PDA

View Full Version : Briggs demands a trade.


TitleTown088
03-05-2007, 08:59 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2788148

"The Chicago Bears team? The coaches, players, city and fans? Yeah, I could stay there forever. I love it. But the Chicago Bears organization? I don't want to be there anymore. I won't play for them and I'll do everything in my power to keep from playing there."
-- Lance Briggs

Jughead10
03-05-2007, 09:21 AM
I don't think he gets a trade. What team will want to give up a high pick just to be able to give him at least 18 million guaranteed?

Addict
03-05-2007, 09:26 AM
wow. I know he was pissed off, but I didn't think he'd take it this far. Is he really this angry about that franchise tag? or is there something else going on?

Jughead10
03-05-2007, 09:28 AM
The problem with the franchise tag this year is that it is considerably less than what one would make on the open market compared to other years. The average of the top 5 players at a position doesn't take into account what players could get this year. Adalius Thomas' contract would certainly inflate that average.

Addict
03-05-2007, 09:31 AM
The problem with the franchise tag this year is that it is considerably less than what one would make on the open market compared to other years. The average of the top 5 players at a position doesn't take into account what players could get this year. Adalius Thomas' contract would certainly inflate that average.

Didn't the bears try to re-sign him? I'm guessing they did offer him quite a good deal.

OzTitan
03-05-2007, 09:39 AM
The average of the top 5 was always lower than what a player could get in FA, this is because the average only counts last year's salary, not the signing bonus a FA deal would bring, it isn't just this year.

Picky I know, I'm just bored :P

tEk
03-05-2007, 09:40 AM
Hmm shaking up things. My mock will definitely change if Briggs jumps ship. I don't know who would be willing to give up that much though.

bigbluedefense
03-05-2007, 09:41 AM
Hot air. Didn't Thomas Jones pull a similar rant? The Bears will just ignore him. Do the same thing they did with Jones. Once he sees he lost the battle, he'll play. Done and done.

Its hard to force your hand when the opposition holds all the strings. Briggs has no control over his situation.

Addict
03-05-2007, 09:44 AM
Hot air. Didn't Thomas Jones pull a similar rant? The Bears will just ignore him. Do the same thing they did with Jones. Once he sees he lost the battle, he'll play. Done and done.

Its hard to force your hand when the opposition holds all the strings. Briggs has no control over his situation.

Well the thing is, let's say (for argument's sake) a team wants Briggs so bad they're willing to pay the picks... Should Chicago in that case refuse, or run with it?

Jughead10
03-05-2007, 09:45 AM
Hot air. Didn't Thomas Jones pull a similar rant? The Bears will just ignore him. Do the same thing they did with Jones. Once he sees he lost the battle, he'll play. Done and done.

Its hard to force your hand when the opposition holds all the strings. Briggs has no control over his situation.

Still its unneeded drama. If Briggs really feels this way he will at least miss all of training camp. Which will then probably lead to him being inactive the first game or two.

bigbluedefense
03-05-2007, 09:49 AM
Well the thing is, let's say (for argument's sake) a team wants Briggs so bad they're willing to pay the picks... Should Chicago in that case refuse, or run with it?

Run with it. They already felt confident that they have able backups to replace him. Plus getting extra picks allows them to address multiple needs. Its a team sport, theres more to the Bears than Briggs, who many feel is a system player anyway.


Still its unneeded drama. If Briggs really feels this way he will at least miss all of training camp. Which will then probably lead to him being inactive the first game or two.

It is unnecessary true. But he won't miss a beat. The scheme is pretty simple, its plug and chug. He can miss all of training camp, as long as he stays in shape he'll be fine. If he misses a game, its no biggie. The Bears won't lose that game because he wasn't there.

bsaza2358
03-05-2007, 09:49 AM
I doubt Briggs gets a trade, but this very much ups the likelihood that Briggs is absolutely gone next season. It is unfortunate for him because of the amount of money being spent on older players (A Thomas), and he's missing out. There's no guarantee that there will be a bunch of teams with that much to spend next offseason...

bigbluedefense
03-05-2007, 09:54 AM
I doubt Briggs gets a trade, but this very much ups the likelihood that Briggs is absolutely gone next season. It is unfortunate for him because of the amount of money being spent on older players (A Thomas), and he's missing out. There's no guarantee that there will be a bunch of teams with that much to spend next offseason...

