What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***BREAKING NEWS**** - Lance Briggs might report to camp after all (1 Viewer)

Sweetness_34

Footballguy
Briggs, Bears near deal

Teammate says LB will sign, be at camp

By David Haugh

Tribune staff reporter

July 25, 2007, 12:51 AM CDT

One of the biggest questions facing the Bears all off-season has been when linebacker Lance Briggs will end his holdout from training camp.

Maybe it won't even begin.

There were strong indications Tuesday night the two sides either were coming close to an agreement that would end a messy contract dispute or had solved it altogether.

Reached on his cell phone, Briggs said "no comment" when asked if he had agreed to sign the one-year contract tender worth a guaranteed $7.2 million and report on time Thursday to the start of training camp in Bourbonnais.

But earlier in the night a Bears teammate who had spoken with both Briggs and a league source said the linebacker had agreed to sign the deal and avoid a holdout the Bears had been dreading.

Asked about the rumors Briggs had agreed to sign the contract and report on time, the player said, "True."

Efforts to reach his agent, Drew Rosenhaus, were unsuccessful.

Rosenhaus and the Bears have continued to speak even after the July 16 deadline to work out a long-term deal for franchise players passed. After a visit to Halas Hall last month, Rosenhaus said he had presented some creative proposals to the team.

Among them were believed to be the possibility of paying Briggs a large portion of the $7.2 million up front, which would serve as a smaller signing bonus. The Bears also have offered to rescind the franchise tag on Briggs for 2008 if he agrees to end the impasse and begin what they believe can be a Super Bowl season.

A team source said it would be fair to say recent discussions left many in the organization hopeful a resolution could be reached in time for the start of camp.

It has been a busy month of planning ahead for the Bears. Locking up cornerback Charles Tillman to a six-year extension Tuesday came weeks after signing an extension with cornerback Nathan Vasher.

The Bears probably didn't envision making that type of commitment to one position group, but when Briggs turned down a long-term contract offer in 2006, the team said it was moving on to other core players.

Asked about Briggs during a teleconference, Tillman said, "I'm going to miss him."

Perhaps it won't be as long as he thinks.

dhaugh@tribune.com

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

:goodposting: :lmao:

 
Among them were believed to be the possibility of paying Briggs a large portion of the $7.2 million up front, which would serve as a smaller signing bonus. The Bears also have offered to rescind the franchise tag on Briggs for 2008 if he agrees to end the impasse and begin what they believe can be a Super Bowl season.

I still don't understand why the Bears would promise not to tag him next year. It's a right they have per the collective bargaining agreement - unless of course they have no intention of signing him, as Berrian and Grossman are unrestricted free agents after this season - and Tommie Harris after the '08 season.

 
Among them were believed to be the possibility of paying Briggs a large portion of the $7.2 million up front, which would serve as a smaller signing bonus. The Bears also have offered to rescind the franchise tag on Briggs for 2008 if he agrees to end the impasse and begin what they believe can be a Super Bowl season.

I still don't understand why the Bears would promise not to tag him next year. It's a right they have per the collective bargaining agreement - unless of course they have no intention of signing him, as Berrian and Grossman are unrestricted free agents after this season - and Tommie Harris after the '08 season.
My 2 cents on this: it's the one chip that the Briggs camp had to play, the one negotiable that made the difference between having Briggs for the full season or just the last 6 games. If he comes in so late, after training on his own, I guess the worry is that he might be more susceptible to injury. And there's the continuity issue -- how easily does he work back into things after 10 games of Okwo/Williams? In the end, the Bears might figure they'd rather have a more-or-less content Briggs for one full year and then get on with things, as opposed to a discontented Briggs for 6 games, followed by another messy dispute the next Spring.
 
Once again the franchise tag is undefeated.
Not sure what you mean by this.But if it means what I think it means google "Sean Gilbert franchise tag."
What it means is that the Franchise Tag has never been defeated. Gilbert still lost because he didnt sign it. You cant make up a years salary no matter what deal you sign the following year. Thats lost money that can never be gained again. Not to mention by sitting out the year he became a total bust. Who knows how much that hurt his career.
 
Well that's great news for this year. And I suppose Jamar & Okwo will be that much more ready next year when it's time for one of them to take over the reigns.

 
Once again the franchise tag is undefeated.
Not sure what you mean by this.But if it means what I think it means google "Sean Gilbert franchise tag."
What it means is that the Franchise Tag has never been defeated. Gilbert still lost because he didnt sign it. You cant make up a years salary no matter what deal you sign the following year. Thats lost money that can never be gained again. Not to mention by sitting out the year he became a total bust. Who knows how much that hurt his career.
He beat it because he forced Washington to trade him rather than re-tag and use of cap space for a player not player. He then received $46M contract. The franchise tag at the time required Washington to pay him $2.75M. He got the financial security he wanted. What happened to him as a player after that is irrelevant.
 
