PDA

View Full Version : Lance Briggs


NYmoney
03-05-2007, 09:13 AM
Looks like Briggs is now formally demanding a trade.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2788148

This could play itself out on draft day, or it could be somewhat similar to Jones last offseason.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 10:02 AM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2965

Just in case anyone wants to read what's already been said in the NFL forum.

SFbear
03-05-2007, 11:03 AM
So under the franchise tag, what happens if Briggs plays and gets a career ending injury?

KBear
03-05-2007, 11:24 AM
So under the franchise tag, what happens if Briggs plays and gets a career ending injury?

He gets his 7+ mil, but he might get screwed over during the following offseason.

KBear
03-05-2007, 11:48 AM
I still say the Bears should front load Briggs' salary if they are planning on resigning him. If other teams really are backloading all of these contracts that the fa are getting, the players must know that there is not the best chances that they will see most of that money. So why wouldn't Briggs accept a deal thats front loaded (to clarify let his contract eat up most of our remaining cap space this season). Let him get his money when the Bears can afford to pay him that.

evershot
03-05-2007, 12:04 PM
I still say the Bears should front load Briggs' salary if they are planning on resigning him. If other teams really are backloading all of these contracts that the fa are getting, the players must know that there is not the best chances that they will see most of that money. So why wouldn't Briggs accept a deal thats front loaded (to clarify let his contract eat up most of our remaining cap space this season). Let him get his money when the Bears can afford to pay him that.

I don't know. After going public for his dislike of the Bears organization it would send the wrong message for future signings.

Right now I say trading him is the best option rather than resigning him or even letting him play out this year with the Franchise Tag, because resigning him now will hurt future dealings with other players looking for big pay day and letting him play on a Franchise Tag will cast a bad light on the Bears organization.

The Bears will probably have to settle for a 2nd round pick this year and a conditional pick next year.

NYmoney
03-05-2007, 12:25 PM
I still say the Bears should front load Briggs' salary if they are planning on resigning him. If other teams really are backloading all of these contracts that the fa are getting, the players must know that there is not the best chances that they will see most of that money. So why wouldn't Briggs accept a deal thats front loaded (to clarify let his contract eat up most of our remaining cap space this season). Let him get his money when the Bears can afford to pay him that.

You can only frontload a salary to a certain %. I believe that % mark is 8.

regoob2
03-05-2007, 12:26 PM
Do you think the saints or colts would give up there first? they need a LB, also what about the pats, briggs could play inside there

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 12:40 PM
I'm fine with trading him, but we need to get value. I trust Angelo to not cave in. He never does.

Addict
03-05-2007, 01:31 PM
Do you think the saints or colts would give up there first? they need a LB, also what about the pats, briggs could play inside there

Colts might. Don't think the Pats will though.

And I don't think the Bears will want to re-sign Briggs after the statement about the Bears organisation.

NYmoney
03-05-2007, 02:14 PM
This very well may be a strategic action by Briggs. He might be sitting at home thinking that he has the most powerful agent, a team with plenty of cap space, a great resume, and great timing. Therefore, he might be just trying to pressure the Bears into signing him long term. You must remember that the Bears and Briggs were in the same ball park before he was franchised. So he might be thinking that if he applies some pressure, then the deal will get done.

I'm not saying his actions are morally justifiable, but there is a level of logic to this train of thought.

VoteLynnSwan
03-05-2007, 02:26 PM
I don't think there's any way the Patriots would trade a pick for Briggs... although they do have two first rounders... hmm... maybe they would. They just seem like a team that likes to keep their draft picks and develop talent.

evershot
03-05-2007, 02:34 PM
I don't think there's any way the Patriots would trade a pick for Briggs... although they do have two first rounders... hmm... maybe they would. They just seem like a team that likes to keep their draft picks and develop talent.

But they also like having Vet Linebackers to fill their starting spots.

bearsfan_51
03-05-2007, 02:43 PM
There's nothing moral about this. Quite frankly I think Briggs is justified in his statements. He didn't insult anyone on the team or anyone on the coaching staff.

So he doesn't like his boss? Lots of people don't. That's the nature of life. I'm sure that it will have very little effect on contract negotiations quite frankly.

KBear
03-05-2007, 03:36 PM
You can only frontload a salary to a certain %. I believe that % mark is 8.

Its better then nothing. He is to young to really back load his contract then cut later, because he should still be good at that time. Maybe Vasher, Harris, etc.. willt take some back loaded contracts. If there is more money upfront, then he might take a lower $ over the long term vs if the Bears back load the contract.

KBear
03-05-2007, 03:37 PM
There's nothing moral about this. Quite frankly I think Briggs is justified in his statements. He didn't insult anyone on the team or anyone on the coaching staff.

So he doesn't like his boss? Lots of people don't. That's the nature of life. I'm sure that it will have very little effect on contract negotiations quite frankly.

But he did not have to make his statements public.

KBear
03-05-2007, 03:40 PM
Do you think the saints or colts would give up there first? they need a LB, also what about the pats, briggs could play inside there

I dont think Briggs really fits the LB type the Pats like, and the Colts probably dont have the money to sign him. That would leave the Saints out of the teams you mentioned, and I dont think they would trade for him when they really dont have to give up any assets by just drafting one in the first round.

Smokey Joe
03-05-2007, 05:47 PM
I got 2 words for Briggs... Shut up!-If you want to be traded, fine. But don't freaking crawl to the media crying like a little baby about the organization.

As long as we get good value, and keep money to resign Harris, Vasher and/or Tillman, Berrian, Ayanbadejo, and maybe a few others (Grossman?), I will be a happy man.

Now the question is... who takes over at WILL?

Smokey Joe
03-05-2007, 05:48 PM
I dont think Briggs really fits the LB type the Pats like, and the Colts probably dont have the money to sign him. That would leave the Saints out of the teams you mentioned, and I dont think they would trade for him when they really dont have to give up any assets by just drafting one in the first round.

I think the Giants might... before we tagged Briggs, the Giants GM did say Briggs would be a top priority in free agency.

KBear
03-06-2007, 03:25 AM
I think the Giants might... before we tagged Briggs, the Giants GM did say Briggs would be a top priority in free agency.

