vegas1211 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Per Brad Biggs of the Sun-Times Marty Booker has signed a two-year deal wit the Bear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Order the rings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Per Brad Biggs of the Sun-Times Marty Booker has signed a two-year deal wit the Bear. Yes!!! He had to be cheap as hell. The sad part is, he's automatically our #1 WR. Hopefully we'll keep after Bryan Johnson. Here's the suntimes blog report from Brad Biggs: Booker agrees to two-year deal with Bears Three days after losing Bernard Berrian to the Minnesota Vikings, the Bears have brought back a receiver they have always called their own. Marty Booker agreed to a two-year contract Tuesday night. Booker, who holds the franchise record with 100 receptions from 2001, chose the Bears over the New England Patriots. Even after trading Booker with a third-round pick to the Dolphins in 2004, general manager Jerry Angelo would refer to him as ``our Marty Booker,'' a sign of the regard he held him in. Now, he is theirs again. Check back for more details soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 About time. I like Booker. Yes, i know he isn't special. But, we needed a WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Good signing. Our receiving corps are still a mess however. We should still pursue D.J. Hackett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Right on! Glad to have Mr. Big Hands back as a Bear! I'm happy with this pick up... Now to find some OL.... Per Brad Biggs of the Sun-Times Marty Booker has signed a two-year deal wit the Bear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Per Brad Biggs of the Sun-Times Marty Booker has signed a two-year deal wit the Bear. Hey Slick, thanks for the breaking news but you really need to title something like that, "Bear's sign Booker!" I clicked on it thinking it was another "Why we should sign Booker" post. But you were all over that. Thanks for the quick info. It's very ironic we only let Booker go because Terry Shea hated him & we wanted Wale. Because of that we signed Moose. Carolina let Moose go because they couldn't afford him. Now both guys are back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Deal is official. LAKE FOREST, Ill. - Wide receiver Marty Booker is returning for a second stint with the Bears after agreeing to a two-year contract on Tuesday. Check ChicagoBears.com later for expanded coverage. Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Time to party like it's 2002! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Good signing. Our receiving corps are still a mess however. We should still pursue D.J. Hackett. Agreed. Booker basically replaces Moose. He's consistently had less production then Moose but similar. We now need a replacement for Berrian. Although I have a bad feeling that replacement will be the combination of Devin Hester/Mark Bradley. The nice thing is that Booker has played in at least 14 games every year since he left the Bears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas1211 Posted March 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Hey Slick, thanks for the breaking news but you really need to title something like that, "Bear's sign Booker!" I clicked on it thinking it was another "Why we should sign Booker" post. But you were all over that. Thanks for the quick info. It's very ironic we only let Booker go because Terry Shea hated him & we wanted Wale. Because of that we signed Moose. Carolina let Moose go because they couldn't afford him. Now both guys are back. Good point. My view on him is that we needed a veteran presence if we were going to go with Bradley, Hester, and a rookie. So a good signing, not great but solid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Sorry for being redundant, but I thought that needed a !!! Here's the Brad Biggs story from the chicagosuntimes.com Bears bringing back Booker March 4, 2008 BY BRAD BIGGS bbiggs@suntimes.com Three days after losing Bernard Berrian to the Minnesota Vikings, the Bears have brought back a wide receiver they always have called their own. Marty Booker agreed to a two-year contract Tuesday night. Booker, who holds the single-season franchise record with 100 receptions in 2001, chose the Bears over the New England Patriots. » Click to enlarge image Marty Booker signed a two-year contract with the Chicago Bears and will be leaving his post as wide receiver for the Miami Dolphins. (AP) RELATED STORIES With no 'o' in Angelo, Bears can't score Blog: Updates from Inside the Bears The 10-year veteran was released by the Miami Dolphins last month and put his free-agent plans on hold while he explored a possible return to the Bears. They were more focused on working with their own free agents, but when Berrian departed for a six-year, $42 million deal with the Vikings, the Bears needed to make a move. Mark Bradley and Devin Hester were the only wide receivers under contract with a catch in the NFL. Booker visited the Patriots shortly after being let go by the Dolphins, but then interest in him quieted. The Bears got involved in