MAATopDogg Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Bears GM says he won't be bullied http://www.topix.net/nfl/washington-redskins/2007/04/bears-gm-says-he-wont-be-bullied CHICAGO -- During Saturday's question-and-answer session for team brass at the 10th annual Bears fan convention, one 25-year season-ticket holder became the first of several to voice a similar viewpoint on linebacker Lance Briggs' situation. "No one person is bigger than the team," the fan named Bob said. "Let him sit!" Only a few other statements or answers made during the Q and A with general manager Jerry Angelo, coach Lovie Smith and team president Ted Phillips met with applause as loud. Three other fans voiced similar opinions supporting the team's handling of its franchise free agent, who is being pursued in a trade offer by the Washington Redskins. Rather than take $7.2 million guaranteed, Briggs has threatened to sit out the season's first 10 games if he's not dealt or given a long-term deal. An answer on the trade proposal will come Washington's way very soon. "Washington did make us an official offer and I told them we'd get back to them probably sometime next week," Angelo told media following the seminar. "So we'll digest what they offered Monday and we'll go from there." The Bears' general manager made it clear Saturday he refuses to be bullied, one way or the other. Angelo insisted if he trades his disgruntled linebacker to the Washington Redskins, it won't signal a weakness in the future on his part in negotiating tactics. In other words, he doesn't fear other players in similar situations in the future making similar demands. "When things come up, we treat them individually," Angelo said. "I've always said this: We're always going to do what's in the best interest of our football team, and that's what we weight. "We can't operate based on perception. Certainly we're cognizant of perception, but ultimately and at the end of the day, we're going to do what's in our best interest." Briggs has made statements saying he wouldn't play for the team again in addition to threatening a holdout. There's no doubt it has been an attempt to dictate his fate by a player who has no authority to do it under the collective bargaining system. "They'll naturally try to dictate," Angelo said. "That's their job, to create any leverage or whatever leverage they can. "But again, we'll assess it from our vantage point and if it's something that we think is going to help us now and going forward, we'll make that decision." Angelo called such comments an attempt to force the team into acting irrationally or at least influence their action. During a talk with Briggs at the NFL owners meetings last week, he asked the two-time Pro Bowl linebacker to cease such attacks. "I said that I didn't think that that served anybody's best interest," Angelo said. "He's always been a class act. Going forward, my advice would be to continue to handle matters with class. "He understands what he's doing and hopefully in the end it works out for everybody." The mere mention Saturday of Briggs' agent, Drew Rosenhaus, evoked boos from the convention crowd. Angelo doesn't think Rosenhaus orchestrated the entire confrontation by telling Briggs what to say. "We're not going to villain-ize Drew," Angelo said. Angelo can't afford that luxury considering he has to negotiate a contract extension with Rosenhaus for defensive tackle Tommie Harris. "When somebody speaks, I have to take it as that's what they feel," Angelo said. "I'm not going to characterize Lance as a puppet. Whatever he says is what he feels." It's taking about a week for the Bears to get back to Washington about the deal because they're trying to weigh the effects on the salary cap. If the Bears kept Briggs and their own 31st pick in Round 1, it would cost them $3 million to $5 million less this season than if they make the deal for the sixth pick. The sixth pick would likely receive anywhere from $15 to $17 million in a signing bonus. The Bears would have needed $7.2 million to pay Briggs and last year's 31st pick in the draft received a $5 million bonus. The extra money could have been put to use in contract extensions for players with deals ending after 2007 like Harris, Charles Tillman, Nate Vasher and Rex Grossman. "You know when you're picking up that high, that's a lot of money and that obviously weighs into any decision that we make," Angelo said. "You just don't look at a decision based on the surface. You have to look into the cap." Angelo said no other team has come forth with a trade offer for Briggs. One fan on Saturday reminded Angelo that Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has a reputation for throwing away draft picks and cash for ineffective or mis-fitted veterans, and perhaps the Bears could finagle an extra draft pick in a trade. "We do want Lance on our football team in '07; Lance has served us well," Angelo said, before adding, "we'll look at anything that we feel will make us a better football team. And in the event that we trade Lance Briggs, so be it." Then they only hope it would come across as a move they wanted, not something they were bullied into doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omeletpants Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 It's only going to get worse with agents like Rosenwhore stiring the pot and no team is immune. This drama will be endless. Some want to villanize the Bears for being greedy, but it was Rosenhaus that set the trade terms not the Skins then he publically announced it to the press. Are teams supposed to accept anything he concocts in his mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Omeletpants, you have a great name! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omeletpants Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Omeletpants, you have a great name! It's our family name:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 We don't bully anyone, everyone is always picking on us, taking all of our draft picks every year. Why can't they just leave us alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 and neither should we. They didn't like our offer, tried to rip us off by demanding more, we should pull the trade offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Please don't be bullied Angelo, call his bluff, save my skins from themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianm23 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Angelo insisted if he trades his disgruntled linebacker to the Washington Redskins, it won't signal a weakness in the future on his part in negotiating tactics. In other words, he doesn't fear other players in similar situations in the future making similar demands. That's exactly what will happen the next time a player gets hit with the Franchise tag (especially a Drew R. client). "We're not going to villain-ize Drew," Angelo said. Why not? He's the guy giving your player the advice and the one trying to orchestrate a trade to a team that will pay his commission....err...client's contract demands. The Bears need to stand firm and put @$$holes like this in place. Here are some reasons why Briggs has little to no ground to stand on. 1) He's not going to be paid more than Urlacher. (drew r. should know this) 2) He can be replaced with another guy and perform similar in the system they run. (see colvin roosevelt for examples) 3) $7.2 million guaranteed is more than enough for him to retire on. What's this "security" he's talking about? 4) They can Franchise him again the next 2 years straight. So that would make him unemployed and not paid for 2 years straight, which would basically destroy his NFL career. What player is going to do that to himself? Then again, there are some idiots out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omeletpants Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 and neither should we. They didn't like our offer, tried to rip us off by demanding more, we should pull the trade offer. Why do you use the term "rip off". The trade parameters were Rosenhaus' pipe dream then he leaked it to the press. Are the Bears supposed to accept the trade terms from an agent. You're villanizing the wrong party. So, if Rosenwhore concocts a deal that says the Skins trade Jason Campbell for the Eagles 7th round choice then the Skins are "ripping off" the Eagles if they ask for more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laxpck Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Ummmm we bully the jets pretty good Randy Thomas Santana Moss I guess we did get screwed on their crappy kicker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Well if they are foolish enough to make the trade the only people who'll get ripped off is the people buying Briggs jerseys before he does a thing for the Redskins which with the current D line wont be spectacular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianm23 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Ummmm we bully the jets pretty goodRandy Thomas Santana Moss I guess we did get screwed on their crappy kicker Laverneous Coles ring a bell? We gave the kid 13 million bonus and a 1st rounder for him. Yeah, we sure "bullied" them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2006Skins Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Why try and bully them??? They know how wild Danny boy is with money at this point and of course they're going to go for more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianm23 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Why try and bully them??? They know how wild Danny boy is with money at this point and of course they're going to go for more. Doing transactions with Dan Snyder is like taking the school slut to the prom. You know you are going to score on that date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Why not? He's the guy giving your player the advice and the one trying to orchestrate a trade to a team that will pay his commission....err...client's contract demands. The next paragraph answers your question: Angelo can't afford that luxury considering he has to negotiate a contract extension with Rosenhaus for defensive tackle Tommie Harris. Fact is, you have to work with the man, and if you lose it over this, there will be a price paid down the road. Fact is, Rosenhaus is one of the top, if not the top, agent in the NFL. You can't afford to get on his bad side. Interesting seeing the difference in philosophy in dealing with disgruntled players. Angelo