He knows that with a weak LB crop in this draft, and a weak FA market with lots of money, he was gonna cash out big time if he wasn't franchised. Thats why he's so mad. He lost alot of money this offseason after he got the tag.

The only team I see crazy enough to make something happen is the Redskins. But they already have McIntosh, so I don't see it happening.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 09:55 AM
I agree with all that has been said. Briggs holds very little power in this situation. If he doesn't show up by the middle of training camp, he won't get paid.

That being said, I understand Briggs' complaints. He played out the remainder of his contract without complaint and with the market as such he wants to cash in and make the 20 million guaranteed that he would likely get. If he's not traded I fully expect him to miss most of training camp. I'll be the first to say now that I totally understand that as well. But for 7.2 million as opposed to nothing, he will eventually show up.

All this being said, expect Angelo to shop him around. He's always said that he doesn't want players on the team that don't want to be here but he's also not going to lose a great player for nothing. Angelo is a very smart GM, he'll do well for the Bears and hopefully Briggs can get what he wants too.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 09:56 AM
I doubt Briggs gets a trade, but this very much ups the likelihood that Briggs is absolutely gone next season. It is unfortunate for him because of the amount of money being spent on older players (A Thomas), and he's missing out. There's no guarantee that there will be a bunch of teams with that much to spend next offseason...

IF they wanted to continue franchising him, I think they easily could.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 10:01 AM
I will say this though, Briggs trying to play the respect card is a joke.

If you are franchised, you're respected.

If you're offered 6 years at 33 million during the season (AD got 7 years 35 million) you're respected.

I totally understand him wanted to get as much money as he can, but it's not like the Bears organization has given him nothing. That's still a hell of a lot of money.

Addict
03-05-2007, 10:01 AM
IF they wanted to continue franchising him, I think they easily could.

I agree he'll suck it up eventually and play. But two years in a row? I think Angelo should look long and hard to find a taker for Briggs, that way:

Briggs is happy, he'll get his gazillion dollar contract he wants (and deserves) and the bears are happy (they'll get a bunch of picks).

HawkeyeFan
03-05-2007, 10:36 AM
The Rams are prepared to offer a 2nd Round Pick and Jimmy Kennedy :)!

Seriously, IF he can play SAM I'd give a 1st.

NYmoney
03-05-2007, 10:40 AM
I agree he'll suck it up eventually and play. But two years in a row? I think Angelo should look long and hard to find a taker for Briggs, that way:

Briggs is happy, he'll get his gazillion dollar contract he wants (and deserves) and the bears are happy (they'll get a bunch of picks).

I thought you could only franchise a player for one season, not two consecutive seasons.

bigbluedefense
03-05-2007, 10:43 AM
I thought you could only franchise a player for one season, not two consecutive seasons.

Clements got tagged 2 years in a row. I think you can do it as long as you want, but teams never do that.

jkb528
03-05-2007, 10:50 AM
Clements did not get tagged two years in a row.

rchrd
03-05-2007, 11:02 AM
Didnt the Pats franchise Vinatieri a few times?

pellepelle_10
03-05-2007, 11:04 AM
No but Walter Jones from Seattle has. I want to say it was 3 years. Chicago should look at San Francisco as a possible bidder. They have a ton of money to burn and they need help at OLB. They were looking at paying Adalius Thomas a load of cash but NE beat them to it. I say lets snatch some draft picks from them and give them Briggs so he can be the new highest defensive player in the NFL next to Clements.

yourfavestoner
03-05-2007, 11:13 AM
Clements got tagged 2 years in a row. I think you can do it as long as you want, but teams never do that.

You can do it as many times as you want. However, once you franchise him the third year, you must pay the player the average of the top five salaries in the league, not at his respected position.

Clements did not get tagged two years in a row.

Yes, he did.

Addict
03-05-2007, 11:15 AM
You can do it as many times as you want. However, once you franchise him the third year, you must pay the player the average of the top five salaries in the league, not at his respected position.


Ouch. That really would suck though.

And Vinnatieri also got tagged twice.

evershot
03-05-2007, 12:06 PM
What team would be willing to give a 2nd this year and a conditional first day pick next year for Briggs? Keep in mind they will have to be able to sign Briggs as well.

