Da Bears 88 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 After releasing three players Monday, the Bears made revised contract offers to Bernard Berrian, Tommie Harris, and Lance Briggs. Special teamer Brendon Ayanbadejo also got an offer. Financial terms aren't available, but apparently the Bears aren't all the away asleep at the wheel. Each of the four players is represented by agent Drew Rosenhaus. Chicago re-signing all four would answer a big chunk of their offseason questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Some thoughts. First, I think it is a mistake to re-sign all three FAs, in addition to extending Harris. While we just created a chunk of space, and are sitting fairly well in terms of cap space, I do not see us re-signing our own AND adding much in FA. Last years team will not go very far, and w/o significant upgrades, I don't see the point, and I do not see the big upgrades if we re-sign everyone. Second, could a stepped up interest in Briggs be an indication of concern over Urlacher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenom283 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I dont think Briggs is gonna take the offer unless they overpay he is one of the Big FA this offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Why would Berrian accept any deal today? One, Berrian is set to be one of, if not the top, WR in FA, which likely means a bidding war. Taking a deal now w/ the bears likely leaves money on the table. Isn't his agent Rosenarce? How often does he leave money on the table? Two, Berrian has said he wants to know what we are doing on offense. Many took that to mean he wants to know if we are going to keep Grossman, which may also imply he is not big on Griese or Orton, who most believe lack the arm strength to utilize Berrian's downfield ability. So w/ our QB situation so up in the air, why would Berrian accept a deal w/ us now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I think the only deal thats very likely is getting Tommie resigned this offseason. I just dont see us overpaying for Berrian. However, we might be able to land Briggs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 It isn't that I want any of these players to leave, but I just do not see how we keep them. Briggs - W/ Suggs tagged, Briggs appears to be the top LB in FA. Not only that, but some might argue he is the top defensive player in FA. He is seeking a huge payday, and I simply question whether our offer will include the $20m+ up front he is likely to get from some other free spending teams. Further, while Briggs often talks about wanting to stay in Chicago, he has also made comments in the past about wanting to get out from Urlacher's shadow. He believes he is an elite player, but as long as he plays next to Urlacher, will he ever get his due? Berrian - Again, top FA at his position. Of all the possibilities, he is probably the most realistic. While the offers could get up there, I am not sure other teams are going to give him the sort of money he thinks (top 5 WR money). Due to our weakness at the position, I can see us over-paying to get him, and it will not be in the same ballpark as Briggs/Harris. Harris - He said last year he believes he should be paid similar to the top defensive player in the NFL. Not just the top DT, but the top defensive player at any position. Well, Freeney signed a deal for something like $30m last year, and it was right after that Harris made his comments. I think Harris is looking at the $30m figure, and I do not think we are going to offer close to that, especially after a year Harris dealt w/ injuries, again. I do not know whether another team would offer him a deal like Freeney, but it doesn't matter as Harris won't be on the market for another year. If he and Rosenarce believe he is worth that, Harris is not likely to sign a new deal for less. So while we may be upper the ante, I just do not see it being enough. It may eventually be enough for Berrian, but I do not see us re-signing him prior to the start of FA. I think Briggs is gone, and Harris will not be re-signed before next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Why would Berrian accept any deal today? One, Berrian is set to be one of, if not the top, WR in FA, which likely means a bidding war. Taking a deal now w/ the bears likely leaves money on the table. Isn't his agent Rosenarce? How often does he leave money on the table? I think you're forgetting that the bidding war is already going on. PFT wrote about this today, and yesterday they mentioned how Moose was originally signed within 12 hours of being cut. Sure the bidding might escalate, but a high profile guy like Rosenass is going to know what his client is worth. Two, Berrian has said he wants to know what we are doing on offense. Many took that to mean he wants to know if we are going to keep Grossman, which may also imply he is not big on Griese or Orton, who most believe lack the arm strength to utilize Berrian's downfield ability. So w/ our QB situation so up in the air, why would Berrian accept a deal w/ us now? This reminds me of when Randle El said he wanted to play for a team where he could be the star receiver, and then signed on to be Washington's #3 WR. Money talks, bullshit walks. Players inevitably go whereever they can get the most money. You mentioned in a different post about us signing all of our own guys. I agree that's not good. For instance, what if we bring everyone back and do nothing to improve the team? As you mentioned, that's highly unlikely to happen. Hell, we might not sign any of them. Giving contract offers to all these guys sends an important message to the rest of the team: If you produce and bust your ass for us, we'll reward you. At the very least, these players will use Angelo's offer as leverage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I think you're forgetting that the bidding war is already going on. PFT wrote about this today, and yesterday they mentioned how Moose was originally signed within 12 hours of being cut. Sure the bidding might escalate, but a high profile guy like Rosenass is going to know what his client is worth. No doubt Rosie is working the phones behind the scenes, and likely has been for