Article on Forte

[sulster]

Sorry I can't add link from my iPad. Cbssportsline has an interesting article on the Forte contract talks. Makes you pick a side. Well I'm on the give the man what he is due. Give him the garaunteed money, since he did all that was asked for since being in the league

[Stinger226]

Sorry I can't add link from my iPad. Cbssportsline has an interesting article on the Forte contract talks. Makes you pick a side. Well I'm on the give the man what he is due. Give him the garaunteed money, since he did all that was asked for since being in the league

I dont blame Forte for any angry, since we dont know the numbers, its hard to pick sides. I think the Bears are dropping the ball on this, and not finding a medium and get it done. If he wants 5 years 41 mil with 20 guarenteed, I pick the Bears .I think 17 guar., with a 4 year 32 gets it done. I think the last I heard we offered 14 guar. with a 5 y. 32 mil.

[LT2_3]

I don't think many are seeing the big picture here. Is this new contract to pay Forte for what he's already done or for what we expect him to do during the new contract. Unfortunately, in a salary cap system, teams can't really pay players for past performance for very long. It's commonplace for teams to pay a star a big salary for a year while they rehab from an injury or drop in performance while they see if they can return to form. After that the player takes a drastic pay reduction or gets released. The problem with the Forte negotiation is that it's not IF Forte's performance will decline, but WHEN.

 

All RBs decline in production as they age. Let's look at LaDanian Tomlinson as an example.

 

2006 - age 27 - 1815 yards rushing - 5.2 ypc - 16 games

2007 - age 28 - 1474 yards rushing - 4.7 ypc - 16 games

2008 - age 29 - 1110 yards rushing - 3.8 ypc - 16 games

2009 - age 30 - 730 yards rushing - 3.3 ypc - 14 games

 

Tomlinson never had a knee injury until the 2008 playoffs and his production ha already started declining. Forte has already had several knee injuries that make future knee injuries more likely. Tomlinson didn't have as many carries in college as Forte because as a freshman and sophmore he split carries with another RB.

 

Now when looking at a long term contract for Forte, he turns 27 this year. If his career declines similarly to how Tomlinson's did, he certainly should have a good season this year, but it would be all downhill from there. Then add to it that Forte started having knee injuries several years earlier than Tomlinson did and it's reasonable to question if his decline might start sooner.

 

See, this whole bit about guaranteed money is the whole crux of the issue. I would bet that the Bears would be willing to offer Forte the kind of money he's looking for as long as it's not guaranteed and is tied to performance like a vet minimum base salary and a $625,000 bonus for every 130 yard rush/receiving game. That would be $10 mil per year if he had 16 130 rush/receiving yard games. Those numbers are simply an example and I'm sure the formula could be tweeked to make it tiered at different levels, but the principle remains that they don't mind paying Forte well if he stays healthy and performs at a high level, but they don't want to pay him big money if he's injured or not playing well. That's where the guaranteed money becomes an issue. Heck, that's where the big unguaranteed salaries become an issue - because the team has to decide to pay him or release him in later years.

 

The more I think about it the more I think it makes the most sense to let him play for the franchise tender this year and see how his knees hold up by season's end before making a decision on next year. If he stays healthy and productive all year, then great! Franchise him again. I just honestly don't think he'll maintain his high level of productivity for 2 more seasons in a row.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

[Pixote]

I love it when the reporters claim this concern of the Bears was leaked from within the organization. Bull Crap!

 

First off, it does not need to be leaked, any team would have the exact same concerns when giving any RB a long term guaranteed deal.

 

Second, I do not think for one minute this was leaked from someone within the Bears organization, I do not think Emery would work that way.

 

Who gains the most from such a story? The Media, of course, who like us on the forum, struggle with things to write about this time of year.

 

Gee, I wonder if the source who wants to remain anonymous could possibly be a member of the media? You bet your bippy it is!

[balta1701-A]

Sorry I can't add link from my iPad. Cbssportsline has an interesting article on the Forte contract talks. Makes you pick a side. Well I'm on the give the man what he is due. Give him the garaunteed money, since he did all that was asked for since being in the league

You should be able to add ipad links if you go to the web page and do some copying and pasting. It takes some time, but it can be done.

 

Anyway, here's the link.