I'm not sure if the Bears really want to trade him to another NFC team to begin with, would the Giants even give up thier first rounder for him? Or maybe their 2nd and third round picks? I'm not sure.

evershot
03-06-2007, 04:30 AM
I got 2 words for Briggs... Shut up!-If you want to be traded, fine. But don't freaking crawl to the media crying like a little baby about the organization.

As long as we get good value, and keep money to resign Harris, Vasher and/or Tillman, Berrian, Ayanbadejo, and maybe a few others (Grossman?), I will be a happy man.

Now the question is... who takes over at WILL?

Jamar Williams may be a good stand in but he is still untested...but he is a possiblity.

gonzo1105
03-06-2007, 10:22 AM
Supposedly, other people have said this on other boards that the Bears and Bills are in talks for Lance Briggs and that Levy will offer a couple of draft picks and possibly Takeo Spikes for Lance Briggs. It would make sense at least from the Bills stand point because both Jauron and Levy know Briggs very well and it has been leaked that if Briggs were to hit FA that he would have been Levy's # 1 priority.

bearsfan_51
03-06-2007, 10:23 AM
Supposedly, other people have said this on other boards that the Bears and Bills are in talks for Lance Briggs and that Levy will offer a couple of draft picks and possibly Takeo Spikes for Lance Briggs. It would make sense at least from the Bills stand point because both Jauron and Levy know Briggs very well and it has been leaked that if Briggs were to hit FA that he would have been Levy's # 1 priority.
No offense to Buffalo but I'm sure Takeo would salivate at the possibility of leaving Buffalo and playing next to Urlacher.

I'm not sure I buy it though, although the fact that Fewell is their DC probably doesn't hurt. As does Levy's general affinity for current Bears players.

SFbear
03-06-2007, 11:19 AM
Supposedly, other people have said this on other boards that the Bears and Bills are in talks for Lance Briggs and that Levy will offer a couple of draft picks and possibly Takeo Spikes for Lance Briggs. It would make sense at least from the Bills stand point because both Jauron and Levy know Briggs very well and it has been leaked that if Briggs were to hit FA that he would have been Levy's # 1 priority.

This is one of the more realistic trade possibilities considering we have a history with trading with Buffalo, the Bills coaching staff are all familiar with Briggs, and theyre trying to emulate our defensive system. Also we wouldnt have to play the Bills for another three years just like with Thomas Jones on the Jets. Levy also has no problem trading away draft picks to get someone he values highly for his system.

Spikes is injury proned and I dont know if he fits our system well (SLB maybe), so I would think the meat and potatoes of the deal would have to be the picks. At least I would hope so.

iowatreat54
03-06-2007, 11:25 AM
just wondering...

say the bears somehow get a late first rounder in a trade for briggs(a pick higher than theirs maybe the saints? idk)...which I don't think will happen...but if they do, do you think there's any chance of them then trading up using their 2 late 1st round picks? or is it more likely they use one(probably the earlier one) and then trade down with the other? just a thought...

bearsfan_51
03-06-2007, 11:42 AM
just wondering...

say the bears somehow get a late first rounder in a trade for briggs(a pick higher than theirs maybe the saints? idk)...which I don't think will happen...but if they do, do you think there's any chance of them then trading up using their 2 late 1st round picks? or is it more likely they use one(probably the earlier one) and then trade down with the other? just a thought...
I think that if we can acquire another 1st, we will trade up. Angelo makes a big deal of having at least 3 first day picks (which makes sense because those are generally your starters, and you need to replenish bodies evenly every year. That being said, if we can get 4 first day picks, it's not unreasonable to try to package two of them to try and move up and get a major impact player if there's someone we really like.

I'm just not sure who that would be. Poz seems like somebody the staff would like a lot. Ted Ginn seems like an Angelo type player, but how would he fit with Berrian already on the team? I've heard Brady Quinn but I HIGHLY he falls out of the top 10.

Maybe a major defensive player, but again, who?

iowatreat54
03-06-2007, 11:56 AM
I think that if we can acquire another 1st, we will trade up. Angelo makes a big deal of having at least 3 first day picks (which makes sense because those are generally your starters, and you need to replenish bodies evenly every year. That being said, if we can get 4 first day picks, it's not unreasonable to try to package two of them to try and move up and get a major impact player if there's someone we really like.

I'm just not sure who that would be. Poz seems like somebody the staff would like a lot. Ted Ginn seems like an Angelo type player, but how would he fit with Berrian already on the team? I've heard Brady Quinn but I HIGHLY he falls out of the top 10.

Maybe a major defensive player, but again, who?

See I agree that maybe if they traded up they would want Poz because you're right, he just seems like the bears' type of player...I don't think we would take Ginn, I see his as more like Hester in the fact that I don't see him playing much WR (like you said we have berrian, so Ginn would be a 3rd WR which at that position we shouldn't be taking a 3rd WR) I think we would take someone like Meacham or Rice (a bigger, more athletic/go up and get passes receiver for the long term)...I feel that if we do get another 1st for briggs, we could package one of the 1st with our 2nd and move high enough where we would have the luxury to have any number of players we wanted instead of seeing who falls to us...

SFbear
03-06-2007, 12:04 PM
I think that if we can acquire another 1st, we will trade up. Angelo makes a big deal of having at least 3 first day picks (which makes sense because those are generally your starters, and you need to replenish bodies evenly every year. That being said, if we can get 4 first day picks, it's not unreasonable to try to package two of them to try and move up and get a major impact player if there's someone we really like.

I'm just not sure who that would be. Poz seems like somebody the staff would like a lot. Ted Ginn seems like an Angelo type player, but how would he fit with Berrian already on the team? I've heard Brady Quinn but I HIGHLY he falls out of the top 10.

Maybe a major defensive player, but again, who?

What have you heard about Brady Quinn?

NYmoney
03-06-2007, 12:49 PM
What have you heard about Brady Quinn?

There is no way Brady drops out of the top 10. No way. Guaranteed. He's too good to even think about that.

SFbear
03-06-2007, 01:25 PM
There is no way Brady drops out of the top 10. No way. Guaranteed. He's too good to even think about that.

I agree. I was just curious what 51 had heard about Brady Quinn in relation to the Bears.

