Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Briggs demands a trade. (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2965)

TitleTown088 03-05-2007 08:59 AM

Briggs demands a trade.
 
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10 (Post 189664)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 189686)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 189686)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict (Post 189691)
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.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10 (Post 189693)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358 (Post 189701)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsaza2358 (Post 189701)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51 (Post 189714)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict (Post 189722)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYmoney (Post 189772)
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

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense (Post 189783)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkb528
Clements did not get tagged two years in a row.

Yes, he did.

Addict 03-05-2007 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner (Post 189830)
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.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.