. A frightening scenario would have been Angelo grabbing Greg Olsen right there considering he thought we were lucky to get him at 31.

bearsfan_51
12-07-2007, 03:30 PM
I guess hypothetically we could have gotten Patrick Willis which would have been awesome given Urlacher's questionable future status. Id assume it would have been for the 11th overall pick straight up. A frightening scenario would have been Angelo grabbing Greg Olsen right there considering he thought we were lucky to get him at 31.

The article said it was pre-trading deadline, so the picks would have been for this year, which is why the article is ******** because I doubt they would have traded Briggs for what will likely be the 28th or 32nd pick in the draft.

toonsterwu
12-07-2007, 05:13 PM
Hmm ... that seems an odd move on the Niners part. Briggs and Willis inside? It's not as if Briggs addresses their pass rush issues ... unless they were contemplating moving Willis into an attack role ... which seems unlikely.

Interesting, but odd.

BroadwayJoe10
12-07-2007, 05:56 PM
Hmm ... that seems an odd move on the Niners part. Briggs and Willis inside? It's not as if Briggs addresses their pass rush issues ... unless they were contemplating moving Willis into an attack role ... which seems unlikely.

Interesting, but odd.

very true. I didn't understand the reasoning behind it, but I do have a feeling, like that article or a different article i read stated, this rule might have caught the attention for the owners meetings. Like any sport, football always has some trades right before the trade deadline, which normally comes from playoff bound teams looking to plug holes due to injuries and non playoff bound teams looking to dispose of certain players for other players or draft picks. I don't see how this trade was a really good one for the 9ers, but for the future i think the league might look at allowing franchised players to sign a long term extenstion with another time if; A) the team acquiring the franchised player pays the portion of their Franchised player's salary, that he spends on their team. Ex. Chicago pays 12 weeks of the salary and the 9ers pay the remaining 4 weeks. I'm sure there will be more fine print, but i expect this to be looked at in the offseason.