December 24, 200718 yr comment_27316 Kyle Orton credited his neckbeard with helping him overcome the cold and windy elements in Chicago on Sunday. "Certainly with the wind, it was cold, but I have a beard so that helps out a little bit. It's kind of warm in this area," Orton said. As always with Orton, there is a method to his madness. Lance Briggs' status for the Bears' season finale is in doubt due to a hip injury. Briggs wants to return to ensure that he has played in 75% of all snaps, thus preventing the Bears from placing the franchise tag on him once again, thus preventing what will surely be a big payday. S1.bmp Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27323 Kyle Orton credited his neckbeard with helping him overcome the cold and windy elements in Chicago on Sunday. "Certainly with the wind, it was cold, but I have a beard so that helps out a little bit. It's kind of warm in this area," Orton said. As always with Orton, there is a method to his madness. Lance Briggs' status for the Bears' season finale is in doubt due to a hip injury. Briggs wants to return to ensure that he has played in 75% of all snaps, thus preventing the Bears from placing the franchise tag on him once again, thus preventing what will surely be a big payday. Ha, Ha! I'd be tempted, if I were JA, to finagle it so Briggs can be franchised again, then trade his butt. Report
December 24, 200718 yr Author comment_27333 Ha, Ha! I'd be tempted, if I were JA, to finagle it so Briggs can be franchised again, then trade his butt. Agreed, ship his ass to Miami!! Take a draft pick Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27339 Agreed, ship his ass to Miami!! Take a draft pick Now that would be sweet! Tuna would get a D standout and we'd get the top pick in the Draft! Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27341 Now that would be sweet! Tuna would get a D standout and we'd get the top pick in the Draft! Uh, no. Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27368 Man, is there a chance he would not get 75% of the snaps? Has he missed that much time this year? If we could hold him out of the game do to injury and therefore keep him below the 75% figure, that would be sweet, then trade his ass for a decent draft selection &/or a quality player in a need position. Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27380 If JA promised him he isnt gonna tag him again than I severely doubt he will, regardless of how many snaps he has taken. Report
December 24, 200718 yr comment_27381 My understanding was he was told if he played 75% of the snaps he would not be franchised, if he did not play 75% of the snaps, we would not have to honor the "no franchise" agreement. Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27388 I agree with Drunkbomber on this. If he is anywhere near 75% of the snaps you do not tag him (especially if he is sitting because of injury). You do not walk to create an issue. Take the compensatory pick next yr. Peace Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27393 I agree with Drunkbomber on this. If he is anywhere near 75% of the snaps you do not tag him (especially if he is sitting because of injury). You do not walk to create an issue. Take the compensatory pick next yr. Peace If we sign who we want to (Faneca, Starks, FA S, FA QB, etc...) then do we get a comp pick even if Briggs leaves? I thought it had to do with gain vs lost in FA. Or is it just lost? Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27398 If we sign who we want to (Faneca, Starks, FA S, FA QB, etc...) then do we get a comp pick even if Briggs leaves? I thought it had to do with gain vs lost in FA. Or is it just lost? It deals with gain and loss... so the only way we'd get a 3rd round compensation pick for Briggs is if all the guys we sign in his place don't do good... And Lance Briggs is worth every penny of 7 million over 6 years (which would be needed to get him...) Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27404 It deals with gain and loss... so the only way we'd get a 3rd round compensation pick for Briggs is if all the guys we sign in his place don't do good... And Lance Briggs is worth every penny of 7 million over 6 years (which would be needed to get him...) It will take a whole lot more than 7 Million over 6 years, better rethink those numbers!! Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27409 It will take a whole lot more than 7 Million over 6 years, better rethink those numbers!! He wants Brian Urlacher money, and that Brian Urlacher money. Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27410 Uh, no. You got it, pal. We'd have to deal our pick as well as Briggs, and maybe a 3rd round pick for MIA's 1st overall pick. But, I might make that trade... Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27415 He wants Brian Urlacher money, and that Brian Urlacher money. You said 7 Million over 6 years. That to me is a little over 1 million per year. Now if you mean 7 million PER YEAR, for 6 years, for a total of 42 Million fine, but then add on another 20 million for a signing bonus and he will sign with us for a contract totalling 62 million over 6 years, not 7 million over 6 years. Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27420 You said 7 Million over 6 years. That to me is a little over 1 million per year. Now if you mean 7 million PER YEAR, for 6 years, for a total of 42 Million fine, but then add on another 20 million for a signing bonus and he will sign with us for a contract totalling 62 million over 6 years, not 7 million over 6 years. of course I meant 7 million per year... and there is no way possible any team would offer him 62 million over 6 years. He'll make anywhere from 2-6 million per year, but with a 20-24 million signing bonus. He'll probably wind up making an average of 7 million per season. Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27428 I was certainly hoping you meant per year but when you kept on saying 7M OVER 6 yrs I just wanted to make certain we were both on the same page. Bears | No long-term negotiations with Briggs Fri, 23 Feb 2007 07:40:05 -0800 David Haugh, of the Chicago Tribune, reports Chicago Bears general manager Jerry Angelo said the club is not intending to negotiate a long-term deal with LB Lance Briggs, who was designated the team's franchise player earlier this month. "When we made the decision, it wasn't with the intention that we were going to [negotiate now]," Angelo said. "I'm not ruling that out or saying that's not a possibility. But we made the decision about our finances that he would be playing under a one-year deal." Briggs is reportedly seeking a nine-year deal in excess of $63.8 million. I assure you, with esculating contracts and salary cap, and another Pro Bowl in his resume, Lance's contract demands will esculate even to a higher $$$ and beyond what the Bears will be able to afford with all the positional needs they have to fill. Report
December 25, 200718 yr comment_27436 I was certainly hoping you meant per year but when you kept on saying 7M OVER 6 yrs I just wanted to make certain we were both on the same page. I assure you, with esculating contracts and salary cap, and another Pro Bowl in his resume, Lance's contract demands will esculate even to a higher $$ and beyond what the Bears will be able to afford with all the positional needs they have to fill. Well, 63 million over 9 years is pretty much 7 million per season (and a lot of his money will probably be backloaded anyway)... Report
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.