some time. Regardless, I think the price is FAR from set. For example, below you mention Randle El. Well, there was a time we were considered the front runner w/ our offer, then Wash comes in and thows up a ton more. Remember Kearse? Bidding began in the $14m SB range, and then went up quick. Phily and Angelo got into a bidding war, and I think his final deal was in the $20m bonus range, w/ our final offer being around $18m. It is one thing to have an idea of what teams are thinking about, but things often change from there. When you are talking about the top FA WR in a weak FA class, I think you can expect a bidding war, and there is simply no way to predict how that goes. If teams like Wash, Dallas, or other big spenders jump into the fray, the war could really go up. If the big spending teams take a pass, the bidding could fizzle quickly. I am not saying we won't end up w/ him, but I simply do not see a deal getting done prior to the start of FA. I think that anyway you look at it, Rosie would believe he is leaving money on the table by avoiding FA, and that is simply something I do not see happening. This reminds me of when Randle El said he wanted to play for a team where he could be the star receiver, and then signed on to be Washington's #3 WR. Money talks, bullshit walks. Players inevitably go whereever they can get the most money. No question players blow off care for all other factors when money is involved, but do you see us making an offer that so blows him away that he ignores those factors like Randle did? I see us making a "sweet" offer, but I do not see us making an offer that blows him away so much that he forgets all other cares. Now it is VERY possible a team like SF comes in an makes such an offer, and Berrian convinces himself that Alex Smith is the 2nd coming, but I simply do not see us making such an offer. An offer like that will not come prior to the start of FA. You mentioned in a different post about us signing all of our own guys. I agree that's not good. For instance, what if we bring everyone back and do nothing to improve the team? As you mentioned, that's highly unlikely to happen. Hell, we might not sign any of them. I just look at the numbers. We are talking about 3 guys who are going to command a ton of coin. And it isn't just about the cap. It is also about how much money the ownership is willing to shell out upfront at any one time. For example, to re-sign all three players, we could be talking about $65m or more ($30m for Harris, $20m for Briggs & $15m for Berrian). Has our ownership ever shelled out that much at one time? Even if they do, can we truly see them shelling out what it would take to get another OL? Cap aside, I do not see our ownership forking over $75, $85m or more at one time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I don't have any issues with the Bears talking to these guys, but I do see your point. I would really be surprised if Briggs stays...but I fear you may be correct in thinking they have concern about Urlacher. But maybe it's just cursory concern... Some thoughts. First, I think it is a mistake to re-sign all three FAs, in addition to extending Harris. While we just created a chunk of space, and are sitting fairly well in terms of cap space, I do not see us re-signing our own AND adding much in FA. Last years team will not go very far, and w/o significant upgrades, I don't see the point, and I do not see the big upgrades if we re-sign everyone. Second, could a stepped up interest in Briggs be an indication of concern over Urlacher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I guess I think the bidding war is already secretly happening. Otherwise, why would ANY of these guys sign right now? Mike Wahle was probably the #2 guard in free agency after Faneca. Not to mention, the Bears were supposedly still in the process of making their free agent evaluations. It would seem clear his best option was to let Faneca set the market and wait until more teams like the Bears were ready. Instead he immediately signs with Seattle. I never saw the numbers, but the reports were that he didn't get a ton of guaranteed money. So either he's an idiot, or there's a lot more going on that we'll never know about. I'd be curious as to which other free agents were discussing with Rosenass & Eugene Parker. For instance, I suspect that Julius Jones would be a guy we were interested in. I don't know this, but Thomas had Rosenass as a client, so it'd make sense that he represents Julius also. No doubt Rosie is working the phones behind the scenes, and likely has been for some time. Regardless, I think the price is FAR from set. For example, below you mention Randle El. Well, there was a time we were considered the front runner w/ our offer, then Wash comes in and thows up a ton more. Remember Kearse? Bidding began in the $14m SB range, and then went up quick. Phily and Angelo got into a bidding war, and I think his final deal was in the $20m bonus range, w/ our final offer being around $18m. It is one thing to have an idea of what teams are thinking about, but things often change from there. When you are talking about the top FA WR in a weak FA class, I think you can expect a bidding war, and there is simply no way to predict how that goes. If teams like Wash, Dallas, or other big spenders jump into the fray, the war could really go up. If the big spending teams take a pass, the bidding could fizzle quickly. I am not saying we won't end up w/ him, but I simply do not see a deal getting done prior to the start of FA. I think that anyway you look at it, Rosie would believe he is leaving money on the table by avoiding FA, and that is simply something I do not see happening. No question players blow off care for all other factors when money is involved, but do you see us making an offer that so blows him away that he ignores those factors like Randle did? I see us making a "sweet" offer, but I do not see us making an offer that blows him away so much that he forgets all other cares. Now it is VERY possible a team like SF comes in an makes such an offer, and Berrian convinces himself that Alex Smith is the 2nd coming, but I simply do not see us making such an offer. An offer like that will not come prior to the start of FA. I just look at the numbers. We are talking about 3 guys who are going to command a ton of coin. And it isn't just about the cap. It is also about how much money the ownership is willing to shell out upfront at any one time. For example, to re-sign all three players, we could be talking about $65m or more ($30m for Harris, $20m for Briggs & $15m for Berrian). Has our ownership ever shelled out that much at one time? Even if they do, can we truly see them shelling out what it would take to get another OL? Cap aside, I do not see our ownership forking over $75, $85m or more at one time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprout Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Why would Berrian accept any deal today? One, Berrian is set to be one of, if not the top, WR in FA, which likely means a bidding war. Taking a deal now w/ the bears likely leaves money on the table. Isn't his agent Rosenarce? How often does he leave money on the table? Two, Berrian has said he wants to know what we are doing on offense. Many took that to mean he wants to know if we are going to keep Grossman, which may also imply he is not big on Griese or Orton, who most believe lack the arm strength to utilize Berrian's downfield ability. So w/ our QB situation so up in the air, why would Berrian accept a deal w/ us now? Berrian probably has some idea what he can expect to get for his FA contract. As said below, tampering goes on. The only way I see Berrian accepting the Bears 1st offer, is if it is in the ball park of what he thinks he can get somewhere else and he is fearful of getting franchise or transition tagged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Re: Wahle, I know you were high on him, but I am not sure he would have been a really high profile FA. He is a name from the past, but has not played well of late. His signing a deal early w/o a great bonus might be evidence to that point. Not only that, but as he was cut, he was available to anyone, and thus a bidding war didn't have to be behind the scenes. His situation is not the same as Berrian/Briggs. I don't doubt that some bidding is going on right now for players who have not hit FA yet. At the same time, I would not agree it is the same as the true bidding war you often see after FA does in fact start. If it was all behind the scenes like you indicate, why wouldn't most all of the top FAs be signed w/in the first minutes of FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Good point on the tag. Threat of a tag would be one incentive for Berrian to take a deal now, if in the same ballpark. It may not be as much as he could get in FA, if a bidding war starts, but if he wants long term security and wants to avoid being tagged, then he could be more inclined to take the deal. On the other hand, he has an agent who has not been pressured much by the threat of tags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted February 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Sign Briggs to a long term deal, so i don't have to watch Jamar Williams playing full time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butkus Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I sincerely hope that Briggs is not signed, he is overrated and lacks character. As said before, he is not a big hitter, he is not that fast, he is solid, AKA slightly above average. Let him go. AND, even if he was the best thing since Singletary, he has to go after all of the shite he talked last year about Chicago, not to mention leaving his Lamborghini on the highway and reporting it stolen initially....not to mention his illegitimate children. Please...what a loser. Berrian, he is a good player, but I would not break the bank on him. Getting rid of "Moose" was a good step, and it would be nice to have Berrian back to maintain some continuity. But not if we have to pay Randy Moss/Terrell Owens type money. I think Booker would be a great pickup right now.......... Harris is a great player, has been hurt alot....how much does he want? If he wants top defensive player type money, then I say bye bye. He has not earned that type of money yet. Big money, yes, top defensive player money being hurt like he has? Nope........ Let's spend some money on OLine, let the linebackers we have take up the slack for Briggs, see if Bradley can produce and some of the backups we have can step up, and see what happens. Much will depend on the QB! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Sign Briggs to a long term deal, so i don't have to watch Jamar Williams playing full time. Any reason why you're so down on Williams so quickly? The impression I got last year was that in the games he played towards the end of the season he at least did an adequate job, perhaps a good job. And then we still have Okwo sitting behind him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted February 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I sincerely hope that Briggs is not signed, he is overrated and lacks character. As said before, he is not a big hitter, he is not that fast, he is solid, AKA slightly above average. Let him go. AND, even if he was the best thing since Singletary, he has to go after all of the shite he talked last year about Chicago, not to mention leaving his Lamborghini on the highway and reporting it stolen initially....not to mention his illegitimate children. Please...what a loser. Yeah, let an all pro LB go. Some overrated guy he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 This is exactly why I think Briggs wants to leave Chicago. As long as he plays next to Urlacher, many will question just how good he is. Whether you agree or disagree, I think it is a valid question. I am not saying he is definitely over-rated, but I think it is a legit question for most players paired w/ already proven all-pro talent. I might point to Wale as an example. When he was in Miami, and had Jason Taylor opposite him (not to mention a load of talent behind him) he was an unstoppable force, netting 15 sacks one season. Since coming to Chicago, he has been a good DE, but no where near the player seen in Miami. Maybe Briggs leaves Chicago and proves he is an all-pro, regardless who he plays next to. Maybe he is a player a defense