Da Bears want Marshall

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

So you think its logical, we trade the 6th overall pick in the draft and a guy who was our starting MLB until this year for a system LB, (the same system i believe that created Warrick Holdman) and the 31st overall pick in the draft, please tell me how we gain anyground here, we give up a cheap serviceable LB for a guy who has had two good seasons in a great system for LBs and then turn around and pay him 20 mil guarenteed, are you not the same guy that thinks its a terrible idea to draft Calvin Johnson? how is this any better? No one really knows how good he is until he gets away from Chicago, this reminds me of Trotter a little bit too much, the only difference is we only had to give up money for Trotter, not drop 25 spots in the draft

I agree....And don't forget that contract he'll sign that will haunt the team for years to come. A team that is always up against the cap is always looking to sign the most expensive players in the league, and damm the consequences. It does not take long to grow completely frustrated by some of the moves this team continues to consider making. Fix the area of the team that needs fixing, the D-line--LB is not a pressing need for this team, therefore there is no NEED for Briggs at this time.

[Alvin#40]

I know there hasn't been a poll on it, but Marshall was the biggest dissapointment in my circle of skins fans in 06 BY FAR.

[stu_nna]

LOL! I got this from a Chicago Bear forum:




Do we ask for Marcus Washington?
Thu Mar-29-07 10:55 PM

I have seen many say we should ask for McIntosh, but I just don't see that happening. We so much spent on Fletcher and Briggs, I think Wash is going to make sure to keep Mac as a less expensive 3rd LB. That would mean Washington is the odd man out.

Washington is not cheap, but not that absurd either. He has about $6m in bonus remaining on 3 years, which Wash will have to eat. He has base salaries of $4m, $4.3 and $4.5m.

That isn't cheap, but he is a solid veteran that would, at minimum, buy us time to draft/develop a replacement for Briggs w/o any massive dropoff in the short term. Also, as we would not be on the hook for the bonus, we can cut him at any time w/o suffering any cap penalties. Heck, we could cut him next year if we find a cheaper replacement.

Washington is a solid LB who I think would be able to fill in. He would not be cheap, but would be cheaper than Briggs and buy us time. He can tackle and can get to the QB.

The other LB they have that could be interesting is Marshall, who is a year older, but might be an even better fit at WLB for our cover two.

I read, I think from Clayton, that we could counter asking for more by way of picks or players. Wash wants their big name (Briggs) but has some pretty good LBs in the fold now. I am not saying Washington or Marshall are pro bowlers, but they are solid and put them next to Urlacher, and they could provide us a replacement that would not be a massive drop in play on the field.

If we trade Briggs and do not get a LB in the deal, as good as the high pick may be (landry) we will at the same time create a huge hole. Adding a LB like one of these two would fill that void, while allowing us to go into the draft w/o feeling like we have to reach for an OLB.

[stu_nna]

This ain't gonna happen...

[number21isabadman]

it wasent even a good deal as it stood

[offiss]

As I said earlier the Bears know we are dumb enough to give them even more so why bother with a no brainer of a sweetheart deal when we will give up even more. That's why they played in the SB last season and we are picking 6th, or should I say were!

If we really want out of the 6th we should start trading down we would winde up with a lot more than we are going to with Briggs, a couple of trade downs should net at least a 2 and a 3, then we can go get all that talent in the second and 3rd round Gibbs has been babbling about.

On a lesser note I believe our 52 million dollar back is now on equal time with his backup L. Betts according to Gibbs, but at least he will technically be the starter. Hurray!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by offiss

As I said earlier the Bears know we are dumb enough to give them even more so why bother with a no brainer of a sweetheart deal when we will give up even more. That's why they played in the SB last season and we are picking 6th, or should I say were!

If we really want out of the 6th we should start trading down we would winde up with a lot more than we are going to with Briggs, a couple of trade downs should net at least a 2 and a 3, then we can go get all that talent in the second and 3rd round Gibbs has been babbling about.

On a lesser note I believe our 52 million dollar back is now on equal time with his backup L. Betts according to Gibbs, but at least he will technically be the starter. Hurray!

Well, we certainly have proven to be horrible negotiators in the past.

In this case, we could have our hands tied. We've already come to an agreement with Briggs, so it may be very tough to get away from the deal now. However, we really don't have much more at all to give for Briggs.

I just hope we don't unload any 2008 picks and perpetuate the problem further. I guess when we fall in love with a player, anything can happen.

[offiss]

Is there a possibility that we can throw Gibbs in with this trade?

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by offiss

Is there a possibility that we can throw Gibbs in with this trade?

Or anyone on this team associated with decison making!


This is all Brunells fault!

[jrocx69]

"Im not saying Washington is a pro bowler"


LMAO, whatta doof

[Big C]

would make a lot of sense marshall going to the bears in the deal if it were to happen. would be less competition for rocky for those who think he wouldnt see the field at all, and its not like marshall has the potential to get much better, seeing as he is already 30

[Darrell_Green_28]

k then let them throw in a second rounder then

so if we get him then , would we not want a backup? oh yeah you dont need depth

[GTripp0012]

I would have a ton of respect for the decision makers if Chicago asked for more and we told them to go shove it.

But like Offiss said, what are the chances of that?

[JGisLordOfTheRings]

F Chicago and F Lance Briggs! That deal was ALREADY in thir favor....WTF ARE THEY THINKING????

"Oh, the deals already bad for us?"
"Yes, sir."
"Awww, **** it. Throw in a couple linebackers or something just to be nice. That'll do it."

[SmootSmack]

With the trade as it is we'd be getting more than some other recent teams that have gotten franchised players have gotten