One factor that is underrated in this situation is that Lovie and JA both have job security now. Their jobs don't rely on Benson and Grossman being successful and I think they will be more willing to cut their losses with either of them if they don't pan out this year and they will be more willing to take a risk on a prospect that may take a year or two to pan out. This made trading Jones much easier even though Benson is an unknown. This is unlike Gruden and Crennel who would be stupid to take Brady Quinn because they need to win now or they will be out of a job. I get the impression Angelo isn't as confident in Grossman as Lovie is and would pull the trigger if Quinn was in reach. Then let Grossman play out his contract for one more Superbowl drive and then let him leave in FA with Quinn ready to take over. It's similar to the Bronco's situation last year with Jay Cutler.

It won't happen because Quinn won't fall that far but I don't think JA would be unwilling to trade up if the opportunity was there. His new deal gives him a lot more flexibility than he has had in previous years so he could surprise us.

iowatreat54
03-06-2007, 02:41 PM
I agree. I was just curious what 51 had heard about Brady Quinn in relation to the Bears.

One factor that is underrated in this situation is that Lovie and JA both have job security now. Their jobs don't rely on Benson and Grossman being successful and I think they will be more willing to cut their losses with either of them if they don't pan out this year and they will be more willing to take a risk on a prospect that may take a year or two to pan out. This made trading Jones much easier even though Benson is an unknown. This is unlike Gruden and Crennel who would be stupid to take Brady Quinn because they need to win now or they will be out of a job. I get the impression Angelo isn't as confident in Grossman as Lovie is and would pull the trigger if Quinn was in reach. Then let Grossman play out his contract for one more Superbowl drive and then let him leave in FA with Quinn ready to take over. It's similar to the Bronco's situation last year with Jay Cutler.

It won't happen because Quinn won't fall that far but I don't think JA would be unwilling to trade up if the opportunity was there. His new deal gives him a lot more flexibility than he has had in previous years so he could surprise us.

wow I never even thought about that angle...and I completely agree with you...although I agree that theres no way we get Quinn unless we trade into top 10, I can see us taking some risks with draft picks and just see how things play out with Grossman and Benson and etc. I don't think we will be too quick on dumping Benson if he doesn't have a great year, I think we will atleast wait to see how the 2008 season goes before we do that...but if there was a chance of trading up to get Quinn, as unlikely as that is lol, I think it wouldn't be out of the question for JA to do it now

SFbear
03-06-2007, 03:08 PM
wow I never even thought about that angle...and I completely agree with you...although I agree that theres no way we get Quinn unless we trade into top 10, I can see us taking some risks with draft picks and just see how things play out with Grossman and Benson and etc. I don't think we will be too quick on dumping Benson if he doesn't have a great year, I think we will atleast wait to see how the 2008 season goes before we do that...but if there was a chance of trading up to get Quinn, as unlikely as that is lol, >>I think it wouldn't be out of the question for JA to do it now<<

That is all Im really saying, that it isnt out of the question. I think people have been getting carried away with the "well JA has never done this before so he won't this time". Every year is different and this draft isnt very deep with talent.

Hurricane Ditka
03-06-2007, 03:16 PM
I think theres a high possibility we could take both a quarterback and a running back early on in this draft. If we package Briggs and nab another first, I could see us trading up if Brady had a Rogers, Leinart, or Cutler type fall, giving up one of our first and our early second, taking Quinn, nabbing an offensive lineman at pick 31, and then going best player available at pick 95. It's unlikely but it's still possible.

NYmoney
03-07-2007, 12:36 PM
Here's my question: TJ gets an upgrade of basically an entire round. However, WES WELKER gets the Phins a 2nd AND 7th rounder. I know that the Bears 2nd is closer to a 1st and the Phins is closer to a 3rd, but really...How can you explain this?

toonsterwu
03-07-2007, 12:40 PM
Here's my question: TJ gets an upgrade of basically an entire round. However, WES WELKER gets the Phins a 2nd AND 7th rounder. I know that the Bears 2nd is closer to a 1st and the Phins is closer to a 3rd, but really...How can you explain this?

In the end, it comes down to who wants certain players. Furthermore, Welker was given a 2nd round tender, right? That plays a huge role in it.

KBear
03-07-2007, 12:44 PM
Welker was given a 2nd round tender, and the Pats through in a 7th round pick just to make sure things went as they wanted it to go.

Getting was turned out to be a high third round pick value for Jones was probably the best deal the Bears could have realistically hoped to get. Teams really cant get what they think is equal value in reurn for one anymore.

Bears_Fan
03-18-2007, 11:17 PM
As a continuation of the 'Buffalo' and 'JA could do anything' discussions...

Would we trade Briggs and 2nd Rd Pick for Buffalo's 1st Rd Pick? We could target guys like Landry, Levi Brown, Nelson, Okoye, and still have another 1st round pick to get Sears, Griffin, Blaylock, or OLB.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
03-19-2007, 06:21 PM
As a continuation of the 'Buffalo' and 'JA could do anything' discussions...

Would we trade Briggs and 2nd Rd Pick for Buffalo's 1st Rd Pick? We could target guys like Landry, Levi Brown, Nelson, Okoye, and still have another 1st round pick to get Sears, Griffin, Blaylock, or OLB.

#37 and Briggs for #12? I would probably do it.

#12 overall = 1200 pts -- #37 is worth 540 -- Briggs is worth 660 which is equivalent to the #29 overall.

But who would JA target there..? I just don't see anyone that jumps out. Maybe Levi Brown.

Landry won't fall, Nelson is a bit over rated on this board IMO and will get picked between 18-24ish.

And you realize if we trade Briggs & #37 and take say Levi Brown & Griffin, we're left with a huge hole at OLB. I don't like the idea of trading Briggs. We need him.

I don't see Willis/Beason/Timmons being as good as Briggs in the future.

I'd rather hold off a year.. Anyone know what the LB class looks like next year?

Bears_Fan
03-19-2007, 09:22 PM
Briggs is worth 660 which is equivalent to the #29 overall.

This is in the area I have been reading Briggs is worth, but I am wondering where you got the number 660 from. What gives him that value?

Bears_Fan
03-19-2007, 09:55 PM
And you realize if we trade Briggs & #37 and take say Levi Brown & Griffin, we're left with a huge hole at OLB.

This is a good point. However, we could get OLB with the 31st pick and Safety with the 94th pick. I think Landry could fall. This is what I am thinking after we get rid of Briggs to Buffalo:

#12: Landry or Levi Brown
#31: OLB
#94: S or OL

regoob2
03-19-2007, 11:21 PM
What makes you think Landry could fall?

