ThePreciating Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 POSTED 4:13 p.m. EDT, July 25, 2007 BRIGGS DEAL NOT AS CLOSE AS ADVERTISED A league source tells us that, despite a report in the Chicago Tribune suggesting that the Bears and linebacker Lance Briggs could soon be getting together on a one-year deal, an end to the offseason-long impasse between the two sides isn't as close as suggested. Briggs, the Bears' franchise player under the CBA, has been tendered a one-year contract that is worth $7.2 million in guaranteed money, if/when he signs it. July 16 was the deadline for working out a long-term deal, but the Tribune reported that Briggs could be signing a one-year deal soon, which would give him a big chunk of the salary as a signing bonus and a promise that the Bears would not hang the franchise tag on him in 2008. A reader has asked whether the Bears could remove the franchise tag and then sign Briggs to a long-term deal. We suppose that it's possible, but we're not so sure that the Bears would be willing to take the risk that an unrestricted Briggs would make a beeline for the Redskins. I know it's PFT so you'll never listen, but does anyone else hope the Bears screw up and remove the franchise tag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shagman Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I know it's PFT so you'll never listen, but does anyone else hope the Bears screw up and remove the franchise tag? NOPE, lets move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 A reader has asked whether the Bears could remove the franchise tag and then sign Briggs to a long-term deal. We suppose that it's possible, but we're not so sure that the Bears would be willing to take the risk that an unrestricted Briggs would make a beeline for the Redskins. :doh: Everytime I read something like this I get really ticked off. This is such media speculation Bull *****. God. This is why I hate PFT. I know it's PFT so you'll never listen, but does anyone else hope the Bears screw up and remove the franchise tag? Only so the Bears could end up screwing themselves over, not in any way hoping that Briggs would come here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreciating Posted July 25, 2007 Author Share Posted July 25, 2007 :doh: Everytime I read something like this I get really ticked off. This is such media speculation Bull *****. God. This is why I hate PFT.Only so the Bears could end up screwing themselves over, not in any way hoping that Briggs would come here. 1. Definitely speculation, I agree. 2. Definitely would be glad to see the Bears make a bonehead move like this, I agree. 3. You still wouldn't want Briggs here? Giving up NO draft picks? Are you serious? I have to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shagman Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 1. Definitely speculation, I agree.2. Definitely would be glad to see the Bears make a bonehead move like this, I agree. 3. You still wouldn't want Briggs here? Giving up NO draft picks? Are you serious? I have to disagree. He is overpriced! with or without the draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flycoach Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I hope they screw up and that he does make a beeline here. To get him for NO DRAFT PICKS after we offered them our #6? I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santana_4_prez Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 We are fine at LB. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 We are fine at LB. Thanks. only if McIntosh plays well that being said, we have too many in-house contracts coming up to even think about paying Briggs what he wants. i would be severly pissed if we gave him money and let either Cooley or Taylor go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 1. Definitely speculation, I agree.2. Definitely would be glad to see the Bears make a bonehead move like this, I agree. 3. You still wouldn't want Briggs here? Giving up NO draft picks? Are you serious? I have to disagree. He would cost way to much, meaning we wouldn't be able to resign Cooley until next offseason, when it's going to REALLY cost us. He would keep McIntosh from seeing the field, who I believe is going to be a better WLB than Briggs, as well as probably ending up getting rid of either Marshal or McIntosh which would be throwing away talent that we paid so much for (in the draft), or throwing away experience in this system (Marshal). These are just a couple of reasons why I'm not interested in Briggs at any cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 He would cost way to much, meaning we wouldn't be able to resign Cooley until next offseason, when it's going to REALLY cost us. He would keep McIntosh from seeing the field, who I believe is going to be a better WLB than Briggs, as well as probably ending up getting rid of either Marshal or McIntosh which would be throwing away talent that we paid so much for (in the draft), or throwing away experience in this system (Marshal). These are just a couple of reasons why I'm not interested in Briggs at any cost. That's not true at all. We currently have the room the sign both AND LL. I do agree that adding Briggs would stunt McIntoshs' growth, but I am worried about Washington based on recent revelations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BALLz Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I'd rather him sign a one year contract with the bears promising they won't franchise him next year and wait and see how our LBs pan out. If we still need LB help next year we sign him as a FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3930023&postcount=22 :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySkin21 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I'd rather him sign a one year contract with the bears promising they won't franchise him next year and wait and see how our LBs pan out. If we still need LB help next year we sign him as a FA. I would rather do the same thing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 That's not true at all. We currently have the room the sign both AND LL. I do agree that adding Briggs would stunt McIntoshs' growth' date=' but I am worried about Washington based on recent revelations.[/quote']We are said to be around 7 million under the cap right now. We still have to sign Landry (we have a rookie cap room at 2.2) and then Cooley, plus what ever else we have to sign due to injuries (pray to God we won't have to, but you have to be prepared just in case). You figure Briggs is going to want a contract around 5 years 35-40 million with a 20 million dollar signing bonus. that would be 4 million a year for the bonus and then another 15-20 million spread out so that it would probably cost us around 5-5.5 million this year. (These numbers are just guesses, not based on anything, and could be completely wrong.) That would leave us with around 1.5 million to sign Landry and Cooley as well as have money left over for emerginces. So again, no thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 We are said to be around 7 million under the cap right now. We still have to sign Landry (we have a rookie cap room at 2.2) and then Cooley, plus what ever else we have to sign due to injuries (pray to God we won't have to, but you have to be prepared just in case). You figure Briggs is going to want a contract around 5 