Number 10
03-05-2007, 12:27 PM
I would not want the Giants to trade for him unless we are talking about a 2nd round pick here. And I doubt he goes for a 2nd rounder.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 12:38 PM
I have no doubt they could get a 2nd rounder. I just don't think they would take it. For those teams picking in the first round, they need to sign their players to new contracts too (albeit for a lower amount). Is Briggs as good as Lawrence Timmons? I certainly think so. Put him in this draft and I think he's the best linebacker available, and still about 25-26 years old.

Number 10
03-05-2007, 12:40 PM
I have no doubt they could get a 2nd rounder. I just don't think they would take it. For those teams picking in the first round, they need to sign their players to new contracts too (albeit for a lower amount). Is Briggs as good as Lawrence Timmons? I certainly think so. Put him in this draft and I think he's the best linebacker available, and still about 25-26 years old.

But he would cost a ton more than a rookie.

Jughead10
03-05-2007, 12:41 PM
I have no doubt they could get a 2nd rounder. I just don't think they would take it. For those teams picking in the first round, they need to sign their players to new contracts too (albeit for a lower amount). Is Briggs as good as Lawrence Timmons? I certainly think so. Put him in this draft and I think he's the best linebacker available, and still about 25-26 years old.

The difference is that if you hold onto your pick and take Timmons you don't have to give him a ridiculous signing bonus. He also has the potential to be greater. Either way it is has its risks and rewards like any player personnel decision. Take Briggs, more of a sure thing but more of a financial burden.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 12:45 PM
Yeah I understand all that, I'm just saying. Not all organizations think the same, and it only takes one to think otherwise to make a trade. Either way I'm not that concerned. These things work themselves out and I trust Angelo to make the right decisions.

Addict
03-05-2007, 12:49 PM
What team would be willing to give a 2nd this year and a conditional first day pick next year for Briggs? Keep in mind they will have to be able to sign Briggs as well.

The bills maybe? 49ers seem to be actively spending their salary cap.

Briggs would be a great pickup for any team. He's not a fast guy or anything but he's got sound instincts.

If we were to get a second-round pick (say... in the 15-25 range) would posluszny be available? he's kind of comparable to Briggs isn't he? Not the fastest, but sound instincts and all?

VoteLynnSwan
03-05-2007, 12:49 PM
I am of the opinion that Lance Briggs is overrated in the first place... He's a good football player but only becomes great when he plays alongside Urlacher.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 12:51 PM
The bills maybe? 49ers seem to be actively spending their salary cap.

Briggs would be a great pickup for any team. He's not a fast guy or anything but he's got sound instincts.

If we were to get a second-round pick (say... in the 15-25 range) would posluszny be available? he's kind of comparable to Briggs isn't he? Not the fastest, but sound instincts and all?

Do you mean a first round pick? I think the best we can hope for is a late 1st (or something equivalent to its value) and I think, while some don't like him much on this board, he'll be gone by 20 or so.

Addict
03-05-2007, 12:56 PM
Do you mean a first round pick? I think the best we can hope for is a late 1st (or something equivalent to its value) and I think, while some don't like him much on this board, he'll be gone by 20 or so.

I like Puz a lot actually. But yeah, he'd probably be gone by round two huh?

Or could we get a first for Briggs? Doubtfull.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 12:59 PM
I don't understand what you're saying. You're asking if Poz will be available in the mid-2nd round? If so absolutely not. I'd be shocked if he fell out of the first round.

Flyboy
03-05-2007, 12:59 PM
I wouldn't so mind giving up the #27 pick for Briggs, but it's the contract he'd want that makes me go 'Ehhhhh... nah'.

LB51
03-05-2007, 01:01 PM
No but Walter Jones from Seattle has. I want to say it was 3 years. Chicago should look at San Francisco as a possible bidder. They have a ton of money to burn and they need help at OLB. They were looking at paying Adalius Thomas a load of cash but NE beat them to it. I say lets snatch some draft picks from them and give them Briggs so he can be the new highest defensive player in the NFL next to Clements.



