Bears interested in Archuleta

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I'd be happily surprised if we got a 5th rounder and stunned if we got anything higher.

5th rounder? They won't even give us a green parking pass for him.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper

5th rounder? They won't even give us a green parking pass for him.

If the Bears truely want him, they'd be wise to give us some compensation. If they trade for him, they get him under his current deal with 6 years remaining and are liable for no part of his signing bonus (which we would take the remaining 6/7 of as dead cap). If he sucks there, the dead cap penalty for cutting him would be a whopping 0 for the Bears.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If the Bears truely want him, they'd be wise to give us some compensation. If they trade for him, they get him under his current deal with 6 years remaining and are liable for no part of his signing bonus (which we would take the remaining 6/7 of as dead cap). If he sucks there, the dead cap penalty for cutting him would be a whopping 0 for the Bears.

I don't think that would be wise at all.

First, if the Redskins get rid of him they will flat drop him.

Second, why the hell would anyone want to touch that contract with a 10 foot pole? After the Redskins drop him, they can sign him in the neighborhood of the league minimum. Around the league, he is viewed as an injured "never was".

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper

I don't think that would be wise at all.

First, if the Redskins get rid of him they will flat drop him.

Second, why the hell would anyone want to touch that contract with a 10 foot pole? After the Redskins drop him, they can sign him in the neighborhood of the league minimum. Around the league, he is viewed as an injured "never was".

they'd want the contract cause the first three years ARE at vet minimum, and they wouldn't have to pay any of the signing bonus (that's ALL on he skins). so they get him cheap for two years and can toss him at any time with no penalty, and there'd be no negotiations to be hassled with on that contract either.

and for the earlier post, the union put in a rule because of lavar's giving money back AND suspended his agent (for two years) for allowing him to do that.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by That Guy

they'd want the contract cause the first three years ARE at vet minimum, and they wouldn't have to pay any of the signing bonus (that's ALL on he skins). so they get him cheap for two years and can toss him at any time with no penalty, and there'd be no negotiations to be hassled with on that contract either.

and for the earlier post, the union put in a rule because of lavar's giving money back AND suspended his agent (for two years) for allowing him to do that.

According to Canuck's sheet '08 has a 1mill salary and 1 mill roster bonus. '07 is at the minimum.

They would still have to send some compensation. Would they even want to let go of a seventh rounder?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper

According to Canuck's sheet '08 has a 1mill salary and 1 mill roster bonus. '07 is at the minimum.

They would still have to send some compensation. Would they even want to let go of a seventh rounder?

actually, in the week after release, any team can pick up a player with his current contract intact (waiver system) before it's totally ripped up. the bears' success would put them behind other teams though, i believe. not sure if you can start a bidding war on a guy claimed by multiple teams, but i'd think not.