DaBears9654
03-20-2007, 01:14 AM
For my opinion, just see my sig.

NYmoney
03-20-2007, 10:32 AM
Welker was given a 2nd round tender, and the Pats through in a 7th round pick just to make sure things went as they wanted it to go.

Getting was turned out to be a high third round pick value for Jones was probably the best deal the Bears could have realistically hoped to get. Teams really cant get what they think is equal value in reurn for one anymore.

no way. the bears could have done much better with that jones trade. this has been commented on millions of times. he was a top 5 yards from scrimmage player last year.

KBear
03-20-2007, 01:12 PM
He was also in his last year in his deal hoping to get a much bigger pay day who will be 29 years old when the season starts in a RB market that has dried up in the past few years.

Now if you mean much better as a deal that would involve acquiring more draft picks instead of just moving up in the second round, then you are right. But getting a high 3rd round pick in value was not a bad deal.

DaBears9654
03-20-2007, 02:09 PM
OK, I said you could see my sig for my opinion, but now to go into details. Why not pay a player consistently in the top 3 on the team in tackles and has been elected to 2 Pro Bowls in a row what he wants? Especially when he's your best OLB and there's that great a disparity between him and #2. This is the kind of garbage that he was talking about when he said that the organization (i.e.: front office) is so terrible.

ChefMike
03-20-2007, 02:35 PM
Well first off I just want to say congrats on such an outstanding season ! I was pulling for the Bears in the SB too bad it was just Peyton's time. Da Bears are poised for another good season though.. Now I would say this.. Trade Briggs !!!!!

He is a Cancer that you don't need or want, example Ed Hartwell in Baltimore a few years ago. As a Ravens fan I saw this similar type of a situation, he was making crazy accusations of being worth more then Ray Lewis cause he was one of our Top Tacklers and made the pro bowl, now he was a good LB but not better then Ray Ray. We decided to let him go and got compensation for him in the draft since he was an RFA and didnt over pay for him. Now look at him he went to Atlanta and got injured and got cut from the Falcons and is looking for a new a Team to play for.

Get rid of him now don't waste your $7.2 million when you could trade him for a draft pick and still go out and sign someone to half of what he would have been paid or possibly package him with your pick to move up in the draft to get another Top LB like Penn St's Puz or a Jarvis Moss from Florida.

I am not saying that they will come in and be better or even right away play to the same level, but your Team is worth more then one player that wants to make waves.

Get the chemo therapy out and get rid of the Cancer !!!!!!!!!

JUST DONT TRADE HIM TO NEW ENGLAND !!! DONT KEEP HELPING THE RICH GET RICHER !!!!!!!!!!

regoob2
03-20-2007, 04:28 PM
OK, I said you could see my sig for my opinion, but now to go into details. Why not pay a player consistently in the top 3 on the team in tackles and has been elected to 2 Pro Bowls in a row what he wants? Especially when he's your best OLB and there's that great a disparity between him and #2. This is the kind of garbage that he was talking about when he said that the organization (i.e.: front office) is so terrible.

We cant afford to pay him market value and keep the rest of our team, we have Jamar Williams who could start next year or we could draft someone. Lovie Smith was a LB coach, our D Coord. was a LB coach, so we can groom a replacement just like we did when holdman left and Briggs stepped in as a third rounder

Bears_Fan
03-20-2007, 06:14 PM
What makes you think Landry could fall?

Don't get me wrong, I think he should be a top 10 pick, and there are a few teams that could take him - Lions, Bucs, Texans, and Falcons. I was looking at Scott's latest mock draft. Landry is listed at #10 to the Falcons, and it would not be too much for Landry to drop to #12.

Detroit might take Landry if they trade down, but that is probably too much for Matt Millen. The Bucs have more pressing needs. The Texans have too many needs to guess which way they will go. The Falcons' Bobby Petrino is an offensive coach, and I think he will go DL or OL - especially if Okoye is there.

regoob2
03-20-2007, 06:18 PM
True..True

DaBears9654
03-20-2007, 10:54 PM
We cant afford to pay him market value and keep the rest of our team, we have Jamar Williams who could start next year or we could draft someone. Lovie Smith was a LB coach, our D Coord. was a LB coach, so we can groom a replacement just like we did when holdman left and Briggs stepped in as a third rounder
But both Williams and Rod Wilson are unproven. If we're going to have to replace him, I would rather do it with a proven LB. They could both be very good, but "potential" in sports is similar to a vulgarity.

bearsfan_51
03-21-2007, 02:29 AM
Drew Rosenhaus was recently on Best Damn and he said that the Redskins, Niners, and Seahawks have all expressed interest in Lance. Whether that means they have interest in trading for him, or just signing him, who knows. But because he is under the tender they can actively talk to teams and speak publicly about it, something that I did not know.

KBear
03-21-2007, 03:45 AM
Of those teams, the Redskins are probably the most care free with their trading of draft picks. I'm not really sure why the Seahawks would be interested. They have good LBs and spent a lot of money on Peterson last year.

bearsfan_51
03-21-2007, 12:58 PM
Of those teams, the Redskins are probably the most care free with their trading of draft picks. I'm not really sure why the Seahawks would be interested. They have good LBs and spent a lot of money on Peterson last year.
Cause they are morons. They traded a 1st for Deion Branch when they already had a mountain of recievers on their roster. I don't know why people keep hiring FO staff from the Seahawks, I consider them one of the worst in the league.

LonghornsLegend
03-24-2007, 05:28 AM
the redskins are interested in every big FA thats on the market every year, and they are always willing to pay up, and trade away picks the next year...thats nothing new, but i would like to see the niners try to land him, i think it helps them out alot, although thats a completely new scheme for him, id like to see how he handles a change of scenery....


any word on who the bears have in mind as a prime replacement in the draft?

SFbear
03-24-2007, 04:17 PM
Drew Rosenhaus was recently on Best Damn and he said that the Redskins, Niners, and Seahawks have all expressed interest in Lance. Whether that means they have interest in trading for him, or just signing him, who knows. But because he is under the tender they can actively talk to teams and speak publicly about it, something that I did not know.