Briggs would play ILB in the 3-4 but he would still be a huge upgrade over Derek Smith

yourfavestoner
03-05-2007, 01:12 PM
The biggest thing the Bears have is their defensive system allows them to hold even more leverage in the situation. Briggs was drafted in the third round, but the production they got out of him was much more valuable then that, and Lovie and Angelo both know that they could probably replace him with a player drafted around the same area. They know they can trade him for a pick higher than they spent on him (a second or maybe a late first), replace him easily, and recoup that salary cap space.

Addict
03-05-2007, 01:15 PM
I don't understand what you're saying. You're asking if Poz will be available in the mid-2nd round? If so absolutely not. I'd be shocked if he fell out of the first round.

I don't even know what I was trying to say. :D sorry.

In most mocks I've seen, Poz wasn't in round one though.

evershot
03-05-2007, 01:39 PM
I don't even know what I was trying to say. :D sorry.

In most mocks I've seen, Poz wasn't in round one though.

If the Bears do trade Briggs Poz might just slip back into the first round.

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 02:16 PM
You can do it as many times as you want. However, once you franchise him the third year, you must pay the player the average of the top five salaries in the league, not at his respected position.



Yes, he did.


No, he didn't. We tried to in the Forum Mock but it couldn't even happen there.

princefielder28
03-05-2007, 02:18 PM
Very interesting, Briggs is a key piece in the defense and now the poor Bears may be starting the beginning of the end :)

Addict
03-05-2007, 02:22 PM
Very interesting, Briggs is a key piece in the defense and now the poor Bears may be starting the beginning of the end :)

You're overrating Briggs, he is important to the Bears, but not a 'key piece'. Urlacher & Harris are the Nucleus of their defense.

Man_Of_Steel
03-05-2007, 02:22 PM
wow, i really im shocked by that qoute, he has a pretty good career going in Chicago. This seems like a huge mistake by Briggs.

VoteLynnSwan
03-05-2007, 02:23 PM
The biggest thing the Bears have is their defensive system allows them to hold even more leverage in the situation. Briggs was drafted in the third round, but the production they got out of him was much more valuable then that, and Lovie and Angelo both know that they could probably replace him with a player drafted around the same area. They know they can trade him for a pick higher than they spent on him (a second or maybe a late first), replace him easily, and recoup that salary cap space.

exactly... with the scheme we play, we can afford to wait until the mid rounds for our LBs and CBs... I don't see us going LB in round 1... if we go Defense, then it would be either a Safety or a DT. Jerry Angelo has easily been one of the best GMs in all of sports since he took charge, and I have confidence in his drafting/signing/trading of players.

princefielder28
03-05-2007, 02:25 PM
You're overrating Briggs, he is important to the Bears, but not a 'key piece'. Urlacher & Harris are the Nucleus of their defense.

He is a key piece b/c if that defense is not on the top of its game and at 100 percent with all the skill the bears can not win b/c they lack a key piece to their offense outside of the O-line. The Bears rely on their defense and when they lose Briggs they have to fill some pretty big shoes.

Caddy
03-05-2007, 02:27 PM
I can't see the Bears shipping Briggs. Wouldn't they lose their franchise tag if they were to trade him?

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 02:38 PM
He is a key piece b/c if that defense is not on the top of its game and at 100 percent with all the skill the bears can not win b/c they lack a key piece to their offense outside of the O-line. The Bears rely on their defense and when they lose Briggs they have to fill some pretty big shoes.
Let's not kid ourselves here. You're a Packers fan hoping that more than anything.

Would losing Briggs be a loss? Sure.

Would we still be much more talented than any other team in the division? Unquestionably.

I think our offense is better than any other team in the division as well. Let alone defensive superiority.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 02:38 PM
I can't see the Bears shipping Briggs. Wouldn't they lose their franchise tag if they were to trade him?

Nope. Not to mention that we don't need it anyway. Briggs is the only player that was up for FA that would even remotely warrant the tag.

yourfavestoner
03-05-2007, 02:48 PM
No, he didn't. We tried to in the Forum Mock but it couldn't even happen there.

You're right, he was only franchised once. However, the reason he couldn't be franchised again was because he agreed to sign the franchise tender only if the Bills agreed not to franchise him again.

TitleTown088
03-05-2007, 02:48 PM
Let's not kid ourselves here. You're a Packers fan hoping that more than anything.

Would losing Briggs be a loss? Sure.

Would we still be much more talented than any other team in the division? Unquestionably.

I think our offense is better than any other team in the division as well. Let alone defensive superiority.


