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

[TheLongshot]

He had a choice. Either be here and play or sit at home and watch the NFL.

That would have been an option, if we had the cap space. But, we had to redo Lavar and Samuels deal just to be able to franchise him. Fact is, we were capstrapped in 2004 after franchising Champ. It is one of the downsides of what we do, and really we could have used better planning for it, but it happened.

Fact is, if we kept Champ, we don't get Washington, we don't get Griffin, and we don't get a lot of players that could help our team. Course, not everything worked out great in 2004, but we were almost guaranteed to suck if we didn't move Champ.

Jason

[brianm23]

Your not very intelligent, are you? Portis missed one season, "Stays hurt"...you have no idea what ur talking about he played 15 games in 2004, 16 in 2005, and had an injury in 2006 and still managed to get in their and give us his all for 8 games....injuries happen its football, a very physically demanding sport injuries happen...and it happened because he was giving 100% like he does every play. He is a great running back and he has proven that your ignorance just makes me laugh because you have no clue what you are talking about...

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? To even put those two players in the same category is crazy, and any GM would tell you this straight up. It's why CBs command the money they do and why they are so valued in the NFL. I'm not saying Portis is a scrub, but missing a season is "stayed injured" in my book. I didn't say he was injury plagued througout his entire career, but when most RBs start to get injuries on the level he does, it doesn't bode well for the rest of their careers.

Keep on laughing chump, but it is the Denver Broncos who have the last laugh in this situation.

[brianm23]

That would have been an option, if we had the cap space. But, we had to redo Lavar and Samuels deal just to be able to franchise him. Fact is, we were capstrapped in 2004 after franchising Champ. It is one of the downsides of what we do, and really we could have used better planning for it, but it happened.

Fact is, if we kept Champ, we don't get Washington, we don't get Griffin, and we don't get a lot of players that could help our team. Course, not everything worked out great in 2004, but we were almost guaranteed to suck if we didn't move Champ.

Jason

Guess that's our fault for signing "PRIME TIME" to a huge contract that still affects our salary cap even years after he is gone. I'd had traded Lavar before I would have Bailey. I guess you guys still think Lavar is a stud LB eh?

[TheLongshot]

Guess that's our fault for signing "PRIME TIME" to a huge contract that still affects our salary cap even years after he is gone. I'd had traded Lavar before I would have Bailey. I guess you guys still think Lavar is a stud LB eh?

The decision was pretty much made when Danny decided to give Lavar that big contract. I understand why he did it, but that pretty much told everyone that there was no way we were going to resign Champ. In the end, the FO made the wrong decision, but Lavar was pretty much the face of the franchise in those years. We've seen what the fan reaction was to Lavar, which was more than he deserved.

Jason

[Langford78]

Redskins come back with a counter offer of go F yourselves. As bulldog said, nobody else is making a play for him, so why add more?

That made me laugh out loud.

[BleedBNG]

Hey Chicago... move up 25 spots in the first round, or try to move up more.

Take it or leave it (in other words... knock off the nonsense), because we're just as content in leaving it.

EDIT: Ooops, sorry, just read jsteelz's thread.

[onnie007]

We need to take that counteroffer and flush it down the toilet along with any more ideas of getting a whining LB who wants to be PAID. Last time I checked, we needed someone on the DL or perhaps a tall WR.

[DRSmith]

If they want Golston, the we want Tank and will give a conditional draft pick up next year, depending if he plays.

[ClintonINFORSIX26]

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? To even put those two players in the same category is crazy, and any GM would tell you this straight up. It's why CBs command the money they do and why they are so valued in the NFL. I'm not saying Portis is a scrub, but missing a season is "stayed injured" in my book. I didn't say he was injury plagued througout his entire career, but when most RBs start to get injuries on the level he does, it doesn't bode well for the rest of their careers.

Keep on laughing chump, but it is the Denver Broncos who have the last laugh in this situation.

First off missing a season would be 16 games not 8. He had a shoulder and injury and a broken hand, big deal. Frank Gore had a two torn ACL's(in both knees) in college and hes in his second year as a running back...thats bad injury...he seems to be fine and for a running back two knee injuries is one a whole different level then a shoulder injury... Your most running backs injury theory you came up with is unfounded, there is nothing to say this injury will bother him. Bailey wouldnt be here and we got a weapon on offense that we hadn't really had until that point. This was a fair trade, so this chump will laugh all he wants.

[Veretax]

He isn't any use to the Bears now, so what is the difference? As soon as he started spouting off the Bears have basically planned on him not playing. They are on to plan B. Briggs is not in any plans at the moment.

What hump are you talking about? We were just in the Super Bowl and if that is a hump, I'll take getting humped every year.