the last few days. He had 50 receptions last season for 556 yards and one touchdown in a moribund Miami offense. The Dolphins cut him as Bill Parcells cleaned shop, and he was headed into the final season of a seven-year, $28 million contract the Bears gave him in 2002. He was traded to the Dolphins along with a third-round draft pick for defensive end Adewale Ogunleye at the end of the 2004 preseason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 The world might explode now that Ogunleye and Booker are both on the same team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Good point. My view on him is that we needed a veteran presence if we were going to go with Bradley, Hester, and a rookie. So a good signing, not great but solid. Agreed. Not to mention the bigger role that Greg Olsen should have with the team this year. Hell, Olsen might wind up being our #1 receiver. We still need to add another WR either through the draft or free agency. But this fills a major gap. All of us can momentarily quit freaking out for the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Great, Now 88 can calm down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Thank God. At least its a move. He should produce much more than moose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 I think this is a great move, and I wouldn't be all that upset with a WR corp of Booker, Bradley, Hester, Haas, Olsen, Clark. Every time Bradley saw the field he seemed to be bigger, stronger, and faster than most. He seemed to be on the verge of a big play, but the OL sucked so bad, and the QB consistency wasn't there, so we never saw it. We also know that Devin Hester is a threat to Forrest Gump a play on every touch. We may also see Haas this year, who knows? And seeing a double-TE package that we were promised last year would be great! I'm not all that worried about the receivers...unless of course the OL is not addressed...in which case the WRs won't matter nearly as much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Thank God. At least its a move. He should produce much more than moose. This is an argument that was beat to death when he was first cut, but why the hell do we think he should produce more then Moose? Moose has outperformed him EVERY year since Booker left, and Moose signed. Booker is a veteran WR who hopefully won't have as many drops as Moose (although I doubt he'll be as good at getting in position.) I view this deal as a wash. Booker replaces Moose & should equal his production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 IF we can get Hackett and/or Johnson now, that would have made our WR good to when an hour ago it was awful. I like the signing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 This is an argument that was beat to death when he was first cut, but why the hell do we think he should produce more then Moose? Moose has outperformed him EVERY year since Booker left, and Moose signed. Booker is a veteran WR who hopefully won't have as many drops as Moose (although I doubt he'll be as good at getting in position.) I view this deal as a wash. Booker replaces Moose & should equal his production. I agree, Moose was really starting to fall, Book should be able to outperform the 2007 stats Moose put up. That gives us Booker, Hester, Bradley, Davis, Hass. I still see us adding another FA (Johnson, Hackett, McCariens) and then drafting one which would mean either Davis/Hass will be the odd man out. Marty Booker year rec yds avg td 2007 50 556 11.1 1 2006 55 747 13.6 3 2005 39 686 17.6 3 2004 50 638 12.8 1 Moose Muhammad 2007 40 570 14.3 3 2006 60 863 14.4 5 2005 64 750 11.7 4 2004 93 1405 15.1 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 I agree, Moose was really starting to fall, Book should be able to outperform the 2007 stats Moose put up. That gives us Booker, Hester, Bradley, Davis, Hass. I still see us adding another FA (Johnson, Hackett, McCariens) and then drafting one which would mean either Davis/Hass will be the odd man out. Marty Booker year rec yds avg td 2007 50 556 11.1 1 2006 55 747 13.6 3 2005 39 686 17.6 3 2004 50 638 12.8 1 Moose Muhammad 2007 40 570 14.3 3 2006 60 863 14.4 5 2005 64 750 11.7 4 2004 93 1405 15.1 16 I'll just throw this out there- Book was in a QB situation that can be argued was worse then ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Another WR will make me happy. Whether it's Hackett or drafting one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Another WR will make me happy. Whether it's Hackett or drafting one. Even if we sign Hackett, I think we'll go WR in the 2nd round with Devin Thomas or Adarius Bowman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Can't complain, I think this is a good move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Marty Booker year rec yds avg td 2007 50 556 11.1 1 Moose Muhammad 2007 40 570 14.3 3 Looks like Moose got outperformed last year...in addition to being over 3 years older (and surely more expensive) than Booker. Moose had some value as a leader and a teacher and an example for the other WR's though. 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.