I'd argue that offensive comment if the Packers had a ******* RB. Wow, the Bears have the best offense in the NFC north. Does this tell anyone about the NFC north?

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 02:50 PM
The Packers and Bears offense is certainly arguable. A lot of it, of course, comes down to Grossman's development.

VoteLynnSwan
03-05-2007, 02:52 PM
I'd argue that offensive comment if the Packers had a ******* RB. Wow, the Bears have the best offense in the NFC north. Does this tell anyone about the NFC north?

i think it could easily be argued without question that the Bears have one of the most talented offenses in the game. Talent however does not always translate into play on the field...

iowatreat54
03-05-2007, 03:08 PM
He is a key piece b/c if that defense is not on the top of its game and at 100 percent with all the skill the bears can not win b/c they lack a key piece to their offense outside of the O-line. The Bears rely on their defense and when they lose Briggs they have to fill some pretty big shoes.

the only real "keys" to our D are urlacher, mike brown, and tommy harris(as of right now)...briggs is definately a huge part of the D but in now way is he a key piece...if we do lose briggs and don't end up drafting a LB high for an immediate answer, we can still play urlacher with hillenmeyer(graned hes a strongside LB) right away and the D won't falter much...we also have your LBs in Jamar Williams, Leon Joe, and Rod Wilson who like the bears said have been groomed to the system and to step in if briggs should leave...so losing briggs will hurt the bears yes but his role can be replaced to an extent that the D won't drop much and may even be comparable to the D with briggs...

that being said...I think the bears definately need to find a trade for briggs this year...the draft isn't producing many LBs that can compare to briggs which is why he wanted to shop the free agency...i think the 49ers would be a good possibility if they didnt run a 3-4 because briggs isnt said to be a good Lb for that scheme...but I think the bears are trying to get as much as they can for him and if they do trade for draft picks I don't think it will be until just before draft day when they see what the best offer is and take it...

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 03:12 PM
Mike Brown isn't key, it just so happens that the rest of our safties are pretty mediocre (hopefully Danieal develops in his second year).

TitleTown088
03-05-2007, 03:13 PM
i think it could easily be argued without question that the Bears have one of the most talented offenses in the game. Talent however does not always translate into play on the field... I am honestly not trying to rip into you here, or the Bears. Who exactly leads you to believe the bears have on of the most talented offenses in the NFL?

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 03:17 PM
I am honestly not trying to rip into you hear or the Bears. Who exactly leads you to believe the bears have on of the most talented offenses in the NFL?
Yeah I would agree that's a bit of an overstatement.

There are, however, some young and talented players.

Benson is obviously very talented. I believe that Berrian and Bradley are as well.

Grossman has an incredible arm. That counts as talent. Unfortunately he also has an incredibly stupid mind.

I think people tend to focus too much on Grossman's struggles this year and still think we have an offense comparable to the one Orton directed in 2005. It's a pretty good offense with young players, it just needs more consistancy.

I guess if he means top half by "one of" I would agree. Anything more than that is an overstatement IMO.

Addict
03-05-2007, 03:19 PM
i think it could easily be argued without question that the Bears have one of the most talented offenses in the game. Talent however does not always translate into play on the field...

uh... Their offense gets the job done. Their defense is arguably the most talented in the NFL.

The chargers, seahawks (when healthy), colts, bengals and the saints all have better offenses than the Bears IMO.

And that's not a knock on the Bears. It's reality knocking on your door.

iowatreat54
03-05-2007, 03:21 PM
Mike Brown isn't key, it just so happens that the rest of our safties are pretty mediocre (hopefully Danieal develops in his second year).

as of this year he is...look at how our D dropped after he went out...he isn't necessarily just key to our secondary because we obviously saw that we had players who could fill the spot and still get the job done albeit not as well...but mike brown pretty much runs the D...urlacher came out and said near the end of the year that it has been hard to adjust without brown because he sees the field better from his position and relays audibles and coverage shifts based on the offense, but when urlacher had to do that because they couldn't rely on the secondary to then they were in worse shape than before(granted they still weren't in bad shape...but worse) so brown is considered a key part of the defense for how he plays as well as how he leads the defense on the field...and I think manning will develop to be very good in our system considering he played pretty well as a rookie and most of his mistakes(i.e. taking bad angles in pursuit, coverage judgement, etc.) were all because of inexperience