[balta1701-A]

I don't think many are seeing the big picture here. Is this new contract to pay Forte for what he's already done or for what we expect him to do during the new contract. Unfortunately, in a salary cap system, teams can't really pay players for past performance for very long. It's commonplace for teams to pay a star a big salary for a year while they rehab from an injury or drop in performance while they see if they can return to form. After that the player takes a drastic pay reduction or gets released. The problem with the Forte negotiation is that it's not IF Forte's performance will decline, but WHEN.

 

All RBs decline in production as they age. Let's look at LaDanian Tomlinson as an example.

 

2006 - age 27 - 1815 yards rushing - 5.2 ypc - 16 games

2007 - age 28 - 1474 yards rushing - 4.7 ypc - 16 games

2008 - age 29 - 1110 yards rushing - 3.8 ypc - 16 games

2009 - age 30 - 730 yards rushing - 3.3 ypc - 14 games

 

Tomlinson never had a knee injury until the 2008 playoffs and his production ha already started declining. Forte has already had several knee injuries that make future knee injuries more likely. Tomlinson didn't have as many carries in college as Forte because as a freshman and sophmore he split carries with another RB.

 

Now when looking at a long term contract for Forte, he turns 27 this year. If his career declines similarly to how Tomlinson's did, he certainly should have a good season this year, but it would be all downhill from there. Then add to it that Forte started having knee injuries several years earlier than Tomlinson did and it's reasonable to question if his decline might start sooner.

 

See, this whole bit about guaranteed money is the whole crux of the issue. I would bet that the Bears would be willing to offer Forte the kind of money he's looking for as long as it's not guaranteed and is tied to performance like a vet minimum base salary and a $625,000 bonus for every 130 yard rush/receiving game. That would be $10 mil per year if he had 16 130 rush/receiving yard games. Those numbers are simply an example and I'm sure the formula could be tweeked to make it tiered at different levels, but the principle remains that they don't mind paying Forte well if he stays healthy and performs at a high level, but they don't want to pay him big money if he's injured or not playing well. That's where the guaranteed money becomes an issue. Heck, that's where the big unguaranteed salaries become an issue - because the team has to decide to pay him or release him in later years.

 

The more I think about it the more I think it makes the most sense to let him play for the franchise tender this year and see how his knees hold up by season's end before making a decision on next year. If he stays healthy and productive all year, then great! Franchise him again. I just honestly don't think he'll maintain his high level of productivity for 2 more seasons in a row.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

Yes, it makes a ton of sense.

 

Basically, here's the question...if the Bears give Forte a guaranteed contract and he gets hurt, and that keeps them from having the cap space to sign other guys, and they wind up missing the playoffs because of it, is that acceptable since Forte has already contributed so much?

 

Somehow, I doubt most people would be happy about that.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

I don't think many are seeing the big picture here. Is this new contract to pay Forte for what he's already done or for what we expect him to do during the new contract. Unfortunately, in a salary cap system, teams can't really pay players for past performance for very long. It's commonplace for teams to pay a star a big salary for a year while they rehab from an injury or drop in performance while they see if they can return to form. After that the player takes a drastic pay reduction or gets released. The problem with the Forte negotiation is that it's not IF Forte's performance will decline, but WHEN.

 

All RBs decline in production as they age. Let's look at LaDanian Tomlinson as an example.

 

2006 - age 27 - 1815 yards rushing - 5.2 ypc - 16 games

2007 - age 28 - 1474 yards rushing - 4.7 ypc - 16 games

2008 - age 29 - 1110 yards rushing - 3.8 ypc - 16 games

2009 - age 30 - 730 yards rushing - 3.3 ypc - 14 games

 

Tomlinson never had a knee injury until the 2008 playoffs and his production ha already started declining. Forte has already had several knee injuries that make future knee injuries more likely. Tomlinson didn't have as many carries in college as Forte because as a freshman and sophmore he split carries with another RB.

 

Now when looking at a long term contract for Forte, he turns 27 this year. If his career declines similarly to how Tomlinson's did, he certainly should have a good season this year, but it would be all downhill from there. Then add to it that Forte started having knee injuries several years earlier than Tomlinson did and it's reasonable to question if his decline might start sooner.

 

See, this whole bit about guaranteed money is the whole crux of the issue. I would bet that the Bears would be willing to offer Forte the kind of money he's looking for as long as it's not guaranteed and is tied to performance like a vet minimum base salary and a $625,000 bonus for every 130 yard rush/receiving game. That would be $10 mil per year if he had 16 130 rush/receiving yard games. Those numbers are simply an example and I'm sure the formula could be tweeked to make it tiered at different levels, but the principle remains that they don't mind paying Forte well if he stays healthy and performs at a high level, but they don't want to pay him big money if he's injured or not playing well. That's where the guaranteed money becomes an issue. Heck, that's where the big unguaranteed salaries become an issue - because the team has to decide to pay him or release him in later years.

