Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Lance Briggs Rumors « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4 5

rocko23

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3937
Offline
#15 : January 30, 2007, 04:33:33 PM

the bears will lock briggs up

cvillebucfan

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3111
Offline
#16 : January 30, 2007, 04:35:23 PM

No #1 pick but I first want to see them tag Briggs. They need Harris more than Briggs and he is the guy that has been getting the chatter regarding a contract.



Baghead #2

BucsPirate

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1791
Offline
#17 : January 30, 2007, 04:41:51 PM

Thing is once the Bears tag him then his option is to sign, not play or force the trade. What price are you willing to pay for Lance Briggs? The Bears will no doubt want a #1, do you do that?

No deal...we need him and our Number one...maybe a one down the line but not this year...how about that?

I would be surprised if the Bears got a number 1 in this years draft from anyone for him. Maybe if a hold out goes into next season they can pull off something like what the Pats did with Deon Branch, but I would be reluctant to give up next years first as well. The best scenario from our perspective may be for him to sign the tender, as it would make it doubtful they would tender him in the area of $10 million in 2008.

BucsPirate

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1791
Offline
#18 : January 30, 2007, 04:43:26 PM

Thing is once the Bears tag him then his option is to sign, not play or force the trade. What price are you willing to pay for Lance Briggs? The Bears will no doubt want a #1, do you do that?
Do you have a list of everyone who has a franchise tag available? Not every team can throw a tag on their best player. Seems everytime there is a discussion about a free agent, you throw the devil's advocate angle of the franchise tag out there.

Go to NFL.com and look up the list of all 32 teams, because everyone has the franchise tag available this year, as they will next year, and the year after, and the year after.

dalbuc

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 21603
Offline
#19 : January 30, 2007, 04:44:44 PM

Do you have a list of everyone who has a franchise tag available? Not every team can throw a tag on their best player. Seems everytime there is a discussion about a free agent, you throw the devil's advocate angle of the franchise tag out there.

Well since the CHI paper thinks they can tag Briggs I'm gonna assume they do have the tag unless the writer didn't bother to check on that.

As for this off-season, I think a lot of tags get used because the one year tender will not be a "bad" contract in comparison with letting guys into FA.

All posts are opinions in case you are too stupid to figure that out on your own without me saying it over and over.

ABuccs Fan

*
Practice Squad

Posts : 0
Offline
#20 : January 30, 2007, 04:52:55 PM

You were right. A player agreeing to terms before July 15th allows the team to be able to use the franchise tag the following year. I was wrong!!!



Guest
#21 : January 30, 2007, 05:02:34 PM

OUCH



Guest
#22 : January 30, 2007, 05:38:29 PM

The Bears are going to lose Lovie and Briggs this off-season.

Briggs will be a Buc next year, bank on it.

Where would Brooks play at?
SLB

BucsPirate

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1791
Offline
#23 : January 30, 2007, 05:49:23 PM

Thing is once the Bears tag him then his option is to sign, not play or force the trade. What price are you willing to pay for Lance Briggs? The Bears will no doubt want a #1, do you do that?
Do you have a list of everyone who has a franchise tag available? Not every team can throw a tag on their best player. Seems everytime there is a discussion about a free agent, you throw the devil's advocate angle of the franchise tag out there.

Go to NFL.com and look up the list of all 32 teams, because everyone has the franchise tag available this year, as they will next year, and the year after, and the year after.
Someone trying to be **CENSORED**y....who doesn't have a clue. You don't have a clue do you? Go ahead and answer with the truth...you don't have a clue! You do know that the Buccs couldn't franchise anyone for 6 years while their tag was on Chidi Ahonotu right? Chidi wasn't even in the league, and our tag was stuck to him. I mean with your smart ass comment, you must think you're smarter than you really are????

I probably should have thought of different way to state it. Its frustrating that some posters assume that other teams are going to make bad personnel decisions just because they want a certain player here. I don't know why I connected that frustration with your post, but I did.

In response to your comment about Chidi. The NFL changed the rules back 2 or 3 years ago so that teams are no longer penalized just for a player signing their contract after a certain date. I don't think there is any way that teams can lose there franchise tag for the following year, and if their is it a situation that is so easy to avoid that it is almost unthinkable for it to happen.

Itchalot

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5747
Offline
#24 : January 30, 2007, 06:36:33 PM

The franchise tag may be used more this year. Since free agent contracts will be going through the roof, taking the average of the top five existing contracts is not nearly as harsh as it normally would usually be.  In the long run that will all balance out in the wash, but in the meantime the franchise option could be a more attractive idea for teams.

And as for Brooks he is the ultimate team player.  Thats what he says, and he walks the walk.  As I have said before Brooks would play Strong Side Waterboy if thats what Kiffin wanted him to do, and he wouldn't have a second thought about it.   

So if Briggs comes here, the last thing you have to worry about is if Brooks will go to the other side.  But BucsPirate has a point that the franchise tag is going to come into play big time in this offseason.


Itchalot

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5747
Offline
#25 : January 30, 2007, 07:28:11 PM

I don't think teams would be penalized.   Every contract has to be approved by the league.  I think if a team wasn't following the CBA the contract wouldn't be approved to begin with.  Right?


vipmark

*
Starter
****
Posts : 663
Offline
#26 : January 30, 2007, 08:01:55 PM

I'm guessing that Jerry Angelo did'nt offer Lovie a new contract last year  because he (Angelo) was waiting to get his own contract done. Now that Angelo's deal is done I would expect Lovie to get his due.......though the Bear's owners have been known to be quite frugal.

Boid Fink

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 54702
Offline
#27 : January 30, 2007, 08:03:52 PM

.......though the Bear's owners have been known to be quite frugal.

That is the understatement of the year!


vipmark

*
Starter
****
Posts : 663
Offline
#28 : January 30, 2007, 08:05:56 PM

cheap bastards?

Boid Fink

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 54702
Offline
#29 : January 30, 2007, 08:08:19 PM

cheap bastards?
BINGO!!

Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Lance Briggs Rumors « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools