Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-02-2007, 09:52 PM   #46
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
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.

ASSUME FOR A MOMENT THAT IS CORRECT !!!

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...]

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 do not. 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?

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.


__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-02-2007, 10:11 PM   #47
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 4,261
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.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 10:20 PM   #48
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,666
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon View Post
On another thread, it was asserted that Danny Boy offered this trade at the owners meeting in the form we now see it.

ASSUME FOR A MOMENT THAT IS CORRECT !!!

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...]

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 do not. 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?

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.


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.
__________________
"Fire Up That Diesel!"
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 10:23 PM   #49
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,968
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper View Post
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.
Rocky's value is high primarily because of what was given up to get him in the first place.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 10:30 PM   #50
Special Teams
 
TenandSix:Unacceptable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 324
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?
TenandSix:Unacceptable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:04 PM   #51
Special Teams
 
TenandSix:Unacceptable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 324
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.
TenandSix:Unacceptable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:05 PM   #52
You did WHAT?!?
 
EARTHQUAKE2689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In The Kitchen With Dyna.
Age: 25
Posts: 12,231
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable View Post
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.
but andre carter lead the team in sacks
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpp3ycMvQd0

This is why you need Mentos. To justify your questionable problem solving skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7geP5ev0VI

Awesome isn't it.
EARTHQUAKE2689 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:10 PM   #53
Special Teams
 
TenandSix:Unacceptable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 324
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689 View Post
but andre carter lead the team in sacks
Double Ouch
TenandSix:Unacceptable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:17 PM   #54
You did WHAT?!?
 
EARTHQUAKE2689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In The Kitchen With Dyna.
Age: 25
Posts: 12,231
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable View Post
Double Ouch
and we had a six way tie for interceptions i think
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpp3ycMvQd0

This is why you need Mentos. To justify your questionable problem solving skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7geP5ev0VI

Awesome isn't it.
EARTHQUAKE2689 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:20 PM   #55
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper View Post
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.
I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:24 PM   #56
You did WHAT?!?
 
EARTHQUAKE2689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In The Kitchen With Dyna.
Age: 25
Posts: 12,231
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."
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
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpp3ycMvQd0

This is why you need Mentos. To justify your questionable problem solving skills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7geP5ev0VI

Awesome isn't it.
EARTHQUAKE2689 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:28 PM   #57
Registered User
 
GusFrerotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
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.
GusFrerotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:32 PM   #58
Playmaker
 
redskins5044's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Schertz, Tx
Age: 35
Posts: 3,208
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
redskins5044 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:33 PM   #59
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689 View Post
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
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.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2007, 11:37 PM   #60
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 4,261
Re: The latest on Briggs: Bears want more

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
I don't think you can justify trading for a pro bowl linebacker as "doing them a favor."
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.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.31764 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25