Once again the franchise tag is undefeated.
Not sure what you mean by this.But if it means what I think it means google "Sean Gilbert franchise tag."
What it means is that the Franchise Tag has never been defeated. Gilbert still lost because he didnt sign it. You cant make up a years salary no matter what deal you sign the following year. Thats lost money that can never be gained again. Not to mention by sitting out the year he became a total bust. Who knows how much that hurt his career.
He beat it because he forced Washington to trade him rather than re-tag and use of cap space for a player not player. He then received $46M contract. The franchise tag at the time required Washington to pay him $2.75M. He got the financial security he wanted. What happened to him as a player after that is irrelevant.
You are missing the point, I explained it above, not sure what you do not understand but he still lost out on 2.75 million and he would have gotten a long term deal anyway. You can not make up lost money.edit -- and its the same reason Briggs will sign this year, he could never make up the $7.5 million he will get paid this year. The franchise tag never loses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As I said in numerous other posts on this subject, Brigg's holdout never made any sense because with Okwo and Williams waiting for his spot, he only stood a chance of damaging his market value by holdint out, not just by looking like a malcontent, but also because the current knock on him is that he's a system guy. To twist a phrase, better to let people think you're a system guy, than sit out and remove all doubt.

 
Among them were believed to be the possibility of paying Briggs a large portion of the $7.2 million up front, which would serve as a smaller signing bonus. The Bears also have offered to rescind the franchise tag on Briggs for 2008 if he agrees to end the impasse and begin what they believe can be a Super Bowl season.

I still don't understand why the Bears would promise not to tag him next year. It's a right they have per the collective bargaining agreement - unless of course they have no intention of signing him, as Berrian and Grossman are unrestricted free agents after this season - and Tommie Harris after the '08 season.
My 2 cents on this: it's the one chip that the Briggs camp had to play, the one negotiable that made the difference between having Briggs for the full season or just the last 6 games. If he comes in so late, after training on his own, I guess the worry is that he might be more susceptible to injury. And there's the continuity issue -- how easily does he work back into things after 10 games of Okwo/Williams? In the end, the Bears might figure they'd rather have a more-or-less content Briggs for one full year and then get on with things, as opposed to a discontented Briggs for 6 games, followed by another messy dispute the next Spring.
:thumbup: With the team's desire to extend Berrian and Harris (and possibly Grossman), the Bears know they won't franchise Briggs next season as it is. So they figure why not concede something they aren't going to use and get a guy who performs well for them in camp on time. The Briggs camp can claim a victory by getting the possible 2008 franchise tag lifted, and the Bears get a motivated Briggs in camp from Day 1. Good for both.

 
Once again the franchise tag is undefeated.
Not sure what you mean by this.But if it means what I think it means google "Sean Gilbert franchise tag."
What it means is that the Franchise Tag has never been defeated. Gilbert still lost because he didnt sign it. You cant make up a years salary no matter what deal you sign the following year. Thats lost money that can never be gained again. Not to mention by sitting out the year he became a total bust. Who knows how much that hurt his career.
He beat it because he forced Washington to trade him rather than re-tag and use of cap space for a player not player. He then received $46M contract. The franchise tag at the time required Washington to pay him $2.75M. He got the financial security he wanted. What happened to him as a player after that is irrelevant.
You are missing the point, I explained it above, not sure what you do not understand but he still lost out on 2.75 million and he would have gotten a long term deal anyway. You can not make up lost money.edit -- and its the same reason Briggs will sign this year, he could never make up the $7.5 million he will get paid this year. The franchise tag never loses.
You're missing the point. If Gilbert signs the tag. Goes out an plays like crap, or even worse suffers an injury a la LeCharles Bentley, his market value is severly reduced and he never see's a contract in the $46M neighborhood.
 
So the question becomes....When Briggs signs this how is he going to play next year....Pro-Bowl Caliber or cautious so that he doesn't get hurt? I vote the latter (I'm a Bears fan too).

 
Hopefully this is a situation that will b resolved. I know that on the Mac/Jurco/Harry show on ESPN radio here in Chicago- Tommie Harris mentiond that he is about as close to 100% as he can be. The guys called him out on it but he said he was good to go.....

 
Snotbubbles said:
Once again the franchise tag is undefeated.
Not sure what you mean by this.But if it means what I think it means google "Sean Gilbert franchise tag."
What it means is that the Franchise Tag has never been defeated. Gilbert still lost because he didnt sign it. You cant make up a years salary no matter what deal you sign the following year. Thats lost money that can never be gained again. Not to mention by sitting out the year he became a total bust. Who knows how much that hurt his career.
He beat it because he forced Washington to trade him rather than re-tag and use of cap space for a player not player. He then received $46M contract. The franchise tag at the time required Washington to pay him $2.75M. He got the financial security he wanted. What happened to him as a player after that is irrelevant.
You are missing the point, I explained it above, not sure what you do not understand but he still lost out on 2.75 million and he would have gotten a long term deal anyway. You can not make up lost money.edit -- and its the same reason Briggs will sign this year, he could never make up the $7.5 million he will get paid this year. The franchise tag never loses.
You're missing the point. If Gilbert signs the tag. Goes out an plays like crap, or even worse suffers an injury a la LeCharles Bentley, his market value is severly reduced and he never see's a contract in the $46M neighborhood.
Snot,Only one person lost in the Gilbert situation and thats Gilbert. The Redskins didnt lose, they were able to get rid of a player that clearly wasnt worth his contract, the Tag didnt lose because it protected the Redskins (as its meant to do). Gilbert lost out on 2.5 million dollars. Its plain and simple. You can bring up what ifs and coulda have's but the simple fact is that the Franchise Tag has never lost, the player either signs the tag or loses the money, the tag cant lose.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top