Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

On another thread, it was asserted that Danny Boy offered this trade at the owners meeting in the form we now see it.

[U][B]ASSUME FOR A MOMENT THAT IS CORRECT !!![/B][/U]

Of course the Bears should ask for more. After all, if it went down the way it was asserted on that other thread, Danny Boy set the floor for the negotiations with his offer; there's no way the Skins can go back to any counter-offer with less than they offered in the first place - - unless Danny Boy wants to look like a horse's ass to his fellow owners and football afficionados. [Remenber, Danny NEVER likes to look like a horse's ass even though he does do that more than once in a while...] :doh:

So, the Bears will counter with some offer to try to get more and then the REAL acumen of the Skins' FO as negotiators will come to view. How do they respond? Do they pull their current offer off the table? Do they make it a "take-it-or-leave-it proposition"? If the Bears want Marshall, do they counter with Rocky - - or vice-versa?

The deal as it stands now would be a HUGE bargain for the Skins - - if they actually needed another linebacker which they [U][B]do not[/B][/U]. For the value of a mid-first round pick, they would be getting a Pro Bowl quality linebacker. That's a good deal.

So, when the Bears ask for more - - as they damned well should - - how much more should the Skins be willing to fork over to get a Pro Bowl linebacker when that is NOT their current most pressing need by a longshot?

Suppose the Bears ask for next year's first round pick too? :nono:

How about next year's second round pick? :confused:

How about Rocky AND Golston? :)

How about Randle-El? :thumb:

Take a deep breath and try to think about all this without emotion because that's how the Bears and hopefully the Skins' FO folks are going to do this...

My hope is that they make the current offer a "take-it-or-leave-it" proposition with about a 72-hour deadline. Then we can move on with or without Lance Briggs in town.


:bdh:

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

Why are so many people ready to give up on Marshall? I would say that he has more value than Rocky or Golston at this point.

I would give them Montgomery and that is it. We are doing them a favor by taking this guy off their hands.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;293977]On another thread, it was asserted that Danny Boy offered this trade at the owners meeting in the form we now see it.

[U][B]ASSUME FOR A MOMENT THAT IS CORRECT !!![/B][/U]

Of course the Bears should ask for more. After all, if it went down the way it was asserted on that other thread, Danny Boy set the floor for the negotiations with his offer; there's no way the Skins can go back to any counter-offer with less than they offered in the first place - - unless Danny Boy wants to look like a horse's ass to his fellow owners and football afficionados. [Remenber, Danny NEVER likes to look like a horse's ass even though he does do that more than once in a while...] :doh:

So, the Bears will counter with some offer to try to get more and then the REAL acumen of the Skins' FO as negotiators will come to view. How do they respond? Do they pull their current offer off the table? Do they make it a "take-it-or-leave-it proposition"? If the Bears want Marshall, do they counter with Rocky - - or vice-versa?

The deal as it stands now would be a HUGE bargain for the Skins - - if they actually needed another linebacker which they [U][B]do not[/B][/U]. For the value of a mid-first round pick, they would be getting a Pro Bowl quality linebacker. That's a good deal.

So, when the Bears ask for more - - as they damned well should - - how much more should the Skins be willing to fork over to get a Pro Bowl linebacker when that is NOT their current most pressing need by a longshot?

Suppose the Bears ask for next year's first round pick too? :nono:

How about next year's second round pick? :confused:

How about Rocky AND Golston? :)

How about Randle-El? :thumb:

Take a deep breath and try to think about all this without emotion because that's how the Bears and hopefully the Skins' FO folks are going to do this...

My hope is that they make the current offer a "take-it-or-leave-it" proposition with about a 72-hour deadline. Then we can move on with or without Lance Briggs in town.


:bdh:[/QUOTE]

I agree with ya SC! I just really hope we don't do something stupid by offering up any players along with the draft pick.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;293983]Why are so many people ready to give up on Marshall? I would say that he has more value than Rocky or Golston at this point.

I would give them Montgomery and that is it. We are doing them a favor by taking this guy off their hands.[/QUOTE]

Rocky's value is high primarily because of what was given up to get him in the first place.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

What's wrong with waiting a year for Briggs if we want him so bad? There is no long term deal from Chitown in the works, won't he be a FA after this season unless they franchise him again?

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

Also, if you're the Bears the LAST thing you want are more of our defenders from last year. They'd be taking a page right out of our terrible offseason moves playbook. Remember last year we got all hot to trot about a couple of woebegone San Fransico 49rs?

Net pick up: Brandon Lloyd and Andre Carter.

Ouch.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;293990]Also, if you're the Bears the LAST thing you want are more of our defenders from last year. They'd be taking a page right out of our terrible offseason moves playbook. Remember last year we got all hot to trot about a couple of woebegone San Fransico 49rs?

Net pick up: Brandon Lloyd and Andre Carter.

Ouch.[/quote]

but andre carter lead the team in sacks

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;293991]but andre carter lead the team in sacks[/quote]

Double Ouch

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=TenandSix:Unacceptable;293992]Double Ouch[/quote]

and we had a six way tie for interceptions i think

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;293983]Why are so many people ready to give up on Marshall? I would say that he has more value than Rocky or Golston at this point.

I would give them Montgomery and that is it. We are doing them a favor by taking this guy off their hands.[/quote]I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=GTripp0012;293994]I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."[/quote]

true but i think we should scrap the briggs deal
give rocky a chance at starting and keep golston in the rotation with griffin and sign ian scott and then either draft gaines adams or laron landry

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

Rather keep Marshall than Rocky or Golston just because he is a starter, but want us to keep them all to be honest. Rocky hasn't played a heck of a lot to just deal Marshall away. Even though Briggs might have better stats in Chicago, he still might not be a good fit in DC. Keep all of our guys put and kill the deal.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

how does drafting a safety help our defense. if we were going to draft a safety with the 6 pick we might as well trade it for briggs. if we keep it we need to trade down or draft andersen,branch,or okoye

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;293996]true but i think we should scrap the briggs deal
give rocky a chance at starting and keep golston in the rotation with griffin and sign ian scott and then either draft gaines adams or laron landry[/quote]I agree.

Competition is a good thing. We seem to be so afraid of it.

Let Rocky and Marshall fight it out. You save so much money over Briggs in doing so.

I'm shocked that Ian Scott is still unsigned. He'd be a fine addition to any team, and we certainly have the need at the position, but I'd pass on him. Let's save our money. Inevitably, there will be a better DT on the open market next year. Lets take advantage of the fact that Salave'a still has a year left on his deal and milk him for all he's worth. If he just can't go anymore, play the rookie I'm assuming we are going to take.

We very well could make a big signing on the DL next offseason, but certainly we will be reevalutating our needs between now and then.

Laron Landry only makes sense if we can get a trade down AND have decided to give up on Sean Taylor. If we are committed to Taylor, Landry makes little sense.

Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more
 

[quote=GTripp0012;293994]I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."[/quote]

Letting them move up to the 6th pick and taking a problem off their hands is doing them a favor in my book. I don't see anyone else beating down their door to take him off their hands. If they don't trade him they are looking at a locker room disaster next season.