Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

WP: Bears to Come With Briggs Counteroffer Team Likely Seeks a Redskins Defender

Skinsinparadise

By Skinsinparadise
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Guest Knightwchmn

Guest Knightwchmn

Posted
Posted

PLEASE BEARS!!! DON'T GIVE UP... HE'S YOURS TO LOSE!!

...and we need you to save the Redskins from their stupid selves of picking up another player at a position they have a surplus of and ignoring their true weaknesses!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4skins23

4skins23

Posted
Posted

I like and backed up the trade proposal we gave the Bears initially, but now I must say to the Bears " SIT AND SPIN MF'ERS!!! SIT AND SPIN!!!!"

I hope the 'skins blow them out and shut them out this year!!!

:bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.C.O.L.B.

G.A.C.O.L.B.

Posted
Posted
I like and backed up the trade proposal we gave the Bears initially, but now I must say to the Bears " SIT AND SPIN MF'ERS!!! SIT AND SPIN!!!!"

I hope the 'skins blow them out and shut them out this year!!!

:bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck: :bearsuck:

YEAH!!! Sit and spin you jive mother****ers!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IrishOrange15

IrishOrange15

Posted
Posted
If we were to trade for Briggs, I could see putting Rocky in, or perhaps even Golston, though less likely, but ONLY in return for Mark Anderson. Meaning, if we acquired Briggs and then viewed Rocky as purely depth, it would not be unreasonable or impossible for the team to turn back to Chicago and attempt to additionally strengthen defensive end with a young player who had 12 sacks a year ago. Otherwise, I would think that's too great a price to pay -- No. 16 in the draft per the value chart AND last year's second -- for Briggs.

You ain't getting Mark Anderson. Lovie Smith is infatuated with him.

YAKUZA

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrJL

MrJL

Posted
Posted
Why dont we trade next years pick instead.

Try to keep this years 6th round pick while still getting briggs would be genius to me.

That I wouldn't mind. I'd even say toss in Marshall and pull the demand for the 31st pick with that deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vladimir L

Vladimir L

Posted
Posted
That I wouldn't mind. I'd even say toss in Marshall and pull the demand for the 31st pick with that deal.

I wouldnt mind trading Marshall + a 1st and 3rd next year.

I would do everything we can to keep the 6th pick.

IF we can pull off getting briggs + keeping the 6th pick. We have upgraded our defense big time this year.

The only reason im scared to draft someone on D is because Gregg Williams is a douche when it comes to playing defensive players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alaadin123

alaadin123

Posted
Posted

Even if we don't go through with this deal, the damage is already done as far as I'm concerned.

It's already given the appearance that the Redskins are a "crazy for big names, " kind of team and if you have a "fading " big name player, you can pawn him off on the Redskins for tip top money and draft picks.

It's clear that Chicago doesn't respect the knowledge of our front office, to even attempt to demand all that they have for Briggs.

Certainly Briggs does not appear to be a "team before me", kinda guy.

Oh how I miss the Jack Kent Cooke days :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dirk McGirk

Dirk McGirk

Posted
Posted

please chicago, your nuts are in a vice with briggs, who do u think ur fooling here? wheres your leverage? should feel lucky you have a chance to dump someone who has publicly said he will never play for the franchise again, and draft someone at #6 who can replace his talent level somewhere on your team. Perhaps QB? The position that lost you a super bowl title. Bears should be jumping on this trade, but perhaps they wont, Skins dont need a brat of a LB, we need to draft our own future pro bowler, preferably a sick DE or DT to compliment Kedric Goldston who will be an up-and-coming force at DT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cmorina69

cmorina69

Posted
Posted
If we were to trade for Briggs, I could see putting Rocky in, or perhaps even Golston, though less likely, but ONLY in return for Mark Anderson. Meaning, if we acquired Briggs and then viewed Rocky as purely depth, it would not be unreasonable or impossible for the team to turn back to Chicago and attempt to additionally strengthen defensive end with a young player who had 12 sacks a year ago. Otherwise, I would think that's too great a price to pay -- No. 16 in the draft per the value chart AND last year's second -- for Briggs.

Agreed if we could pull that off then we could take a SS or a CB in the draft or even a WR and this team would have all of its needs filled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fpickering

fpickering

Posted
Posted
You want to talk about intelligence and ignorance? How about you call every GM in the NFL and ask them who they would rather have. Portis or Baily?

CHAMP DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE, HE DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE. Can we please put this argument to rest?! We would have lost him anyway in F/A had we not traded him and we would only have that 2nd round pick which was used to draft Tatum Bell. So ask yourself, who would you rather have... Portis or Bell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brianm23

brianm23

Posted
Posted
CHAMP DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE, HE DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE. Can we please put this argument to rest?! We would have lost him anyway in F/A had we not traded him and we would only have that 2nd round pick which was used to draft Tatum Bell. So ask yourself, who would you rather have... Portis or Bell?

He didn't want to be here because we stuck the Franchise tag on him. (much like Briggs situation with Bears) Had we just negotiated a deal as we did with Samuels and Arrington, then he would have wanted to be here. Well, I'd rather have Tatum Bell and Champ Bailey then just Portis alone. So if you are going to ask that question, put in the full equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fpickering

fpickering

Posted
Posted

How about we don't trade for Briggs since we don't need him and we stay at #6 while looking for opportunities to trade down on draft day?

This is not that hard. If the FO screws this up I will officially enter my name for consideration to be GM of the Redskins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ClintonINFORSIX26

ClintonINFORSIX26

Posted
Posted
CHAMP DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE, HE DID NOT WANT TO BE HERE. Can we please put this argument to rest?! We would have lost him anyway in F/A had we not traded him and we would only have that 2nd round pick which was used to draft Tatum Bell. So ask yourself, who would you rather have... Portis or Bell?

Don't listen to this guy I pulled out the statistics of how portis help our offense improve and Champ Bailey statistically did not help the Broncos defense....But he just keeps saying some much bull he doesnt even know what hes talking about, Let him talk...hes not very intelligent and makes himself look dumb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...