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 03:24 PM
Urlacher actually played better once Brown left oddly enough. But yes I'm quite familiar with his position as team leader, I just think such things are replaceable. Urlacher and Tommie are the two players that this defense esentially needs.

iowatreat54
03-05-2007, 03:28 PM
Urlacher actually played better once Brown left oddly enough. But yes I'm quite familiar with his position as team leader, I just think such things are replaceable. Urlacher and Tommie are the two players that this defense esentially needs.

yea I don't doubt urlacher played better...but as far as running the D it wasn't run as well or as smooth or whatever as when brown did it...I agree urlacher and harris are undoubtedly the 2 players the D needs and that brown can definately be replaced...but as of right now he is key to our D because there is no one who can immediately replace what he does for us...manning is a long term solution for that and we have no safeties with enough experience in our system to replace brown as of right now...

SFbear
03-05-2007, 03:59 PM
Urlacher actually played better once Brown left oddly enough. But yes I'm quite familiar with his position as team leader, I just think such things are replaceable. Urlacher and Tommie are the two players that this defense esentially needs.

Id argue Urlacher started playing better or at least he was more noticeable once the Dline started cooling down and teams started game planning for Tommie more. First couple games Urlacher was just sitting back twiddling his thumbs cuz the front four was dominating.

The Legend
03-05-2007, 04:26 PM
question a team that plan on draft a LB in the first just trade for him

Giants

Colts

Saints

Eagles

indyfan1985
03-05-2007, 04:35 PM
question a team that plan on draft a LB in the first just trade for him

Giants

Colts

Saints

Eagles


The Colts would LOVE to have Briggs. He is clearly better than all the LBs available in this years draft. He would be our Derrick Brooks for the defense.

Chucky
03-05-2007, 04:57 PM
The Colts would LOVE to have Briggs. He is clearly better than all the LBs available in this years draft. He would be our Derrick Brooks for the defense.

Lance Briggs will never come close to. Derrick Brooks their names shouldn't even be in the same sentence.

VoteLynnSwan
03-05-2007, 05:03 PM
I am honestly not trying to rip into you here, or the Bears. Who exactly leads you to believe the bears have on of the most talented offenses in the NFL?

at this point, with the running game that we have, a very talented (physically) younger QB, and some extremely talented (albeit often injured) young receiving core, and a very solid veteren OL... i don't think there's any doubt that (talent wise) the Bears offense is in the top 10 in the league (which is what i meant by one of the best).

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 08:09 PM
You're right, he was only franchised once. However, the reason he couldn't be franchised again was because he agreed to sign the franchise tender only if the Bills agreed not to franchise him again.

Dude, as a hardcore Bills fan I obviously know everything about the Clements situation, why are you telling me this?

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 08:22 PM
On the Briggs subject...I would give up the Bills 2nd Rounder for him.

sweetness34
03-05-2007, 08:23 PM
On the Briggs subject...I would give up the Bills 2nd Rounder for him.

Then you wouldn't get a deal. JA is going to make you pay a hefty price for Briggs.

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 08:28 PM
Then you wouldn't get a deal. JA is going to make you pay a hefty price for Briggs.

Not sure...I think the ball is in Briggs' court on this one. He's going to holdout if he doesn't get a trade.

Stash
03-05-2007, 08:36 PM
at this point, with the running game that we have, a very talented (physically) younger QB, and some extremely talented (albeit often injured) young receiving core, and a very solid veteren OL... i don't think there's any doubt that (talent wise) the Bears offense is in the top 10 in the league (which is what i meant by one of the best).

You must be a Bears fan. You just traded T Jones, so you have the unproven Benson at RB. Grossman is young, but as somebody already pointed out he is kinda stupid. Saying Chicagos WR core is extremely talented is an extreme overstatement; Berrian would probably only be the #2 WR on most other teams. I do agree with you about the OL, they seem pretty solid. IMO, the Bears success had nothing to do with their offense.

regoob2
03-05-2007, 08:42 PM
If he holds out he wont get paid, and he said he likes the bears players and fans and i dont think he'd do that to them, he might hold out through training camp but i cant see him missing any games

locseti
03-05-2007, 08:49 PM
I had no idea things were THIS bad in Chicago.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 09:01 PM
I had no idea things were THIS bad in Chicago.
They really aren't. This kind of stuff happens on every team. Nobody likes the franchise tag. It happens.