As far as the Bears offering more, why should they? The Skins are the team that came knocking and made an offer. It is not the Bears to offer more. Your FO wants the player, the Bears want them to step it up a little more. If the skins don't, no loss except to Briggs. The Bears move on and Briggs sits on his azz and makes notta!!!!!!

You know what, thats fine by me you keep Briggs, we'll pick him up next year for a deal that won't kill our cap in 08

[brianm23]

This was a fair trade, so this chump will laugh all he wants.

It's funny that you are the ONLY one beyond the Redskin's FO that thinks this was a "fair" deal. Congrats on being delusional.

[ClintonINFORSIX26]

It's funny that you are the ONLY one beyond the Redskin's FO that thinks this was a "fair" deal. Congrats on being delusional.

Great comeback...ur delusional cuz u try to believe that stank your saying...

[brianm23]

Great comeback...ur delusional cuz u try to believe that stank your saying...

ps. isn't portis STILL injured? I do believe so. Have a \_ (seat).

You are delusional if you think it was a fair trade. Ask your fellow companions up here if they think it was a fair trade and ask them who got the better of the deal. Dude, I hate fanboys that aren't realistic. You can be a fan and still know the reality of the situation. The reality of the situation is we got raped yet again in a whack trade.

[carniby]

The Bears dont want Golston. They have Dusty Dvorcek and Anthony Adams along with Tank Johnson and Tommy Harris.

Is asking for Rocky McIntosh so outrageous? Losing Briggs opens a huge hole for the Bears, and the Skins wanting Briggs means they are comfortable not using McIntosh for the near future.

[XSean21TaylorX]

if we did this bears better offer more picks to us.

[pjfootballer]

Keep on laughing chump, but it is the Denver Broncos who have the last laugh in this situation.

Yeah, laughing with their shiny new Lombardi's that Champ brou...oops. That's right, they haven't won squat either. Hmmm....

[Fan since a Fetus]

I do think that we need another dominate linebacker. I don't know if Briggs is that guy or not. I also don't know if McIntosh is that guy. I don't know either because I haven't seen either play in GW's system. McIntosh one game. Briggs is a beast in Chicago, but so was Warrick Holdman and Rosevelt Colvin. Maybe he is the product of the system, maybe not. He doesn't have to do too much in that system. We have two great linebackers in Fletcher and Washington. I was hoping Marshall would return to be a decent starter on the outside. I don't think we NEED Briggs.

I do know one thing! I do not want to give up the 6th pick and a player for Briggs. Way, way too much in my opinion. I will be very mad if we trade Golston or Marshall. Especially Golston. I am not saying he is going to be the next great thing, but my hopes are high that he at least becomes a solid DT. I am not sold on McIntosh being great. Obviously, the coaching staff doesn't think too highly of him. But, we did trade up for him in the draft.

If the coaches can mis-evaluate McIntosh's value in GW's system, then they can mis-evaluate Brigg's value in GW's system!

Hey Chicago: Hopefully the Skins are smart enough to know they have you in a bad situation. They should be asking you for extra players. How about you throwing in a DT or a DE, Briggs, and then we will as swap 1st round picks. Then we may think about it. If not then, find someone else to deal with or keep your market money hungry linebacker.

Also Skins fans: Can we please stop arguing about the Portis and Bailey deal. It is done with. Get over it. It happened whether you like it or not. Either way you look at it, the Skins learned a lesson. No matter, if they thought the deal was good or bad, they learned from it.

[ClintonINFORSIX26]

ps. isn't portis STILL injured? I do believe so. Have a \_ (seat).

You are delusional if you think it was a fair trade. Ask your fellow companions up here if they think it was a fair trade and ask them who got the better of the deal. Dude, I hate fanboys that aren't realistic. You can be a fan and still know the reality of the situation. The reality of the situation is we got raped yet again in a whack trade.

Are we still playing games I believe not. It doesn't matter what other people "think" why dont we say whats real...Bailey= No taste of the playoffs...Since we aquired Portis our rushing total went from 103 (without) portis...to 110 ( in 2004) and 137 ( in 2005) In 2005 when portis played the whole year we finished 11 in total offense...Bailey didnt really make denvers defense statistically better they finished 7 without Bailey and 7 with Bailey and this past year they finish 14th....Also this past until this past year our defense did not suffer when we lost Bailey as we were a top 10 defense both years...

[cphil006]

Don;t do this. Don't destroy our franchise.

[CG]

I don't think going after Briggs means the team is giving up on Rocky. Rocky is a fine young player who has done a lot on teams, and I doubt that he's going to become a throwin in a trade like this. Same goes with Golston.