years 35-40 million with a 20 million dollar signing bonus. that would be 4 million a year for the bonus and then another 15-20 million spread out so that it would probably cost us around 5-5.5 million this year. (These numbers are just guesses, not based on anything, and could be completely wrong.) That would leave us with around 1.5 million to sign Landry and Cooley as well as have money left over for emerginces. So again, no thank you.Your #'s are way off and are not structured properly. Any contract we offered him would be at least 6 years and probably 7. my guess would be a 7 yr, $56M contract. We would give him a $12M SB + $8M RB in the 2nd year that is guaranteed. Thus, the hit for the first year would be $2.6M(including base salary). It would be the same type structure for Cooley. Landry is a bit different because his contract will probably be more incentive laden. Remember there is a HUGE difference between "guaranteed" and a signing bonus. In the end, it does cut it close, but there are several players who will likely be gone that will free up space i.e. Collins. People think we don't have room to maneuver right now without effecting Cooley, but it's just not true. We have plenty of room. We are just waiting until he brings his price down. For the record I think Cooley should end up getting a 7 year deal worth a total of $42M with $18M guaranteed. I don't have intimate knowledge of the negotations, but I imagine Cooley is asking for $7M a year and we are offering five. Just a guess.Also, for the record, I really hope we sign Al Wallace to be our #3DE/situational pass rusher. He would be relatively cheap and has been a solid producer for Carolina for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Your #'s are way off and are not structured properly. Any contract we offered him would be at least 6 years and probably 7. my guess would be a 7 yr' date=' $56M contract. We would give him a $12M SB + $8M RB in the 2nd year that is guaranteed. Thus, the hit for the first year would be $2.6M(including base salary). It would be the same type structure for Cooley. Landry is a bit different because his contract will probably be more incentive laden. Remember there is a HUGE difference between "guaranteed" and a signing bonus. In the end, it does cut it close, but there are several players who will likely be gone that will free up space i.e. Collins. People think we don't have room to maneuver right now without effecting Cooley, but it's just not true. We have plenty of room. We are just waiting until he brings his price down. For the record I think Cooley should end up getting a 7 year deal worth a total of $42M with $18M guaranteed. I don't have intimate knowledge of the negotations, but I imagine Cooley is asking for $7M a year and we are offering five. Just a guess.Also, for the record, I really hope we sign Al Wallace to be our #3DE/situational pass rusher. He would be relatively cheap and has been a solid producer for Carolina for years.[/quote'] I have no doubt that your numbers are lot better than mine. However, even so I would not be interested in Briggs at this point, no matter what the numbers add up to. I just feel that the best thing we can do for this LB corp and this defense as a whole is leave it alone, unless injuries force us to tinker with it. That's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HitStickTaylor21 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 he just signed a one year tender. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2949139 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I think Briggs at the time of the draft was an isurance move and the best deal they could possibly get for moving 25 spots down the draft from the No.6. pick ...looking back to up essentially two starters(one a two time probowler already) from 1 pick is more than they were offered elsewhere.... Now we dont have the money or desire for him...this is just typical PFT speculation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/CHI/10268779 Bears, Briggs agree to one-year deal NFL.com wire reports LAKE FOREST, Ill. (July 25, 2007) -- Linebacker Lance Briggs, who'd threatened to hold out of training camp, agreed Wednesday to a one-year, $7.2 million deal with the Chicago Bears. Briggs, a Pro Bowl selection last season when the Bears made the Super Bowl, had been unhappy when the Bears designated him as their franchise player. Click on link for rest of article... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I have no doubt that your numbers are lot better than mine. However, even so I would not be interested in Briggs at this point, no matter what the numbers add up to. I just feel that the best thing we can do for this LB corp and this defense as a whole is leave it alone, unless injuries force us to tinker with it. That's just my opinion.Honestly, I agree with you on Briggs. I was just pointing out that it was possible and wouldn't affect our dealings with Cooley. The one thing that really bothers me about discussions on this site is the lack of respect given to Marshall, who is an ideal #4, versatile backup and Khary Campbell who is a top special teamer in the league and has filled in very well if not discretely in his time here. I'm interested to see if we go with 6 or 7 LBers and whether Blades and Sartz make it. I think at this point blades is #6 and Sartz is 7 and his roster spot all depends on how other positions play out. LBer is certainly a strength and a vastly underated one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poundTHErock Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 ha ha shows how much PFT knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 No To Lb, No To Biggs, our LB position is fine. Lets talk about the dline or lack there of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portis4Lfe Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Good riddance briggs...but something tells me after that year is up he will be snooping around redskins park once again. We all know SNYDER GETS HIS MAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 he signed...moving on... Lets go Rocky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Honestly' date=' I agree with you on Briggs. I was just pointing out that it was possible and wouldn't affect our dealings with Cooley. The one thing that really bothers me about discussions on this site is the lack of respect given to Marshall, who is an ideal #4, versatile backup and Khary Campbell who is a top special teamer in the league and has filled in very well if not discretely in his time here. I'm interested to see if we go with 6 or 7 LBers and whether Blades and Sartz make it. I think at this point blades is #6 and Sartz is 7 and his roster spot all depends on how other positions play out. LBer is certainly a strength and a vastly underated one.[/quote']I couldn't agree more about the Marshall point. Marshall is a highly experinced player who is more than capable of playing any of the three LB postitions. However, I don't think that either Blades or Sartz are going to be cut. I think that Campbell will be cut before they will. I think that Blades will learn to play the MLB from Fletcher, and will replace Fletcher in three years, and Sartz will tutor under Washington (who will not have any problems this year), and probably take over for him in about four years. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.