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 09:07 PM
Clements didn't have a problem with the FT because we promised that we wouldn't tag him again. Maybe the Bears should've done the same with Briggs and they could've kept him around for one more year.

I think that this shows that Briggs wants money over a winning team. I honestly don't think he will play another down as a Bear. There's going to be a considerable amount of interest in him. I think the only thing that is going to hold back from him being traded is the Bears GM. However, he did trade Thomas Jones, so I definitely see Briggs be traded.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 09:11 PM
Angelo traded Jones a year AFTER Jones demanded to be traded. Jones did the same crap last year, the FO said no, he played the year out, and then the Bears traded him for good value with just one year left on his contract.


There's a lesson to be learned here.

49erfaithful
03-05-2007, 09:14 PM
The Colts would LOVE to have Briggs. He is clearly better than all the LBs available in this years draft. He would be our Derrick Brooks for the defense.


The colts wouldnt be loosing much. They would give up the last pick in R1 where they would have probally drafted an OLB, instead with the trade they can get a proven player instead of a rookie

art vandelay
03-05-2007, 09:14 PM
Angelo traded Jones a year AFTER Jones demanded to be traded. Jones did the same crap last year, the FO said no, he played the year out, and then the Bears traded him for good value with just one year left on his contract.


There's a lesson to be learned here.

Right...except Angelo wouldn't be able to trade Briggs next year since he only has one year on his franchise tender. So he would have to trade him this year if he wants immediate value.

Bearsfan123
03-05-2007, 09:18 PM
The colts wouldnt be loosing much. They would give up the last pick in R1 where they would have probally drafted an OLB, instead with the trade they can get a proven player instead of a rookie

the only problem with that is the $ Briggs would want from you guys. So tell me, would they be willing to pay for him?

iowatreat54
03-06-2007, 11:31 AM
You must be a Bears fan. You just traded T Jones, so you have the unproven Benson at RB. Grossman is young, but as somebody already pointed out he is kinda stupid. Saying Chicagos WR core is extremely talented is an extreme overstatement; Berrian would probably only be the #2 WR on most other teams. I do agree with you about the OL, they seem pretty solid. IMO, the Bears success had nothing to do with their offense.

actually the bears success has a ton to do with the offense...not so much relying on the offense to do well but relying on them to not make mistakes and to basically eat up time so that they can score just enough to win and give the D rest so when they come back on they can stop any O, force turnovers, score, etc. so yes the bears offense is very key to their success...

also...yes benson is unproven as starters go, but he is a 3rd year back now who averaged the same YPC as jones, scored as many td's as jones, and has never had an issue of injury problems in the past...he has shown he has the speed, power, and carrying ability to succeed in the NFL and is definately ready to start

but I guess this season we will see what happens...

Severe Punishment
03-06-2007, 02:23 PM
For Vikings fans, this news (coupled with the Thomas Jones trade) just keeps
getting better and better.

iowatreat54
03-06-2007, 02:36 PM
For Vikings fans, this news (coupled with the Thomas Jones trade) just keeps
getting better and better.

haha it may look like its better and better but the bears are still lightyears ahead of the vikings...can't wait to see our D against jackson :D

BlindSite
03-06-2007, 04:53 PM
This is a stupid move by the Front Office and I hope they get screwed by it.

Briggs played his ******' heart out of that team and the best, the absolute best they can offer him, is here you go champ, you get a one year deal, better luck next time.

bearsfan_51
03-06-2007, 05:01 PM
This is a stupid move by the Front Office and I hope they get screwed by it.

Briggs played his ******' heart out of that team and the best, the absolute best they can offer him, is here you go champ, you get a one year deal, better luck next time.

It's called the franchise tag. Teams do it all the time. How exactely, by the way, could they get "screwed" by it? At the very worst he holds out the whole year, makes absolutely no money, and they get the same result as they would have had they done nothing at all.


Oh, and they offered him 6 years-35 million. He turned that down.

bearsfan_51
03-06-2007, 05:02 PM
For Vikings fans, this news (coupled with the Thomas Jones trade) just keeps
getting better and better.

Too bad the Vikings suck.