Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Redskins offer No. 6 overall pick for Briggs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by evershot View Post
    The conditional pick would be base on Briggs and it would come from the Bears. Much like how Seattle had to give up a first instead of a second because of the amount of playing time Deion Branch had.
    That doesn't make any sense. What he's saying is that usually, as in the case of Seattle, the team giving up the conditional pick is the team that gets the player. IE: dependent upon how the player does for said team. It very rarely (if ever) is the other way around. Why would we give more if Briggs is productive? That makes no sense.

    I think people are trying to rationalize this too much. The rumored deal likely is what it is.


    Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

    Comment


    • This just posted on the Chicago Tribune site.

      http://chicagosports.chicagotribune....ears-headlines

      To paraphrase, the Bears offered Briggs the same deal Clements got (one year deal with a promise not to re-franchise next season) and Briggs refused.

      Washington is pushing the trade. The Bears have made no comments other than Angelo saying they had no plans to get rid of Briggs simply because he was making a "rukus".


      Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
        That doesn't make any sense. What he's saying is that usually, as in the case of Seattle, the team giving up the conditional pick is the team that gets the player. IE: dependent upon how the player does for said team. It very rarely (if ever) is the other way around. Why would we give more if Briggs is productive? That makes no sense.

        I think people are trying to rationalize this too much. The rumored deal likely is what it is.
        I was trying to explain what yourfavestoner wanted. He wants another pick from the Bear to give to the Redskins (ain't gone happen).

        Comment


        • I guess it just depends on how much Briggs is going to ask for. I don't have the numbers that the top linebackers make, but I do know that the difference between #6 and #31 this year is going to be about 18-20 million over 5 years.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Patriots-Lions View Post
            Am I the only one who doesn't think this a ridiculous deal? I mean what would you rather have?

            Gaines Adams

            or

            Lance Briggs
            Jamaal Anderson/Jarvis Moss/Anthony Spencer/Victor Abiamiri
            which is why i really wouldnt mind it after looking it over a bit, people do over value draft picks here...well, i guess i did in my first couple posts on this thread, but after thinking...we already get a proven starter and one more who could get some playing time this year and help.

            heck, we could even take quinn pitcock/tank tyler/justin harrell or whoever to help out the d-line, there's still a bunch of good prospects to take for us.
            Last edited by critesy; 03-27-2007, 12:39 AM.


            RIP, Sean Taylor.

            Comment


            • Also, wouldnt resigning Briggs be similar to that of a #6 overall contract? Why not get a bonefide starter, that you know is a probowler, and has many years left.

              Originally posted by BeansDooma
              who retires first: brett favre or aaron rodgers?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bearfan View Post
                Also, wouldnt resigning Briggs be similar to that of a #6 overall contract? Why not get a bonefide starter, that you know is a probowler, and has many years left.
                No. Briggs will get something very similar to Clements. Adalius Thomas got about 22 million guaranteed I believe. I'm sure Briggs will get more than that.


                Nobody cares about your stupid fantasy team.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Patriots-Lions View Post
                  Am I the only one who doesn't think this a ridiculous deal? I mean what would you rather have?

                  Gaines Adams

                  or

                  Lance Briggs
                  Jamaal Anderson/Jarvis Moss/Anthony Spencer/Victor Abiamiri


                  Hahahahahahahahahahaaaaa *breath* Hahahahahaha......

                  Jamaal Anderson at the 31st pick....... Hahahahahahahhaa........


                  Comment


                  • if we do get the #6 do you think theres any chance we trade that pick then? I mean yea we could get any number of people at that pick and I would want them to, but JA seems to like to trade down in drafts and people really really over-value draft picks so maybe theres a chance of getting a lower pick or 2 or another player we need via trade? just a thought...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                      Synder continues to look like a bigger fool every year and the Redskins fans love him for it. I don't know whether to crack up more at Snyder or their fans. LMAO!
                      ok wow, u can shut up cause what redskins fans do u see jockin snyder for the moves hes made in the past? how bout none, damn cowboys fans think they're gods

                      this deal shouldnt be done cause briggs is gonna cost too much and we need a elite dline prospect not a ok one in the late 1st


                      Stedman Bailey 2012 Stat Tracker:
                      12 Games, 106 Rec, 1501 yards, 23 TD's

                      Steddy Ambition!
                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOnISzeG2Ao

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Smokey Joe View Post
                        ZOMG!!!!!! Think of the possibilities! 31 and Briggs for 6... omg, I could fondle myself to the thought of that. OMG, I need to look at some of the possibilities!
                        LMAO Smokey you're a trip man..wow there's a lot to talk about now. I'd really like to see us move down a little and try to get Patrick Willis and another player in the 2nd, 3rd maybe. IMO I just don't really see any player that will land to us this high other than Landry but to Lose Briggs this definatelly means we're going to have to draft OLB. Well like i said..OLB will definatelly be a 1st day selection and if this goes down I bet it won't past rnd 2 for sure.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by iowatreat54 View Post
                          if we do get the #6 do you think theres any chance we trade that pick then? I mean yea we could get any number of people at that pick and I would want them to, but JA seems to like to trade down in drafts and people really really over-value draft picks so maybe theres a chance of getting a lower pick or 2 or another player we need via trade? just a thought...
                          I need to read through threads before posting. I completely agree with this iowa. I'd **** my pants if we were high enough to take Calvin Johnson but this simply won't happen. Laron Landry would be nice but I'm confident Mike Brown can come back and do well. At 31 drafting a Safety would be fine but #6? I don't know about that one. If we could trade down and get additional picks then I'd be all for it. I'd really like to see us get the chance at Patrick Willis. This guy will be a monster in the NFL. Hell Beason, Poz, Timmons, or Willis would be fine with me if we can get another draft pick in addition.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by bearsfan_51 View Post
                            That doesn't make any sense. What he's saying is that usually, as in the case of Seattle, the team giving up the conditional pick is the team that gets the player. IE: dependent upon how the player does for said team. It very rarely (if ever) is the other way around. Why would we give more if Briggs is productive? That makes no sense.

