PDA

View Full Version : Washington potentially to trade pick to Bears for Briggs!


crazyisme
03-26-2007, 10:15 PM
I would be pissed as all hell if this happened for one reason, more than likely they would take Landry

possibly Quinn, but if quinn is gone no doubt they take landry, WOW i would be soo freaking pissed off!

but if that happens, wed probably end up with adams which isnt terrible in itself but still landry on the bears behind that front 7, damn!

Vikes99ej
03-26-2007, 10:28 PM
I want this to happen so bad. I want Gaines Adams over everyone else in this draft. If the Lions don't take Joe Thomas @ 2, the Cards will take Thomas @ 5. The only issue would be the Bucs. They might want Adams, too.

VikesRule
03-29-2007, 07:39 PM
I want this to happen so bad. I want Gaines Adams over everyone else in this draft.

Even over CJ?

I wouldn't be suprised if the Redskins once again throw away their draft for another veteran, but Briggs is bigtime and definitely would hurt the Bears, perhaps more than the pick will. I hope the Bears do make this trade and then draft Brady Quinn. I'd love to see him bust in Chicago. :D

Vikes99ej
03-29-2007, 08:41 PM
Even over CJ?

I wouldn't be suprised if the Redskins once again throw away their draft for another veteran, but Briggs is bigtime and definitely would hurt the Bears, perhaps more than the pick will. I hope the Bears do make this trade and then draft Brady Quinn. I'd love to see him bust in Chicago. :D

Thinking about Calvin Johnson on the Vikings hurts me, because it is so unrealistic. Too many other teams want him.

DHVF
03-30-2007, 01:06 AM
I want this to happen so bad. I want Gaines Adams over everyone else in this draft. If the Lions don't take Joe Thomas @ 2, the Cards will take Thomas @ 5. The only issue would be the Bucs. They might want Adams, too.
You want the Bears to rape another team in a trade "so bad"?

swagger
03-30-2007, 01:13 AM
The Redskins are morons. I really don't understand their undervaluing the draft.

Severe Punishment
03-30-2007, 01:54 AM
The Redskins are morons. I really don't understand their undervaluing the draft.
Last I checked they had 3 Super Bowl titles.

I wish our current group of idiots could bring themselves to that "moron" status.

neko4
03-30-2007, 01:56 AM
I would be pissed as all hell if this happened for one reason, more than likely they would take Landry

possibly Quinn, but if quinn is gone no doubt they take landry, WOW i would be soo freaking pissed off!

but if that happens, wed probably end up with adams which isnt terrible in itself but still landry on the bears behind that front 7, damn!

Why would they pick a Quinn after drafting a first round QB 2 years

Severe Punishment
03-30-2007, 02:29 AM
Why choose anyone ?

let's just not even show up on draft day.

wogitalia
03-30-2007, 10:26 AM
Last I checked they had 3 Super Bowl titles.

I wish our current group of idiots could bring themselves to that "moron" status.

Yeah and we have one of the best D-Lines ever. The past is the past. Redskins have been horrible for more than a minute now.

DaBears0530
03-30-2007, 10:33 AM
Why would they pick a Quinn after drafting a first round QB 2 years

Are you talking about Kyle Orton? If so he was drafted in the 4th round, and IMO
is nothing more than a good backup.

bearsfan_51
03-30-2007, 10:38 AM
You want the Bears to rape another team in a trade "so bad"?
Who was the first team we raped?


For the record, I think Branch, Amobi, Brown, and Willis would all be options too. Although the FO has already said they'd rather not pick in the top 10, which is one reason why the trade hasn't already happened.

DHVF
03-30-2007, 01:40 PM
Who was the first team we raped?


For the record, I think Branch, Amobi, Brown, and Willis would all be options too. Although the FO has already said they'd rather not pick in the top 10, which is one reason why the trade hasn't already happened.
Not "another" as in for the second or so time, but "another" as in some other team.

Severe Punishment
03-30-2007, 01:48 PM
Who was the first team we raped?


For the record, I think Branch, Amobi, Brown, and Willis would all be options too. Although the FO has already said they'd rather not pick in the top 10, which is one reason why the trade hasn't already happened.
Actually, from the sounds of it...I expect the trade to happen IF and only IF Chicago can find some team over the weekend to trade down with (perhaps middle of the draft). They're coming to the realization that they will (as of now)
only get a 2008 compensatory pick (3rd round value) right now if they let him sit the 07 season and then let him walk.
Right now he has more value for trade than he would once the season starts up.
I understand they don't want Briggs setting the precedent (players wanting out and then "getting their way" (public perception). But
I also think they're going to look at it from a buisness standpoint and try
and get value out of a guy they've invested quite a bit into.

swagger
03-30-2007, 02:25 PM
Last I checked they had 3 Super Bowl titles.

I wish our current group of idiots could bring themselves to that "moron" status.

How many have they won since Daniel Snyder bought the team team in 1999?

You want the Vikes to be more like the Snyder Redkskins, and their constant overpaying for overrated FAs (Archuleta, Randle El, etc) and giving away draft picks like they're free? Really? That's funny.

Severe Punishment
03-30-2007, 02:36 PM
When did I make some distinguish of "this era versus that era" comparison on the Redskins and WHEN did I say I would've then chosen the Daniel Snyder version of the Redskins.


You're getting negative rep points for AGAIN trying to start a fight on your ignorance and lies.

swagger
03-30-2007, 03:45 PM
You're getting negative rep points for AGAIN trying to start a fight on your ignorance and lies.


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Crazy_Chris
03-31-2007, 04:23 AM
the three redskin superbowls are irrealevant as that was a long time ago...Although its not so much snyder throwing away the picks its gibbs... he values building teams with proven veterans over through the draft and he doesnt want to come to realize that just wont work out in todays NFL snyder goes along with it because why the hell does he care how the team is doing when its still the most profitable team in the league every year... now as for the bears in the top 6 i think if they make the trade it doesnt necesarily doom us i think they would look to trade down in the middle of the 1st but if they got stuck at 6 Landry would porbably be a lock to them

The Dynasty
04-02-2007, 10:05 AM
There was a counter offer today. So they are still talking about it and PFT.com thinks that the bears will try to trade out of 6 to gain more picks.

Vikes99ej
04-02-2007, 10:15 AM
As long as the Bears aren't thinking about Gaines Adams, I'm happy. But if the Bears are trying to trade out of that spot, that could create problems for us.

wogitalia
04-03-2007, 07:44 AM
This is not a good trade for the Vikings. Bears would have CJ, Quinn, Landry and Thomas as their top guys should they stay there, which would basically rob us of one of the guys we should be looking at.

I mean assuming the Raiders don't decide to make shockwaves, one of those guys should be there for us as it stands. I really dont want Adams or Anderson, I just dont like them on the Vikings. We just have so much bigger needs than DE that can be addressed with the pick. Defense is just the least of our worries, we only have 3 guys who should be NFL starters on our entire offense. At least we have 6 or 7 on defense.

tylere0814
04-03-2007, 12:02 PM
It would defiinitely suck for the bears to leap frog us, that would give them power to draft someone the dont want us taking. However i dont see that happening, but its a possibility. Chicago would definitely look to trade down, they need OLine help and maybe a WR or TE.

The Dynasty
04-03-2007, 12:13 PM
It somewhat looks like these trade rumors have stalled because bears want more and redskins sticking with the deal so it could become a day before the draft trade.

Severe Punishment
04-03-2007, 12:36 PM
Whatever team is picking in that 6 position is surely to take a guy we have high on our list. Washington is most likely looking DE / FS and probably QB too (they did have Russell in for a workout).

It really doesn't matter to me...whose picking there, I'm just assuming whoever it is , is going to take someone we need.

The Dynasty
04-03-2007, 03:32 PM
well according to the NFL section on this forum that the Bears said no.

wogitalia
04-04-2007, 12:33 AM
It really doesn't matter to me...whose picking there, I'm just assuming whoever it is , is going to take someone we need.

Thats a given when you have as many needs as we do but I prefer the idea of Washington taking a DE and leaving us in a situation where we cant take one then Washington almost certainly not taking one and us ending up with a decent talent when there are much better prospects available. I will be annoyed if we take a defensive prospect other than Landry, unless we trade down obviously.

Crazy_Chris
04-04-2007, 12:50 AM
...there are more top defensive prospects(Gaines Adams, Jamal Anderson, Alan Branch, Amobi Okoye, LaRon Landry,) available than offensive playmakers(CJ, AD) and than the quaterbacks, and the chances are that all those offensive playmakers could be gone by the time we pick i dont know if your reffering to Gaines adams the DE with "decent" talent but IMO hes much more than decent hes elite talent