NFL Network: Bears' Briggs, 31st Pick for Skins' 6th Pick?

Hey, don't they have those places in Japan where you can smash an entire room to pieces?

Only if you're Godzilla.

Briggs and Fletcher are still learning how to knock somebody in the mouth? Think they know how to do that already dude.

Any rookie we draft at # 6 won't need to learn our system or will come in with instant chemistry??


Man please, this is the same sh*t we were talking about last year.
In fact, every year. I'm weary with this team bringing in the 'missing piece.'

Same damn discussion, different dress.

I am going to echo what most have you have been saying on this thread. I don't like the move at all. We don't need more linebackers right now, and we definely don't need to wrap up more of our precious cap space in linebackers.
This move would not help our main issue with our defense our Dline. If we pull the string on this move we are idiots, and the only way I would even think about this move is if we get all of the Bears first day picks. That's it anything else would be a complete rip off to us and it would show how much we haven't learned the past few years.

Any of you Capologists know exactly how much we are currently paying linebackers right now.

I'm with ya, I don't think on paper this is a bad deal, in fact if we hadn't drafted Rocky it would be a great deal for us. I think everyone's getting all upset over this based on the assumption that Rocky WILL be our starter at wlb. I hope he's ready to be, but as someone said maybe he's a bust, or just hasn't convinced the coaches yet. maybe they see him as a 3rd down LB or to spell both LB spots in some packages?

The other concern is the $. What's the difference between paying the #6 pick & Briggs? Both will get a hefty bonus, but Briggs is a proven commodity.

At #31 we can get a good DE, one that will start. I have reservations about the deal from a team chemistry standpoint more than a talent/value standpoint. As JoeRedskin said, a pro bowl LB & a 1st rnd. pick for a high 1st pick is a good deal. There's more certainty that Briggs will be a top player than the #6 will be. See the recent history of 1st round D-line picks if you disagree.

I can't help but agree, even though I would have a tough time giving up no. 6 and probably wouldn't without a gun to my head. There is more than an element of truth in the notion that there will still be a top DL on the board at No. 31. My guess is that the skins think they'll have a great shot at Anthony Spencer, who is almost as fast as Adams and had a spectacular senior year. Even if they miss Spencer, there will still be a great prospect and definate upgrade at DE or DL at No.31. Do the math.

Let's say Smootsmack's theory on Marcus Washington is right, and he's got a nagging problem that bothers the coaches to the point that they need his replacement right away.

Here's what bothers me: It yet again demonstrates this front office's mental block towards the defensive line. Certainly the same argument could be made with regard to Joe Salave'a. He was nicked up all last year, couldn't hold up against the run, and the statistics against the run prove it. But why isn't there the same type of urgency to plan for his replacement? Here we were in prime position at #6 to get an impact player at his position but now, if these reports are true, they're willing to plummet to #31 where it's certain no defensive lineman will be available with any value.

Didn't Joe Gibbs understand how important it was to have a defensive line made up with the likes of Dave Butz, Daryl Grant, Dexter Manley and Charles Mann? What has happened that has taken his focus away from such a vital element to a strong defense?

We could line you up at Defensive End and with Lance Briggs on your side he makes every play.

We could line you up at Defensive End and with Lance Briggs on your side he makes every play.


Maybe -- but 5-7 yards later? That's the point. All the superstars at linebacker won't matter when they have to make the tackle after a big gain and nobody can stop them at the line of scrimmage.

I'm sure most wouldn't think this that big a problem if someone with the title "General Manager" in front of it was behind the trade from end. My guess is that the majority of the people who don't like the trade just don't like it because they're programmed to not like the move.

Personally, I don't hate the move but we can do better I think. By the way, hearing some rumbling about Justin Harrell and Charles Johnson. Two guys who could be there at #31

The kicker in this deal is what we would do at #31. Can we still pick up a quality DT or DE? If so this might not be a bad deal, but again it all depends on what's there at #31.

The Skins don't need another LB. They need a every down defensive end. This is a very deep draft. It might be best for the Skins to trade down and get additional picks. The defensive end that they need will be available in the middle of the first round.

After sleeping on this the deal as proposed right now doesn't seem that bad to me. Would I want them to do it? No. But remember (as some have already pointed out) the price tag of a franchise player is two first rounders. In this scenario the Skins still keep a 1st rounder and get a franchise quality player. Can anyone deny what a great LB corps this would be with Washington, Fletcher, and Briggs... with Marshall and McIntosh coming off the bench?!

I think the Skins would actually be coming out ahead on this deal if they were to do it, that being said I'm not in favor of it.

I'm scared because I'm about to argue fervently against The Ego. But here goes nothing...

Just because a guy is labeled a franchise player, is he automatically worth 2 first round picks? That's what the CBA says a franchise player is worth in a trade, but that doesn't mean teams are willing to pay that.

If Lance Briggs didn't have the franchise tag, would you give this year's first rounder and next year's first rounder for him? I'd hope not. The reason? He's not worth that much, no matter what tag he has on him!

We're not coming out ahead of anything. We'd get a really good LB and a pick that can't possibly land us an impact DT. We don't need 1 good LB. We need an impact DT, a young G to groom (don't forget, we're currently planning on forcing a career-long T who is built like a T to switch to G), an athletic S to play alongside Taylor, and some would say a young DE because we're getting old at that spot.

This trade does not fit our needs, it doesn't solve our problems, and it perpetuates the players' discontent with our front office's willingness to pay outside talent rather than pay to keep their own. We need to trade the 6th pick for more picks, not Lance Briggs and a pick that can't solve our biggest need: DT.