Well, we've got 3 main LBs now - Fletcher, McIntosh (presumably) and Washington. To start Briggs, we're 'demoting' one of our developed starters and defensive leaders OR our new FA stud OR the second year player without a proven track record. Are we gonna bench Marcus Washington for Briggs? I hope not. Unfortunately, it doesn't leave much room for shafting anyone but McIntosh who is still unproven. We'd have a disgusting LB core and McIntosh would be riding the bench.

I hope we just stick with Rocky and develop our cheap talent (draft picks are as cheap as it gets).

:eaglesuck

[DieselPwr44]

You people are getting upset over nothing and here's why:

Sources said the Bears will ask the Redskins for a player in addition to the sixth pick, which they likely would trade to stockpile more first-day draft picks. Sources say the Bears could ask for middle linebacker Lemar Marshall, who started the last two seasons but will be a backup with the arrival of London Fletcher. The Bears also might ask the Redskins to part with either linebacker Rocky McIntosh, for whom the Redskins gave up two draft picks to select in the second round of last year's draft, or defensive tackle Kedric Golston,

This quote is based on pure speculation. How do I know this?

Listening to Sirius NFL Radio's "Moving the Chains" with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan last week, they had a segment on their show talking about various,possible trades around the league.

They started off with the Briggs deal first: Skins and Bears swap picks,Skins get Briggs. Kirwan and Ryan both prefaced their comments with "this is just speculation on our part."

Kirwan(former Jets GM) was speculating that Chicago wouldn't do this deal but if the Skins sweetned the deal with a player, that might put it over the top.

So both Ryan and Kirwan started discussing the Skins roster over the air. Ryan with "the Bears could ask for Marshall. He could slide right in while they groom a replacement." Kirwan counter speculates " The Bears are going to lose Tank Johnson so If I were the Bears,I'd ask for Golston."

Now I tune in today and both are talking about how they speculated on possible scenarios on the Briggs trade,go home for the weekend and then come back Monday with the Post doing an article with what they talked about the previous week and never once mentioned where they got it from.

Kirwan even commented that he didn't know they were in the business of helping a reporter at the Post make their deadline. :laugh:

So if I were you guys/gals, take this Bears counter offer with a grain of salt. It's pure speculation reported as fact by the WP. Who apparently have a SIRIUS subscription. :laugh:

[TheLongshot]

Now I tune in today and both are talking about how they speculated on possible scenarios on the Briggs trade,go home for the weekend and then come back Monday with the Post doing an article with what they talked about the previous week and never once mentioned where they got it from.

Kirwan even commented that he didn't know they were in the business of helping a reporter at the Post make their deadline. :laugh:

Dang, that's almost Nunyo-level reporting. Thanks for the scoop, man.

Jason

[brianm23]

Are we still playing games I believe not. It doesn't matter what other people "think" why dont we say whats real...Bailey= No taste of the playoffs...Since we aquired Portis our rushing total went from 103 (without) portis...to 110 ( in 2004) and 137 ( in 2005) In 2005 when portis played the whole year we finished 11 in total offense...Bailey didnt really make denvers defense statistically better they finished 7 without Bailey and 7 with Bailey and this past year they finish 14th....Also this past until this past year our defense did not suffer when we lost Bailey as we were a top 10 defense both years...

I'm sure you're smart enough to figure out that

AFC > NFC

NFC Least hasn't been squat in years my friend, so you should know good and well that the only reason Washington even made it to the playoffs is because the rest of the NFC is a huge joke. Just because they didn't go to the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't get the better of the deal and doesn't mean they don't have a better team than us. Fact is....they do at this current moment. I love my Skins (and panthers) but I'm realistic about my teams and the decisions they make.

[ClintonINFORSIX26]

I'm sure you're smart enough to figure out that

AFC > NFC

NFC Least hasn't been squat in years my friend, so you should know good and well that the only reason Washington even made it to the playoffs is because the rest of the NFC is a huge joke. Just because they didn't go to the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't get the better of the deal and doesn't mean they don't have a better team than us. Fact is....they do at this current moment. I love my Skins (and panthers) but I'm realistic about my teams and the decisions they make.

Playoffs is playoffs....we are in the NFC and will continue to be in the NFC...If you actually read what I am saying you will notice I am saying, our offense improved and our defense (with the exception of last year) stayed completely the same, where as Bailey statistically did not improve denvers defense that much. Be realistic, that I am. I am looking at if from the stand point of what happened where you are trying to predicted that portis will suffer from this injury down the line. And as far as them being a better team then us, is far from what we are talking about, we are talking about the trade. The trade was fair like I said we both filled our needs.

[bulldog]

name the 'dominant' linebackers on the Redskins 1982 and 1987 Super Bowl teams

the fact is those teams were based, as most solid defenses are, on the skill of the defensive line and the corners.