So in response to Rosenhaus's statement both the Niners and Seahawks have said that they have absolutely no interest in Briggs. Its not very idea to bluff when it will almost certainly blow up in your face.

bearsfan_51
03-24-2007, 04:23 PM
So in response to Rosenhaus's statement both the Niners and Seahawks have said that they have absolutely no interest in Briggs. Its not very idea to bluff when it will almost certainly blow up in your face.
Yeah I saw that, except it was the Redskins not the Niners that I saw. I think that Rosenbriggs think that they can create a media storm around this similar to the TO situation. The problem is that Briggs plays on defense and nobody cares about defensive players except a very few extreme cases.

sweetness34
03-26-2007, 10:29 PM
Reported Trade Offer:

To Redskins:

Lance Briggs
#31 Pick

To Chicago :

#6 pick

I'm too tired to comment on this tonight so I'll just put it up for you guys.

regoob2
03-26-2007, 10:54 PM
reported by who??

evershot
03-26-2007, 10:57 PM
reported by who??

foxsports Jay Glazer

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6613558

regoob2
03-26-2007, 11:00 PM
no way that happens, thats giving up a lot for lance

bearfan
03-27-2007, 12:38 AM
no way that happens, thats giving up a lot for lance

Lance = 2 time probowler. 25-26 years old, and LBs last a pretty long time in this league. He is IMO an elite LB right now, and he has room to grow. The contract that he would get, would probably be that of what a #6 would get, maybe even less.

Thats my only problem with the trade, is the cap.

sweetness34
03-27-2007, 01:12 AM
reported by who??

Sorry for forgetting that, like I said I'm tired as $hit, but I heard it on Sports Nite tonight which is why I posted it.

pellepelle_10
03-27-2007, 01:51 AM
the redskins are interested in every big FA thats on the market every year, and they are always willing to pay up, and trade away picks the next year...thats nothing new, but i would like to see the niners try to land him, i think it helps them out alot, although thats a completely new scheme for him, id like to see how he handles a change of scenery....


any word on who the bears have in mind as a prime replacement in the draft?

I could only hope Patrick Willis. The only thing is drafting him at #6 may be a bit too high if you ask me. Hell we "could" possibly get a LB fairly close where we're already at. Pos, Beason, and Timmons could all drop until the later 1st round. If we were to acquire this pick I would really like for us to trade the 37th pick instead of the 31st personally. I know it would be harder than hell trying to get anything else from Washington but I could very well be wrong. I mean this was the first offer so maybe we can work a little more out of the deal. In all honesty I think it would be in our best to trade down from #6 to acquire some young players for depth. This would be sweet even though we'd lose one hell of a linebacker. I have faith in Angelo's drafting of defensive players. The last 1st rounder was Tommie Harris who isn't half bad..(hehehe).

pellepelle_10
03-27-2007, 02:03 AM
See I agree that maybe if they traded up they would want Poz because you're right, he just seems like the bears' type of player...I don't think we would take Ginn, I see his as more like Hester in the fact that I don't see him playing much WR (like you said we have berrian, so Ginn would be a 3rd WR which at that position we shouldn't be taking a 3rd WR) I think we would take someone like Meacham or Rice (a bigger, more athletic/go up and get passes receiver for the long term)...I feel that if we do get another 1st for briggs, we could package one of the 1st with our 2nd and move high enough where we would have the luxury to have any number of players we wanted instead of seeing who falls to us...

Again I agree with you iowa. Gin fits the same mold as many players we have besides being small. If we lose Briggs then it will be aparent OLB will be drafted at some point in time. Rice, Meachem, Jarrett wouldn't warrant a pick that high because they'll end up going mid to late 1st round. I see the same for OLB other than Patrick Willis who is a stud. I'm seeing this #6 pick as trade bait to move to the mid 1st, grab a top end OLB or WR and get another selection either late 1st or early 2nd to draft WR or *sigh* OL.

bearfan
03-27-2007, 02:07 AM
Possibilities:
1.Trade up for CJ
-IMO, could happen. If the Raiders dont take him, I cant Imagine that the Lions, Browns, or Cards would. Bucs..maybe, but IMO they have other needs. If we could somehow manage to trade up for CJ if he slips past #1, then I think we should take it with out question.

2. Trade Down
Into Teens:
Pick up a mid rounder with this one as well. Maybe draft a WR still, Mcheam or Bowe. Olson IMO would be out of the question in mid 1st round for us.

KBear
03-27-2007, 02:45 AM
I could only hope Patrick Willis. The only thing is drafting him at #6 may be a bit too high if you ask me. Hell we "could" possibly get a LB fairly close where we're already at. Pos, Beason, and Timmons could all drop until the later 1st round. If we were to acquire this pick I would really like for us to trade the 37th pick instead of the 31st personally. I know it would be harder than hell trying to get anything else from Washington but I could very well be wrong. I mean this was the first offer so maybe we can work a little more out of the deal. In all honesty I think it would be in our best to trade down from #6 to acquire some young players for depth. This would be sweet even though we'd lose one hell of a linebacker. I have faith in Angelo's drafting of defensive players. The last 1st rounder was Tommie Harris who isn't half bad..(hehehe).

Of course you would prefer to give up the #37 pick instead of the #31 pick, its a lower pick. I would also assume that you would rather trade a 7th round pick, or just trade Briggs straight up for the #6 pick. But Briggs and the #31 pick is more then a fair deal to move up to #6.

for the sake of the fact that I am bored, I'm going to assume that this rumor has some truth in it. Then I would guess that the Bears must be targeting Landry, Brown, and putting themselves in a position to draft Quinn should he fall that far. If it is for Landry, we can assume the Mike Browns days as a Bear are numbered, but he would have to be healthy for the Bears to officially cut him. Brown would be the OLT for the furture, and the Bears would have to move ahead of the Falcons/Dolphins/Texans to get him.

Adams could be a sleeper pick here if he is still there, but something would have to happen to Brown or Ogunleye for that to happen, most likely Brown since Ogunleye would be cheaper to keep then to get rid of.

I might be overlooking Okoye here, as he could very well be the pick here. Would be a good fit. Bears could concerned about not being able to resign Harris considering who his agent is. Tank might be let go, though that might be that popular of a move with the Bears players considering how much support they have shown Tank in his legal troubles.

KBear
03-27-2007, 06:39 AM
I would not be agaisnt trading Briggs for the Redskins 1st rounder next year and Rocky McIntosh. Bears would keep their first rounder this year, and the Redskins can keep theirs.