                            I think people are trying to rationalize this too much. The rumored deal likely is what it is.
                            Bah. I don't know why I said "conditional" at all. Just got caught up in repeating the rhetoric that I'm used to hearing so much. I just meant an additional mid-round pick.

                            Comment


                            • The most intriguing thing about all this to me is the role of Drew Rosenhaus. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Dan Snyder is doing Drew a favor to drum up talk and try to build a market. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if Snyder really wanted to make this move and is awaiting Joe Gibbs decision. Personally, I'm waiting for Jason LaCanfora's blog to hear more.

                              Onto the ramifications from my perspective -

                              As nice as the 6th pick is, the Bears would only make this move as a last resort. As much as we (including myself) talk about the relative ease of moving a player in at LB for the scheme (witness Indy's LB turnovers for example), the reality, especially in this situation, would be far different and likely lead to a drop in play. With the Bears window being now, that's a move that's tough to make.

                              That said, it is something I could see. So what would be the focus at 6, assuming we don't deal again? With the move for Anthony Adams and Adam Archuleta addressing some short term concerns, it allows us to focus more, when comparing the talent to what is there. Ideally, the Bears would like Calvin Johnson ... but he won't be there. What's after that? I don't buy QB ... not there. Even if Quinn is there (and if he is, then the Texans might've miscalculated bad, as they liked him but didn't want to give up the assets), I don't see the Bears going that route. They are likely going with a Rex/Brian plan this year, and at best, they'll find a 3rd QB to compete with Kyle. That's my guess.

                              I think Laron Landry and Patrick Willis top the list if we stay at 6. For all the talk about Willis being a mike in a 4-3 and a weak ILB in a 3-4, I still believe that the role he might be able to make the most impact is as a tampa-2 weak. That allows him to flow and attack with regularity, limiting his exposure in coverage of the deep middle. It does raise some coverage concerns on the edges, but not enough. If Briggs is dealt, Willis could be given the chance to start immediately.

                              The other thought runs to Laron Landry. Archuleta will get one starting spot, and while signs point to Mike Brown returning, if the Bears deal that high, they'll likely jump Minnesota, who should be one of the first suitors for Landry (and no, I don't expect Landry to go top 5). I highly doubt any team deals into the top 5 for Landry ... but who knows. The Bears could move to 6 to grab Landry, let Mike Brown go, slide Danieal Manning to CB (and provide key depth for us there).

                              All in all, if it's Willis or Landry, I'd prefer seeing us deal up or down at that point, and not stay. I don't see defensive lineman there for now. What do Willis and Landry have in common? For the most part, many are viewing them as low risks. Even though I have concerns with Willis, serious concerns, I can agree with the low risk assessment as he has the appropriate work ethic, background, and is strong in enough areas that he should make a long career for himself in the NFL.

                              I could see the Bears dealing up ... or down from there. A long way to go.

                              For Washington, I would hate this deal. It just doesn't make sense, and while the Redskiins have done nonsensical things in the past, this offseason has, for the most part, been frugal and made sense. They've tried to address OL depth (albeit, I think Fabini's done ... and not sure what Ross Tucker has), and CB Depth. They've created linebacker depth with the signing of London Fletcher-Baker, as Rocky McIntosh likely is on the outside looking in. Adding Lance Briggs makes little sense in reference to their needs. That would mean 5 LB's for 3 spots (Washington, Fletcher-Baker, Briggs, Marshall, McIntosh), and unless Gregg Williams decides to shock the world with a 3-4 (he's not ...), that means someone capable moves on.

                              Dropping to 31 is also a huge risk relative to their DL needs. Granted, it puts them in play for the 2nd tier DT's, but the needed base end help is iffy there. Someone should be there ... will it be someone they like enough? It doesn't address their need for more picks at the same time (outside of another LB being dealt off). A darkhorse at 31 would be going OL ... and adding a guard, creating the necessary depth (Todd Wade going back to a depth role). That being said, it's just not a smart move in an offseason that, for the most part, has been smart (not spending wildly ... that being said, I, as previously noted, was not a big fan of the Fletcher-Baker move).

                              Let's wait and see what happens, and I suggest people keep a close eye on the LaCanfora blog, as he, IMO, is one of the best beat writers out there right now, and in his blog, has been very fair in critiquing and praising the Redskins.

                              Comment


                              • lolooolllolooloooollllllloooolllloolololollllllool zzz

                                The trade isn't as bad as it looks at first, but WOW still.

                                If the Bears pull this off, they may try to trade down in the first to get in a position for another LB.

                                by BoneKrusher
                                <DG> how metal unseen
                                <TheUnseen> Drunken Canadian Bastard: There's an APS for that

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information