Just for fun, I figured I'd take a look at what FAs might be available next year. According to KFFL (http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php?option=WR&y=2010), the list includes:

 

Chris Chambers

Braylon Edwards

Lee Evans

Vincent Jackson

Greg Jennings

Brandon Marshall

Derrick Mason

Hines Ward

Roddy White

 

Some of those guys may have already signed extension that they haven't reflected yet, but that's a hell of a list right there. If Denver doesn't have a great year, you think Marshall's not running toward Chicago with both hands in the air?

 

The problem, the much-anticipated "uncapped year" of 2010 will probably actually hinder FA movement:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

Just for fun, I figured I'd take a look at what FAs might be available next year. According to KFFL (http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php?option=WR&y=2010), the list includes:

 

Chris Chambers

Braylon Edwards

Lee Evans

Vincent Jackson

Greg Jennings

Brandon Marshall

Derrick Mason

Hines Ward

Roddy White

 

Some of those guys may have already signed extension that they haven't reflected yet, but that's a hell of a list right there. If Denver doesn't have a great year, you think Marshall's not running toward Chicago with both hands in the air?

 

The problem, the much-anticipated "uncapped year" of 2010 will probably actually hinder FA movement:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

I don't think an uncapped year will hinder FA movement as it may increase it because you have teams like Dallas and Washington who have big pockets. It will absolutely kill a team like Green Bay.

I don't think an uncapped year will hinder FA movement as it may increase it because you have teams like Dallas and Washington who have big pockets. It will absolutely kill a team like Green Bay.

 

Except if you read the article I attached, the provisions are built to prevent people from buying championships by limiting the amount of money successful teams can spend without losing comparable value (either by cuts or FA). For a team like the Bears who now expects to be more successful, that's a bit of a concern.

Evans got a 4 year, $40 million extension this past year. Jennings won't leave GB to come here and plus, his extension will be their top priority through this season into the offseason. Mason is 35 right now and so he'll be 36 by that time- I'll pass. You can make a case for Ward being the face of that franchise in Pittsburgh. He'll be 35 by that time and so I'll again pass.

 

However, Jackson, Edwards, Marshall, and White are all FA's. UFA? I'm not sure. But they are all FA's.

If Marshall wasn't such a POS of the field, I'd love to have him. I love the way he plays.

 

But he is too much of a POS to be risking a huge contract on.

If Marshall wasn't such a POS of the field, I'd love to have him. I love the way he plays.

 

But he is too much of a POS to be risking a huge contract on.

Yeah no kidding, who knows when he will be suspended again.

I don't think an uncapped year will hinder FA movement as it may increase it because you have teams like Dallas and Washington who have big pockets. It will absolutely kill a team like Green Bay.

And Chicago. The Bears are in a large market but the owners don't have large pockets.

Some of those guys may have already signed extension that they haven't reflected yet, but that's a hell of a list right there. If Denver doesn't have a great year, you think Marshall's not running toward Chicago with both hands in the air?

Evans was extended through 2012.