That way the Redskins can still get their DL prospect, and the Bears wont have to shell out $$ for a top ten pick this year. Plus next year the Bears stand to loose Vasher/Tillman/Berrian/Grossman among other, so more picks next year make sense. Adding McIntosh will at least take away a glaring need to take an OLB this year. I'm not saying that he will be a pro bowler, but at least he is a good young prospect.

SFbear
03-27-2007, 01:06 PM
Dream scenario:

Trade 31st and Briggs for 6th pick from Redskins

Trade 6th and 37th pick for 3rd pick from Browns (possibly another mid rounder next year)
3rd - 2200
6th - 1600
37th - 530

1. Oakland grabs Russell
2. Detroit grabs Thomas
3. Chicago grabs CJ

We get our big physical reciever to learn behind Moose and complement Berrian.

*sigh* It isnt going to happen is it.

sweetness34
03-27-2007, 01:15 PM
Dream scenario:

Trade 31st and Briggs for 6th pick from Redskins

Trade 6th and 37th pick for 3rd pick from Browns (possibly another mid rounder next year)
3rd - 2200
6th - 1600
37th - 530

1. Oakland grabs Russell
2. Detroit grabs Thomas
3. Chicago grabs CJ

We get our big physical reciever to learn behind Moose and complement Berrian.

*sigh* It isnt going to happen is it.

Trading up? Hell yes it could happen.

Taking CJ? Less likely but JA is "jesus in a suit." (sorry 51, I had to steal this from you).

SFbear
03-27-2007, 01:34 PM
Trading up? Hell yes it could happen.

Taking CJ? Less likely but JA is "jesus in a suit." (sorry 51, I had to steal this from you).

Id also like to add to my Dream scenario that Briggs busts in Washington and after two years the Redskins trade him back to us for a sixth round pick and we sign him for peanuts.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
03-27-2007, 02:07 PM
Dream scenario:

Trade 31st and Briggs for 6th pick from Redskins

Trade 6th and 37th pick for 3rd pick from Browns (possibly another mid rounder next year)
3rd - 2200
6th - 1600
37th - 530

1. Oakland grabs Russell
2. Detroit grabs Thomas
3. Chicago grabs CJ

We get our big physical reciever to learn behind Moose and complement Berrian.

*sigh* It isnt going to happen is it.

As ridiculous as this may sound .. It has potential.

IF Cleveland wants AP.. They could trade down and he would be there at #6.

TB @ #4 has Caddilac - Arizonia @ #5 has Edge ..

The Browns could REALLY use the extra early 2nd round pick to help with the numerous holes on that team.

If JA reallly wants Calvin he can probably get him.. Assuming he doesn't go #1 and no one moves up at #2 where Detriot is trying to move down from.

DaBears9654
03-27-2007, 02:38 PM
foxsports Jay Glazer

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6613558
I saw it on NFL Network's ticker. On NFL.com here (http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/10033511). Just a tidbit of info on it though.

pellepelle_10
03-27-2007, 09:11 PM
for the sake of the fact that I am bored, I'm going to assume that this rumor has some truth in it. Then I would guess that the Bears must be targeting Landry, Brown, and putting themselves in a position to draft Quinn should he fall that far. If it is for Landry, we can assume the Mike Browns days as a Bear are numbered, but he would have to be healthy for the Bears to officially cut him. Brown would be the OLT for the furture, and the Bears would have to move ahead of the Falcons/Dolphins/Texans to get him.

Adams could be a sleeper pick here if he is still there, but something would have to happen to Brown or Ogunleye for that to happen, most likely Brown since Ogunleye would be cheaper to keep then to get rid of.

I might be overlooking Okoye here, as he could very well be the pick here. Would be a good fit. Bears could concerned about not being able to resign Harris considering who his agent is. Tank might be let go, though that might be that popular of a move with the Bears players considering how much support they have shown Tank in his legal troubles.

Some new news for anyone that hasn't seen yet. Chicago is apparently looking to re-sign Ian Scott which (to me) is good news given that DT should no longer be a concern.

Also Rotowold reported as of today the Chicago is one of 4 teams interested in Darrell Jackson WR - Seattle Seahawks however none of the teams interested is willing to give up a 2nd round pick for him (which to me makes a lot of sense given his injury concerns). I think this could be a good catch if we could get him at a good price. The guy can flat out play when healthy. Thats the only concern. Very underrated player.

back to what you're saying though kbear..I'm honestly confused to who chicago would get at the 6th. If they do stay I'd agree for all of the selections. I'm really at a lost to who they'd get that high. Landry sounds logical but I have a feeling Brown could return back just fine. (this is just me though). Gaines Adams would be a nice selection but with Ogunleye, Anderson and Brown its just hard for me to grasp it. if we resign Scott I really can't see DT either.

OLB would be nice but for a #6 pick this is very high. Maybe if we could trade down this would be ideal but for #6 this is way high for any of these players. I'd only hope that we could trade this pick down to get more picks. Apparently Angelo has turned the #6 down so hopefully this is where the real negotiating begins. Snyder is dealing with a mastermind. Angelo is one tough cookie. I hope a deal is worked out.

Bearsfan123
03-27-2007, 09:16 PM
i thought about it and how about trading down with the Patriots? considering they have two first rounders, we could grab Poz, and Staley, or Griffin and Blaylock, or Jarret and Beason. Then in the second grab Grubbs. Imagine, Beason, Staley, Grubbs, and a Rhema McKnight first day

pellepelle_10
03-27-2007, 10:06 PM
Dream scenario:

Trade 31st and Briggs for 6th pick from Redskins

Trade 6th and 37th pick for 3rd pick from Browns (possibly another mid rounder next year)
3rd - 2200
6th - 1600
37th - 530

1. Oakland grabs Russell
2. Detroit grabs Thomas
3. Chicago grabs CJ

We get our big physical reciever to learn behind Moose and complement Berrian.

*sigh* It isnt going to happen is it.

That would be crazy if we could do that but yeah..I'm not sure the possibility of us doing this.

SFbear
03-27-2007, 10:16 PM
i thought about it and how about trading down with the Patriots? considering they have two first rounders, we could grab Poz, and Staley, or Griffin and Blaylock, or Jarret and Beason. Then in the second grab Grubbs. Imagine, Beason, Staley, Grubbs, and a Rhema McKnight first day

That would require the Patriots to want to trade up. Why wouldnt the Redskins have already done this if they were interested?

pellepelle_10
03-27-2007, 10:24 PM
i thought about it and how about trading down with the Patriots? considering they have two first rounders, we could grab Poz, and Staley, or Griffin and Blaylock, or Jarret and Beason. Then in the second grab Grubbs. Imagine, Beason, Staley, Grubbs, and a Rhema McKnight first day

That would be sweet. I don't know if NE would be down with that. It always seems as though NE always has multiple picks every draft. LOL

Smokey Joe
03-27-2007, 10:25 PM
That would require the Patriots to want to trade up. Why wouldnt the Redskins have already done this if they were interested?
Because the Skins want Briggs...

NYmoney
03-28-2007, 10:15 AM
The bears should throw Briggs and the Jets 2nd rounder for that #6. I'd love that trade, and I wouldn't mind trading away our 1st round and Briggs for the 6.

sweetness34
03-29-2007, 04:27 PM
Haha JA is going to counteroffer the 'Skins according to Mike Mulligan. This should be fun to watch.

I have this gut feeling that he's going to own them in this deal, well ok it doesn't have to be a gut feeling, it's more common sense that it'll happen but I sense a huge robbery taking place in our favor on this one.

pellepelle_10
03-29-2007, 07:11 PM
Haha JA is going to counteroffer the 'Skins according to Mike Mulligan. This should be fun to watch.

I have this gut feeling that he's going to own them in this deal, well ok it doesn't have to be a gut feeling, it's more common sense that it'll happen but I sense a huge robbery taking place in our favor on this one.

Jerry Angelo is about to work Snyder like a plate of BBQ Ribs. LOL

evershot
03-29-2007, 08:36 PM
I have a feeling Angelo is going to go after the Skin's 2008 picks AND 2009 picks.

Smokey Joe
03-29-2007, 08:51 PM
How bout the Skins just get this over with and just sign him to an offer sheet already? :D

bearfan
03-30-2007, 12:43 AM
I have a feeling Angelo is going to go after the Skin's 2008 picks AND 2009 picks.

Haha, I hope he pulls a Paxson and gets the rights to switch 1st rounders next year also ;)

HEISMANHERSCHEL
03-30-2007, 12:56 AM
The freakin bears are gonna get the better end of the deal. The reason I say this is you guys are smarter with your player personnel.

All the skins do anymore is overpay for older players. There is no way I would make this trade if I was washington, and no way I would wait to do it if I was a bear.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
03-30-2007, 01:33 AM
Haha, I hope he pulls a Paxson and gets the rights to switch 1st rounders next year also ;)

That would be fun.

We would all have 2 teams to root for.

The Bears & whoever Washington plays.

KBear
03-30-2007, 01:44 AM
Actually theres three, add in whoever is playing the Packers.

BUSTKUNTLAWL
03-30-2007, 02:09 PM
Actually theres three, add in whoever is playing the Packers.

good point.

bearsfan_51
03-31-2007, 11:41 AM
I really don't like the way Lovie is handling this situation publicly.

"I have kids that act up from time to time and eventually they come back".


Here's the difference Lovie.

A) You're not his Dad.
B) He's not ten.

And by speaking about it publicly in such a manner, you're taking a "we know what's best for Lance and eventually he'll tow the line" is both arrogant and stupid. I don't think there is any question that what is best for Lance right now is to do whatever the hell he wants, which appears to be make a lot more money. I just don't understand the need for such comments. Sure the Bears have the right to franchise him. Sure they have the right to hold his rights and all that entails. They can even publically say that they expect him to play the season (although I don't think they believe that and it's more of a way to increase his trade value) but to act in such a condescending manner is insulting to Lance and I think to every player in the NFL. As a Bears fan I hope he's ready by training camp. As a rational adult I wouldn't blame him one bit if he held out untill week 10.

regoob2
03-31-2007, 12:14 PM
I like that he said it, he's telling lance that he doesnt approve of what hes doing to the bears. briggs is telling the bears by holding out that he doesnt care about helping the team he only wants to help himself, lovie isnt like that and doesnt want players that think and act like that.
if you wanna hold out then hold out. if your gonna play the play the whole year, the fact that he only wants to play the last 6 games of the season sucks. he might not be ready to play if he sits out the preseason and first 10 games.

bearsfan_51
03-31-2007, 01:48 PM
There isn't a single player in the league that won't look out for their best interests over that of the team.

HawkeyeFan
04-02-2007, 09:54 PM
Anyone hear this:

Some guy on another forum PM if you want proof of that forum said that The Rams offered a 3rd this year and 1st next year for Briggs, and that was heard on Sirius Radio, I'm trying to get confirmation but personally think its BS.

bearsfan_51
04-02-2007, 09:58 PM
Anyone hear this:

Some guy on another forum PM if you want proof of that forum said that The Rams offered a 3rd this year and 1st next year for Briggs, and that was heard on Sirius Radio, I'm trying to get confirmation but personally think its BS.

Now way in hell we'd take that anyway.

HawkeyeFan
04-02-2007, 10:09 PM
I know, I agree its a terrible trade for Chicago. The Bears should just give him his long term deal and get it over with.

sweetness34
04-03-2007, 02:33 PM
I know, I agree its a terrible trade for Chicago. The Bears should just give him his long term deal and get it over with.

We're not giving this guy Urlacher money, no way. He's a very good player but in the long term signing Tommie Harris is more important for our franchise.

pellepelle_10
04-03-2007, 03:16 PM
Bears | Team rejects Redskins' trade offer for Briggs
Tue, 3 Apr 2007 10:45:27 -0700

Jay Glazer, of FOXSports.com, reports as of right now, the proposed deal sending Chicago Bears LB Lance Briggs and the No. 31 overall pick in the NFL Draft to the Washington Redskins for the No. 6 overall pick is off the table after Bears general manager Jerry Angelo rejected the deal. According to sources, Angelo phoned the Redskins Tuesday, April 3, with his decision. The deal, however, may not be lost for good. The Bears would like to include LB Rocky McIntosh in the deal. The Redskins, however, do not want to part with McIntosh.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

This IMO would be one sick deal!! C'mon Snyder..pull that trigger..lol

VoteLynnSwan
04-03-2007, 03:27 PM
i think something may get done a little closer to draft time as Snyder will panic because he doesn't know what to do with his draft picks.