 

The more I think about it the more I think it makes the most sense to let him play for the franchise tender this year and see how his knees hold up by season's end before making a decision on next year. If he stays healthy and productive all year, then great! Franchise him again. I just honestly don't think he'll maintain his high level of productivity for 2 more seasons in a row.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

 

It makes perfect sense. Having Bush signed makes Forte almost expendable. I say almost as Bush hasn't really been tested as a feature back for a whole season. Is he capable? no doubt. The additional fact that Kalil Bell and Forte are very similar in their styles (IMHO) also makes it less difficult to watch Forte sit out. The guaranteed money from the teams perspective makes logical sense. With the uncertaintly of Fortes future ability they are wise in holding off for now and see how things are after the end of the year. Forte isn't really gettting that bad a deal in the franchise tag amount. I know it sucks as a player but the team holds the cards in this one.

 

[AZ54]

The more I think about it the more I think it makes the most sense to let him play for the franchise tender this year and see how his knees hold up by season's end before making a decision on next year. If he stays healthy and productive all year, then great! Franchise him again. I just honestly don't think he'll maintain his high level of productivity for 2 more seasons in a row.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

 

 

I view this more as do the Bears (or we) think Forte will be highly productive for 3 years? More realistically if I take Forte's side on a 4 or 5 year deal can we get three of the four years at a high level of productivity, assuming one of those seasons will be marred by injury. Forte's arguing he will be the Bears don't want that commitment.

 

I understand Forte's demands but from a business standpoint and that of what helps us keep the best team on the field long term I side with the Bears. If Forte is unwilling to accept less guaranteed than his reported demand of $20mil then I'd do the back-to-back franchise tags (if he's healthy and performing) and then move on.

[balta1701-A]

I view this more as do the Bears (or we) think Forte will be highly productive for 3 years? More realistically if I take Forte's side on a 4 or 5 year deal can we get three of the four years at a high level of productivity, assuming one of those seasons will be marred by injury. Forte's arguing he will be the Bears don't want that commitment.

 

I understand Forte's demands but from a business standpoint and that of what helps us keep the best team on the field long term I side with the Bears. If Forte is unwilling to accept less guaranteed than his reported demand of $20mil then I'd do the back-to-back franchise tags (if he's healthy and performing) and then move on.

The only reason why you wouldn't think you could get 3 solid years out of Forte is if you really dont' have confidence in his health. If you think he's only got a year or two left on those knees, then that committment would be excessive.

[madlithuanian]

Great analysis. Makes perfect sense to me.

 

I don't think many are seeing the big picture here. Is this new contract to pay Forte for what he's already done or for what we expect him to do during the new contract. Unfortunately, in a salary cap system, teams can't really pay players for past performance for very long. It's commonplace for teams to pay a star a big salary for a year while they rehab from an injury or drop in performance while they see if they can return to form. After that the player takes a drastic pay reduction or gets released. The problem with the Forte negotiation is that it's not IF Forte's performance will decline, but WHEN.

 

All RBs decline in production as they age. Let's look at LaDanian Tomlinson as an example.

 

2006 - age 27 - 1815 yards rushing - 5.2 ypc - 16 games

2007 - age 28 - 1474 yards rushing - 4.7 ypc - 16 games

2008 - age 29 - 1110 yards rushing - 3.8 ypc - 16 games

2009 - age 30 - 730 yards rushing - 3.3 ypc - 14 games

 

Tomlinson never had a knee injury until the 2008 playoffs and his production ha already started declining. Forte has already had several knee injuries that make future knee injuries more likely. Tomlinson didn't have as many carries in college as Forte because as a freshman and sophmore he split carries with another RB.

 

Now when looking at a long term contract for Forte, he turns 27 this year. If his career declines similarly to how Tomlinson's did, he certainly should have a good season this year, but it would be all downhill from there. Then add to it that Forte started having knee injuries several years earlier than Tomlinson did and it's reasonable to question if his decline might start sooner.

 

See, this whole bit about guaranteed money is the whole crux of the issue. I would bet that the Bears would be willing to offer Forte the kind of money he's looking for as long as it's not guaranteed and is tied to performance like a vet minimum base salary and a $625,000 bonus for every 130 yard rush/receiving game. That would be $10 mil per year if he had 16 130 rush/receiving yard games. Those numbers are simply an example and I'm sure the formula could be tweeked to make it tiered at different levels, but the principle remains that they don't mind paying Forte well if he stays healthy and performs at a high level, but they don't want to pay him big money if he's injured or not playing well. That's where the guaranteed money becomes an issue. Heck, that's where the big unguaranteed salaries become an issue - because the team has to decide to pay him or release him in later years.

 

The more I think about it the more I think it makes the most sense to let him play for the franchise tender this year and see how his knees hold up by season's end before making a decision on next year. If he stays healthy and productive all year, then great! Franchise him again. I just honestly don't think he'll maintain his high level of productivity for 2 more seasons in a row.

 

Does this make sense to anyone else?

 

[selection7]

I just want to point out that after the Bush pickup, I went to the RAiders boards and many people were hardly in love with Bush there (though of course many others were dissapointed to lose him). We should feel good about having him but it can't be overstated that he's unproven as a feature back. Also, his ypc has declined three years in a row (4.8, 4.1, & 3.8) and I've read he's not a great blocker. A couple of people seemed to see him as a bit of a head case. So we'll see. I admit I don't know him. I don't pay attention to bad AFC teams.

[Mongo3451]

I view this more as do the Bears (or we) think Forte will be highly productive for 3 years? More realistically if I take Forte's side on a 4 or 5 year deal can we get three of the four years at a high level of productivity, assuming one of those seasons will be marred by injury. Forte's arguing he will be the Bears don't want that commitment.

 

I understand Forte's demands but from a business standpoint and that of what helps us keep the best team on the field long term I side with the Bears. If Forte is unwilling to accept less guaranteed than his reported demand of $20mil then I'd do the back-to-back franchise tags (if he's healthy and performing) and then move on.

I have to agree, but part of me thinks he deserves a little good will. He was probably given bad advice last year and is paying for it now. That being said, I think he'll be productive another three years, so 4yr/30mil with 16 guaranteed sounds about right. Pay the guaranteed early making him cap friendly to keep or cut in the last year.

 

 

[Stinger226]

I have to agree, but part of me thinks he deserves a little good will. He was probably given bad advice last year and is paying for it now. That being said, I think he'll be productive another three years, so 4yr/30mil with 16 guaranteed sounds about right. Pay the guaranteed early making him cap friendly to keep or cut in the last year.

I think the offer on the table is about what you stated, and he doesnt want that. The deal is , unhappy or not, he will not leave 7.7 on the table and sit out. He then has to play well to get the tag next year, if might not be good relations but thats life. Making 16 mill in the next two years aint sucking hind tit.

[Guest TerraTor]

It makes perfect sense. Having Bush signed makes Forte almost expendable. I say almost as Bush hasn't really been tested as a feature back for a whole season. Is he capable? no doubt. The additional fact that Kalil Bell and Forte are very similar in their styles (IMHO) also makes it less difficult to watch Forte sit out. The guaranteed money from the teams perspective makes logical sense. With the uncertaintly of Fortes future ability they are wise in holding off for now and see how things are after the end of the year. Forte isn't really gettting that bad a deal in the franchise tag amount. I know it sucks as a player but the team holds the cards in this oi

 

 

 

... i dont get this love affair with Kalil Bell... the guy.stinks and is not a starter... If money is the issue which it is, Angelo paid Chester Taylor 7+....Barber 3.5... etc

 

 

expendable my ass..Matty is the bears offense.. Should he get Mccoy cash? i don't think so but i think we are talking about 2-3M Guaranteed more in what Forte is asking....

[madlithuanian]

Sorry. Cutler is the Bears offense. This isn't 1985. QB's rule the NFL now. You need a solid RB to win, but you need an amazing QB. Thankfully, we have that.

 

We really don't know what Forte is demanding and what the Bears are offering. So, I'm just going to not worry about it until something concrete comes out. I'm going to hope that Matt signs the tag and plays the full season. Maybe he sits until week 10, but he'll be hurting himself financially, letting his teammates down and potentially making himself less attractive once he does eventually become a FA or a trade possibility.

 

I love Matt. But, like many, I worry about his durability at this point, when the downward spiral hits, and why he can't find the end zone with tough short yards.

 

To me, it just looks like an eventual parting of the ways. Things can change, but that how I'm seeing it. I think we have him for 2 more seasons at best. I see us addressing it in next years' draft. The good thing is at least Matt will get 2 SB championship rings before he leaves for Washington...

 

 

 

... i dont get this love affair with Kalil Bell... the guy.stinks and is not a starter... If money is the issue which it is, Angelo paid Chester Taylor 7+....Barber 3.5... etc

 

 

expendable my ass..Matty is the bears offense.. Should he get Mccoy cash? i don't think so but i think we are talking about 2-3M Guaranteed more in what Forte is asking....

 

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Yes, it makes a ton of sense.

 

Basically, here's the question...if the Bears give Forte a guaranteed contract and he gets hurt, and that keeps them from having the cap space to sign other guys, and they wind up missing the playoffs because of it, is that acceptable since Forte has already contributed so much?

 

Somehow, I doubt most people would be happy about that.

My thoughts exactly.

 

Essentially, I put it this way:

 

People backing Forte right now- "Pay the man! He's been a great teammate and a great RB."

Same people in 4 years when Forte is averaging 3.5 ypc- "Emery is a dumbass for paying a 27 year old RB that much money. Giving a RB that much money when he has that much mileage on him already is idiotic."

 

i dont get this love affair with Kalil Bell... the guy.stinks and is not a starter... If money is the issue which it is, Angelo paid Chester Taylor 7+....Barber 3.5... etc

 

 

expendable my ass..Matty is the bears offense.. Should he get Mccoy cash? i don't think so but i think we are talking about 2-3M Guaranteed more in what Forte is asking....

How do you know that he "stinks?" He's done well with the carries he's been given. If he can work on his fumbling issues, he's another team's #2 RB, easily.

['TD']

People backing Forte right now- "Pay the man! He's been a great teammate and a great RB."

Same people in 4 years when Forte is averaging 3.5 ypc- "Emery is a dumbass for paying a 27 year old RB that much money. Giving a RB that much money when he has that much mileage on him already is idiotic."

 

I'm pretty consistent on my opinions, unless a player or management prove me wrong, and I will admit I was wrong. I, however, would never say anything Forte is paid for this contract is too much.

 

The Bears have been dismal to below average the past few years on offense. In the presence of ever changing offensive coordinators and strategies, quarterback troubles, a questionable WR corp, and a lack luster at best offensive line, Forte has been a shining gem on offense. He's accounted for much of the teams offense, while other areas have struggled and exceeded the expectations of his rookie contract by a mile.

 

His contract he just fulfilled was for 4 years and $3.8 million total over those 4 years. In comparison a washed up Chester signed with the Bears a couple years ago and was given a contract with $7 million guaranteed the first year. That's nearly double what Forte has made his first 4 years. Michael Bush just signed with the Bears and was given 7 million guaranteed in his contract to back up Forte and near a year what Forte has made over the life of his contract. Chester Taylor did not, and Michael bush probably will not contribute to this team what Forte has over the past 4 years.

 

I feel it sets a bad precedent and example to players on the team and players looking to join the team at a minimal contract, that the team will not only not reward your past success with the team, but will hold you hostage under a franchise tag and make you pay for less than your worth.

 

I personally feel Forte is a top 5 back in the league. His tag price this year doesn't reflect that tho. He's getting paid 2 million less under it, then the average of the top 5 backs in the league due to the new franchise tag system this year.

 

I feel now, and will feel 4 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, that Forte deserves a top tier RB contract not only for what he can still contribute to the team, but a reward for what he has given the team the last four years while making less than a million per. I also feel it will not only have a negative impact on Forte, on some how some fans view the team, and future players on if they are willing to deal with the Bears and motivation of ones who are drafted.

[AZ54]

I feel now, and will feel 4 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, that Forte deserves a top tier RB contract not only for what he can still contribute to the team, but a reward for what he has given the team the last four years while making less than a million per. I also feel it will not only have a negative impact on Forte, on some how some fans view the team, and future players on if they are willing to deal with the Bears and motivation of ones who are drafted.

 

 

I'm sure the Patriots are worried about the exact same thing as they have a history of letting good players leave when they wouldn't pay their contract demands including the current battle with Wes Welker. Miraculously they still have good vet FA willing to play there, often bargain prices, just for a shot to win a ring.