can build around. Then again, maybe he is simply a good player who benefited from playing next to Urlacher. Time will tell, but I think it is a legit question, and further, think it is one reason (though money is the key) why he will leave Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted February 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Briggs stats: 2003: 16 games, 78 tackles 2004: 16 games, 126 tackles 2005: 16 games, 107 tackles 2006: 16 games, 134 tackles 2007: 14 games, 103 tackles Man, is he just terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Briggs stats: 2003: 16 games, 78 tackles 2004: 16 games, 126 tackles 2005: 16 games, 107 tackles 2006: 16 games, 134 tackles 2007: 14 games, 103 tackles Man, is he just terrible. I don't believe he ever said he's terrible. He said he's overrated, which doesn't necessarily mean he thinks he's bad. However, this is good news, but I'd wait to deal with Tommie after this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 On a defense designed to funnel plays towards Briggs he should get a lot of tackles. He's a very good player but I don't think he's a great player and I don't want to break the bank for him. I suspect that while our offers are serious they are also a courtesy to Rosenhaus. Briggs will test the market, there's no reason not too. I don't expect him back. This could also be JA blowing some smoke about our need at LB so teams aren't so certain what we're looking at in the draft. Berrian could well be tagged and Rosenhaus knows we're wiling to do that since we did it last year and worked out a deal with money upfront for Briggs (child support?) before the season started. I like Nfol's assessment of the contract situation for Berrian and I think there could be some common ground found between the two sides. Especially if incentives are good enough (i.e. Pro Bowl) to increase the contract significantly. Harris. He played hurt all last year winning Troy Aikman's respect along the way. It was refreshing to see a guy go through that for the team. Now Harris has to make a decision because his injury history does raise significant questions about his long term future. Is it worth it to take a huge payday now or does he wait and try to get a record setting deal next year. IMO JA is just being smart in taking the risk of the long term signing now feeling it's going to enable him to save millions. Ayanbendejo...first special teams player to make $2mil/yr, not with the Bears but he could get the best signing bonus ever for a special teams player. Will that make him happy? I have to agree about one thing: how are the Bears coming up with that much money to throw out in bonuses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Regarding Harris, when it comes to signing any player early, I have always been of the opinion the player has to give up some of their demands if they want to get the deal done. Harris is due about $1m in base this year. If he wants his big payday early, he needs to come down on his demand. That goes for any player. The player is under contract for another year (sometimes more than a year for other players). If they want the team to shell out a new deal early, then they can't make demands on the team as if they were FAs. So if Harris is asking for $30m now, I would politely tell him to stuff it. If he is telling the team that while he "might" get $30m next year, he would accept $25m this year, I would talk. Frankly, I am not sure I would give him $25m, but it's the point of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Tommie Harris will be the highest DT paid in the NFL, plain and simple... and rightfully so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 On a defense designed to funnel plays towards Briggs he should get a lot of tackles. He's a very good player but I don't think he's a great player and I don't want to break the bank for him. I suspect that while our offers are serious they are also a courtesy to Rosenhaus. Briggs will test the market, there's no reason not too. I don't expect him back. This could also be JA blowing some smoke about our need at LB so teams aren't so certain what we're looking at in the draft. Berrian could well be tagged and Rosenhaus knows we're wiling to do that since we did it last year and worked out a deal with money upfront for Briggs (child support?) before the season started. I like Nfol's assessment of the contract situation for Berrian and I think there could be some common ground found between the two sides. Especially if incentives are good enough (i.e. Pro Bowl) to increase the contract significantly. Harris. He played hurt all last year winning Troy Aikman's respect along the way. It was refreshing to see a guy go through that for the team. Now Harris has to make a decision because his injury history does raise significant questions about his long term future. Is it worth it to take a huge payday now or does he wait and try to get a record setting deal next year. IMO JA is just being smart in taking the risk of the long term signing now feeling it's going to enable him to save millions. Ayanbendejo...first special teams player to make $2mil/yr, not with the Bears but he could get the best signing bonus ever for a special teams player. Will that make him happy? I have to agree about one thing: how are the Bears coming up with that much money to throw out in bonuses? Well, we have about 20-25 million in cap space, and most deals are backloaded anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Tommie Harris will be the highest DT paid in the NFL, plain and simple... and rightfully so. Maybe. While I am not going to argue Harris is elite when it comes to DTs, I would argue he needs a healthy 16 game season this year. If he has another season hindered or shorted by injury, I am not sure he will get the mega-payday he expects. FA is always a gamble, but when you are talking about giving up $30m guaranteed, health of the player should not be a big concern. If he has another productive year, and stays healthy, I agree he will be the top paid DT in the league. Top defensive player, I am not so sure. But if he doesn't stay healthy, I think his contract will drop quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.