NYmoney
04-03-2007, 04:42 PM
We're not giving this guy Urlacher money, no way. He's a very good player but in the long term signing Tommie Harris is more important for our franchise.

I concur. harris>>>> briggs

pellepelle_10
04-04-2007, 12:10 AM
i think something may get done a little closer to draft time as Snyder will panic because he doesn't know what to do with his draft picks.

I hope you're right on this.

PapaBearHalas
04-06-2007, 05:20 PM
I concur. harris>>>> briggs

Good call and it is not even close.

In fact, I will be quite disappointed if we don't deal Briggs, even if it is for that deal the Rams allegedly proposed. Briggs, in my opinion, is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. The guy is fast and makes tackles...he is not a playmaker and this league is about making plays. The fact that he plays the weak side AND next to a HOF player allows him to go virtually unmolested on every play and still the guy fails to deliver game-changing plays. Put differently, you don't pay a guy who is solely a tackle machine like he is a pillar of the defense.

Perhaps more importantly, paying a guy like this is the type of move that sinks franchises; you don't, indeed you can't, pay a complimentary player like he is a superstar. The Pats, for example, have identified their core guys (and fundamental franchise philosophy, but that is another thread) and simply fill in around them...our core guys are Urlacher, Harris, Kruetz, (and for better or worse) Angelo and Lovie. Briggs rates somewhere below Hester, CedBen and Mark Anderson in terms of importance to the overall unit.

I remember people jumping up and down about losing Roosevelt Colvin and to a lesser degree Warrick Holdman as well...

bearfan
04-07-2007, 02:28 PM
Kris Jenkins on Trading Block?
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/507/story/77146.html

anyone think that a trade like this would be looked into:

Briggs

for

Jenkins
2nd or 3rd rounder

I wouldnt mind that at all, but I would still rather have Bills or Redskins 1st

bearsfan_51
04-07-2007, 02:40 PM
Kris Jenkins on Trading Block?
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/507/story/77146.html

anyone think that a trade like this would be looked into:

Briggs

for

Jenkins
2nd or 3rd rounder

I wouldnt mind that at all, but I would still rather have Bills or Redskins 1st
Kris Jenkins would do nothing for us.

bearfan
04-07-2007, 08:33 PM
Kris Jenkins would do nothing for us.

Just a thought. I mean, I doubt it would ever be mentioned, but Harris/Jenkins at DT IMO would be a pretty good combo

bearfan
04-07-2007, 10:16 PM
haha, looking at his thread, maybe it wasnt a good idea lol

BUSTKUNTLAWL
04-08-2007, 11:18 AM
Kris Jenkins on Trading Block?
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/507/story/77146.html

anyone think that a trade like this would be looked into:

Briggs

for

Jenkins
2nd or 3rd rounder

I wouldnt mind that at all, but I would still rather have Bills or Redskins 1st

Jenkins sucks.

wtf.

bearfan
04-08-2007, 08:38 PM
did you not read my posts after I gained that knowledge? :?

OhioState
04-09-2007, 07:53 AM
i really hope angelo can pull off some masterfull deal and get us a nice package for briggs. if he is going to be a baby and holdout then i say good riddance and hello to the next guy.

awfullyquiet
04-13-2007, 01:53 PM
ha, i already posted this.
but 6+68+Randle El = Briggs+31+37.

It'd be better than switching picks with the skins. because, honestly. NFC East?
I feel oddly torn by this all. I'm a bears fan first, skins fan second.

I also find it very fun that the bears have baby riggs on the roster.

NYmoney
04-17-2007, 08:07 AM
ha, i already posted this.
but 6+68+Randle El = Briggs+31+37.

It'd be better than switching picks with the skins. because, honestly. NFC East?
I feel oddly torn by this all. I'm a bears fan first, skins fan second.

I also find it very fun that the bears have baby riggs on the roster.

I doubt the Bears do this because Angelo already put his price tag on ARE, and the Skins trumped that price with their higher offering. Thus Angelo, Master of the Cap, has little incentive to do this trade.

awfullyquiet
04-17-2007, 12:35 PM
I doubt the Bears do this because Angelo already put his price tag on ARE, and the Skins trumped that price with their higher offering. Thus Angelo, Master of the Cap, has little incentive to do this trade.

mmm, i also think that ARE would agree to a restructuring as long as he wasn't on a team that sucked cajones.

SFbear
04-25-2007, 12:47 PM
In reference to Briggs trade buzz here's an article about 5 team who are supposedly interested. There's Washington, Denver, New York, Buffalo, and Tampa Bay.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070423bearsbriggs,1,4585517.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Angelo has said that he hasn't recieved any offers other than Washington.

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=3336

So there is interest but no official offers. I think if it happens it'll have to happen a few days before the draft. Im not sure how apprehensive teams would be about making big time trades without discussion beforehand and without some sort of extension agreed to with Briggs. However the Redskins have already set the bar and the other teams could just use that as a benchmark.

Tampa Bay has recently gotten rid of Quarles to free up cap space and the GM has confirmed rumors that the he is interested in Briggs. They have Cato June and Derrick Brooks but Brooks doesn't look like he is going to be around for much longer. He's the face of that franchise but Tampa Bay has never had a problem shipping out defensive veterans like Lynch and Sapp. Although Brooks is aging I think he would provide an actual upgrade to Briggs for our Superbowl window and provide a stop gap while younger talent at OLB develops. Also there is the obvious connection between Lovie and Brooks.

Ironically the only team that doesn't seem like a good fit for Briggs is the only team that has given us an official offer.

Bearsfan123
05-21-2007, 01:13 PM
New idea- Okay this deal will not equal the 6th overall pick but to me, it would give the Bears the best advantage.

Bears trade
Lance Briggs

Oakland trades
Thomas Howard
2nd rd pick
4th rd pick

Reasoning: Bears get a replacement linebacker along with two probably high picks. Lance would be put on a good defense in which his run stopping skills would be well used.

bearfan
05-21-2007, 04:08 PM
Meh, that trade would be good, but I am really high on Okwo and Williams. But thats also probablyt he best value there as well. Would be happy with that I guess

BUSTKUNTLAWL
05-21-2007, 04:55 PM
I wouldn't do that deal.