['TD']

I'm sure the Patriots are worried about the exact same thing as they have a history of letting good players leave when they wouldn't pay their contract demands including the current battle with Wes Welker. Miraculously they still have good vet FA willing to play there, often bargain prices, just for a shot to win a ring.

 

Come one now. The Patriots and the Packers let up the most yards on defense last year, so I guess defense doesn't matter either. The difference is that both teams have 2 of the best QB's in the league and coaches. As long as either of them have Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers they are going to be competitive.

 

The Bears are apples and oranges compared to those teams. Yes, veterans will go there for a shot at a ring, but no people aren't attracted to the Bears for a shot at a ring. I'm not saying the Bears can't or won't win a Super Bowl anytime soon, but the Patriots have consistently been in the super bowl or leading the AFC since they have had Tom Brady and the Packers will likely be contenders for years due to Aaron Rodgers.

 

Anyways, my reply was more towards the idea that people that want Forte paid now will be complaining about it a few years from now. Forte is a 26 year old running back in his prime that will turn 27 near the end of the season. I fully advocate him getting a contract on par with those recently signed by other players at his position for the reasons i stated, and will not be griping 4 years from now when he's 30, if he was to get a 4 year deal.

[Mongo3451]

Come one now. The Patriots and the Packers let up the most yards on defense last year, so I guess defense doesn't matter either. The difference is that both teams have 2 of the best QB's in the league and coaches. As long as either of them have Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers they are going to be competitive.

 

The Bears are apples and oranges compared to those teams. Yes, veterans will go there for a shot at a ring, but no people aren't attracted to the Bears for a shot at a ring. I'm not saying the Bears can't or won't win a Super Bowl anytime soon, but the Patriots have consistently been in the super bowl or leading the AFC since they have had Tom Brady and the Packers will likely be contenders for years due to Aaron Rodgers.

 

Anyways, my reply was more towards the idea that people that want Forte paid now will be complaining about it a few years from now. Forte is a 26 year old running back in his prime that will turn 27 near the end of the season. I fully advocate him getting a contract on par with those recently signed by other players at his position for the reasons i stated, and will not be griping 4 years from now when he's 30, if he was to get a 4 year deal.

Agreed. It's all about Brady. Belichick is only the genius Brady makes him out to be. I do agree with letting players go once they are past their prime though. It will be interesting to see how good they are once Brady retires.

 

I do think it goes both ways though. Forte is over a barrel and not budging.

[LT2_3]

The Bears have been dismal to below average the past few years on offense. In the presence of ever changing offensive coordinators and strategies, quarterback troubles, a questionable WR corp, and a lack luster at best offensive line, Forte has been a shining gem on offense. He's accounted for much of the teams offense, while other areas have struggled and exceeded the expectations of his rookie contract by a mile.

 

Agreed that Forte has been a bright spot recently, but in a salary cap system, you can't pay players for past performance. If you do, then you can't stay competitive as a team.

 

His contract he just fulfilled was for 4 years and $3.8 million total over those 4 years. In comparison a washed up Chester signed with the Bears a couple years ago and was given a contract with $7 million guaranteed the first year. That's nearly double what Forte has made his first 4 years. Michael Bush just signed with the Bears and was given 7 million guaranteed in his contract to back up Forte and near a year what Forte has made over the life of his contract. Chester Taylor did not, and Michael bush probably will not contribute to this team what Forte has over the past 4 years.

 

I don't see how this seems so unfair. It's how the system works: Players play for cheap on their rookie contracts, and then they make more once they hit free agency. Chester Taylor and Micheal Bush both had to play for cheap on their rookie deals, and then they made more on their first free agent contracts. Try comparing just Bush and Forte. Forte made more than Bush the past 4 years because he was drafted higher. If Forte had signed the deal offered last year, he would have at least double the guaranteed money as Bush and his salaries would be about double as well. It would be fair then - but Forte is simply misreading what he's worth and being stubborn about it.

 

I feel it sets a bad precedent and example to players on the team and players looking to join the team at a minimal contract, that the team will not only not reward your past success with the team, but will hold you hostage under a franchise tag and make you pay for less than your worth.

 

I think that is absolutely ridiculous. Players look at situations that resemble their own. Players on their rookie contract don't make much and that is league wide no matter what. Once they hit free agency, they can pick where they want to play and negotiate a contract that they like. If they think they are going to improve their value in short order, then they can sign a shorter term contract. Either that, or they can take the security of a longer term contract and deal with the fact that they may not get a new deal until that one ends. See, the RB position is very different than any other because RBs start to decline at about age 28 whereas other positiions don't start to decline until their 30s. The RB position is unique in that they have fewer years to play the game and earn money. Just ask 32 year old LaDanian Tomlinson who has been pretty much forced into retirement. (By the way, a 5 year contract for Forte would take him to age 32 as well.)

 

I personally feel Forte is a top 5 back in the league. His tag price this year doesn't reflect that tho. He's getting paid 2 million less under it, then the average of the top 5 backs in the league due to the new franchise tag system this year.

 

That's an issue to take up with the NFLPA because they agreed to it. Again, this is made worse because Forte is a RB and RBs have short careers. In hindsight, Forte should have come out after his sophomore year of school. If he had, he would have been a free agent the first time 2 years ago when a long term deal wouldn't have taken him to the end of his career. 2 other players to look at: LeSean McCoy who got his big contract because he's 3 years younger, and Ray Rice who is the same age as Forte and will probably end up playing on the Franchise tag this year too.

 

I feel now, and will feel 4 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, that Forte deserves a top tier RB contract not only for what he can still contribute to the team, but a reward for what he has given the team the last four years while making less than a million per. I also feel it will not only have a negative impact on Forte, on some how some fans view the team, and future players on if they are willing to deal with the Bears and motivation of ones who are drafted.

 

Well thank God your not the GM of the Bears. They would suck forever. BTW, how long do you propose paying players after they start sucking? Should we still be paying Tommie Harris $8 million per year? How about Ogunleye or Vasher? They all were good 5 years ago. Should we still be paying those guys their big contracts too? Then we wouldn't have cap space for Marshall, Campbell, or Bush - who if we had last year, we would have been in the playoffs.

 

All the best teams don't pay guys contracts with guaranteed money in years likely to be past their prime and they release them BEFORE they start to decline - or shortly thereafter. You appear to justify this sentimentality because you somehow think the Bears don't belong in a group with the best teams in the league. Let me tell you something, those teams are the best in the league BECAUSE they aren't sentimental and don't hand out stupid contracts based on past performance.

['TD']

All the best teams don't pay guys contracts with guaranteed money in years likely to be past their prime and they release them BEFORE they start to decline - or shortly thereafter. You appear to justify this sentimentality because you somehow think the Bears don't belong in a group with the best teams in the league. Let me tell you something, those teams are the best in the league BECAUSE they aren't sentimental and don't hand out stupid contracts based on past performance.

 

I'm not going to argue point for point with you, because simply this is my opinion and you are entitled to your own. I was defending the idea that myself, and people like myself, actually may have reasons to want Forte resigned aren't necessarily going to be the ones that will complain about the same transaction in the future. That was a ridiculous notion and I tried to give reasons why I think so.

 

I will point out a few things I think you apparently took the wrong way from what I said or twisted for your view.

 

One thing that is flat out wrong, Forte would not be 32 under a 5 year contract. You're a numbers guy so I figured you would catch this.

Year 1) 26

Year 2) 27

Year 3) 28

Year 4) 29

Year 5) 30 but he will turn 31 with 2 or 3 games left in the regular season.

 

Matt Forte yes, would reach 31 with 3 games or more given they make the play offs in a 5 year deal. If your theory is indeed holds true that RB's peak and start to drop at 28, we'd be getting 3 years leading up to the peak and the beginnings of the fall.

 

Another thing, I never said I didn't think the Bears were in the best teams in the league. I said that Chicago wasn't where players sign just to win a championship. That's not a knock on this team, because I do think it has great potential. It's just that there are few teams out there that are year in and year out competitors for the Super Bowl.

 

The Bears have done a good job of doing exactly what you have said with getting rid of players in Harris and Kruetz and so on, but also have been able to keep the players that have contributed around ie Urlacher, Tillman, and Briggs. They even paid Hester, I feel in part due to their sentimentality, a pretty considerable contract a few years ago after he was breaking records.

 

I think Forte's contributions should be able to bring the team and him together if only a few million a part. I. like you, am glad that I am not GM of this team either, but I'm really glad that you aren't either. I imagine if you were GM we would have 3/4ths of the team going into training camp would be working for the league minimum and if I was GM 3/4thsf our team would be offensive linemen.

 

Really, none of us on the board are near qualified, but we have fun giving our opinions and arguing with each others.