doesn't want to be bullied into dealing a player, while Gibbs is willing to let a player go if he wants out. Which is better for a team? Personally, if a guy doesn't want to be here, I don't know if I really want him to be here either. What kind of effect does that have on the locker room? On the other hand, I understand the leverage thing. If a team knows that you need to move a player, you don't have a lot of leverage to get the best value for such a player. At the same time, it may still be worth it. I can understand why the Bears would like something else in the trade. Moving up doesn't really benefit them, and they aren't going to get a replacement for Briggs with the 6th pick. If someone offered two picks, or a pick and a player, it might have more value to them than our deal. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunken Master III Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 We have been abused in the past by Denver.... don't get Chicago started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Laverneous Coles ring a bell? We gave the kid 13 million bonus and a 1st rounder for him. Yeah, we sure "bullied" them. They gave us a good deal on the refund, tho, with Moss. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laxpck Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Ummmm we got Santana Moss when we got rid of Laverneous I dont care if it cost us 100 mill to get rid of King Toe Pain We got the better end of that one for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Why do you use the term "rip off". The trade parameters were Rosenhaus' pipe dream then he leaked it to the press. Are the Bears supposed to accept the trade terms from an agent. You're villanizing the wrong party. So, if Rosenwhore concocts a deal that says the Skins trade Jason Campbell for the Eagles 7th round choice then the Skins are "ripping off" the Eagles if they ask for more? The rip off would be the Bears wanting the Sixth pick AND players or some kind of EXTRA. They're getting incredible value for a malcontent right now. This is a very fair offer. No one was willing to be fair when we needed to trade Champ or Coles. They gouged us for an extra pick and a receiver that they had all but given up on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Adama Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Fact is, you have to work with the man, and if you lose it over this, there will be a price paid down the road. Fact is, Rosenhaus is one of the top, if not the top, agent in the NFL. You can't afford to get on his bad side.I loved what the Eagles had done with Terrell Owens, another Rosenhaus client, they benched him and tried not to pay him. They stood firm and didn't waiver. They were also down the toilet that year anyway at the time, but they still did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 I loved what the Eagles had done with Terrell Owens, another Rosenhaus client, they benched him and tried not to pay him. They stood firm and didn't waiver. They were also down the toilet that year anyway at the time, but they still did it. Yes, but the original poster was asking about, why not trash Rosenhaus? Because you have to work with him. The TO situation had far more to do with TO than it did with Rosenhaus, even if Rosenhaus was part of the problem. The focus was still on TO, as it should be for Briggs. Ultimately, Briggs made a choice and it is his responsibility. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImmortalDragon Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Don't you wish we had a GM that wouldn't be bullied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibrahim Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 People need to stop blaming Rosenhaus, is he holding a gun to Gibbs's head to seek a trade? Rosenhaus does not have s**** to do with this. As Angelo stated above, "We have an official offer from the 'skins." If you wanna blame someone blame stupid Gibbs for going along with this. If we needed an OLB that bad, why didnt we just sign Adalius Thomas (who is a BEAST and better than Briggs). We wouldn't have needed to give up anything for him too. Now we are giving away an equivalent of a 16th overall pick just to make a splash at a position at which we are set. For goodness sakes we have M. Washington, L. Fletcher, R. McIntosh (spent TWO 2nd round picks to land him just last year), L. Marshall, K. Campbell, C. Clemons. Geez this team sucks. Snyder can't sell this team soon enough. Cerratto can't get fired soon enough. Gibbs can't retire soon enough. This team can't get a REAL GM soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 One fan on Saturday reminded Angelo that Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has a reputation for throwing away draft picks and cash for ineffective or mis-fitted veterans, and perhaps the Bears could finagle an extra draft pick in a trade. Even stupid Bears fans know how to rape the Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redshu Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Doing transactions with Dan Snyder is like taking the school slut to the prom. You know you are going to score on that date. Oh so true..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.