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!

Skins want Briggs (1 Viewer)

Rozelle

Moderator
KFFL

Redskins | Team offers No. 6 overall pick for Briggs

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:10:10 -0700

Jay Glazer, of FOXSports.com, reports the Washington Redskins have offered the No. 6 overall pick to the Chicago Bears for LB Lance Briggs and the No. 31 overall pick, according to agent Drew Rosenhaus.

 
wow...Fletcher/Briggs/Washington would be pretty sick.

that seems like a pretty good offer for a guy who may hold out if he stays in Chicago.

 
KFFL

Redskins | Team offers No. 6 overall pick for Briggs

Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:10:10 -0700

Jay Glazer, of FOXSports.com, reports the Washington Redskins have offered the No. 6 overall pick to the Chicago Bears for LB Lance Briggs and the No. 31 overall pick, according to agent Drew Rosenhaus.
According the value chart:#6 pick - 1,600 points

#31 pick - 600 points

1000 points = pick #16. So this is the equivalent of trading the #16 overall pick for Lance Briggs. Given his contract demands, that's a steep price to pay.

 
This trade is a bad idea for Washington. They need d-linemen, not LB's. I still think this is a bad enough idea that this is just an unfounded rumor.

 
There goes McIntosh's value.
One has to question his value even if Briggs isn't there. They barely played him at all last year, which I think was really stupid by the coaching staff. They nothing to play for, so why not get the kinks out now? Oh well....The 'Skins better be getting a little more than Briggs and the 31st pick IMO.
 
There goes McIntosh's value.
One has to question his value even if Briggs isn't there. They barely played him at all last year, which I think was really stupid by the coaching staff. They nothing to play for, so why not get the kinks out now? Oh well....The 'Skins better be getting a little more than Briggs and the 31st pick IMO.
He did play a couple of games and his athletecism showed when he did. They rarely play rookies over there. I'm surprised they are going after a LB too. He would be fine for a kid and they have other needs especially on the line. And safety. They could pick up a good D-lineman at the #6 spot.Seems like a dumb trade.
 
There goes McIntosh's value.
One has to question his value even if Briggs isn't there. They barely played him at all last year, which I think was really stupid by the coaching staff. They nothing to play for, so why not get the kinks out now? Oh well....The 'Skins better be getting a little more than Briggs and the 31st pick IMO.
He did play a couple of games and his athletecism showed when he did. They rarely play rookies over there. I'm surprised they are going after a LB too. He would be fine for a kid and they have other needs especially on the line. And safety. They could pick up a good D-lineman at the #6 spot.Seems like a dumb trade.
:bag: I agree completely!
 
There goes McIntosh's value.
One has to question his value even if Briggs isn't there. They barely played him at all last year, which I think was really stupid by the coaching staff. They nothing to play for, so why not get the kinks out now? Oh well....The 'Skins better be getting a little more than Briggs and the 31st pick IMO.
He did play a couple of games and his athletecism showed when he did. They rarely play rookies over there. I'm surprised they are going after a LB too. He would be fine for a kid and they have other needs especially on the line. And safety. They could pick up a good D-lineman at the #6 spot.Seems like a dumb trade.
Dale Lindsay, the abrasive LB's coach, is also gone. There were even rumors that it was in part over the McIntosh issue. That may change the way that the LB's are used this coming year.
 
bcr8f said:
redman said:
Dale Lindsay, the abrasive LB's coach, is also gone. There were even rumors that it was in part over the McIntosh issue. That may change the way that the LB's are used this coming year.
What was that issue?
Starting him over Holdman, which is what you were discussing. Sorry, I didn't mean for that to be enigmatic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This trade is a bad idea for Washington. They need d-linemen, not LB's. I still think this is a bad enough idea that this is just an unfounded rumor.
I agree this isn't a good deal for Washington. They should be able to get more value for 1.06. However, it's not like picking 31 completely destroys their chances of getting a good DL.
 
This trade is a bad idea for Washington. They need d-linemen, not LB's. I still think this is a bad enough idea that this is just an unfounded rumor.
I agree this isn't a good deal for Washington. They should be able to get more value for 1.06. However, it's not like picking 31 completely destroys their chances of getting a good DL.
That's assuming they have knowledgeable people making the picks. Snyder + Cerrato + Gibbs = a joke.The Redskins will never win as long as Snyder keeps playing fantasy GM. Briggs does not fit in Williams D and they should use that 6th pick on someone that can really help, like a DE or DT.
 
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.

 
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.
When? I've been listening all day and haven't heard that.
6:00 Eastern ESPN. Had Mort on. Talked about Briggs and Randy Moss.
You're right. Mort just said the same thing on ESPN2. He said the Bears weren't interested in the #6 pick.The Skins should be interested in it.
 
on local radio today, they said that Angelo asked Briggs to play out the 07 season and in return the Bears would promise not to use the franchise tag on him next year. Briggs reportedly declined.

 
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.
Dan Snyder is that twerp you went to high school with that everyone wanted to beat up but no one ever did.The Bears did the Skins a favor by not accepting this deal. This'll force the Skins to take Gaines Adams, which they oughta do anyways.

 
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.
Dan Snyder is that twerp you went to high school with that everyone wanted to beat up but no one ever did.The Bears did the Skins a favor by not accepting this deal. This'll force the Skins to take Gaines Adams, which they oughta do anyways.
Anything to bash Snyder! Why you think that this isn't Rosenhaus' doing is beyond me.
 
redman said:
massraider said:
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.
Dan Snyder is that twerp you went to high school with that everyone wanted to beat up but no one ever did.The Bears did the Skins a favor by not accepting this deal. This'll force the Skins to take Gaines Adams, which they oughta do anyways.
Anything to bash Snyder! Why you think that this isn't Rosenhaus' doing is beyond me.
I thought it was all Rosenhaus until ESPN said they talked to 2 league sources and then wondered.
 
redman said:
massraider said:
Mort said the Bears told the Skins they weren't interested and weren't happy the Skins brought this public and caused such a commotion.
Dan Snyder is that twerp you went to high school with that everyone wanted to beat up but no one ever did.The Bears did the Skins a favor by not accepting this deal. This'll force the Skins to take Gaines Adams, which they oughta do anyways.
Anything to bash Snyder! Why you think that this isn't Rosenhaus' doing is beyond me.
I personally don't think going public wih trade discussion is worthy of bashing. If Snyder did take it public, I wouldn't have a problem with it. I was just kind of making a general statement about Snyder.

Before you climb up on that cross and nail yourself to it, do a search. I don't think you''ll find me bashing Snyder. After all, I am a Raiders fan.

 
According to local DC sports radio stations, Briggs and the Skins have agreed on a contract, now they're just waiting for the Bears answer.

My questions is this - if Briggs does go to WAS, who is Briggs' replacement with CHI? Is it Jamar Williams? Does anyone have any inside info?

 
Assuming away total insanity (or drunkenness) on the part of the Redskins as a reason for this proposed deal, I think there are some important implications here. The reason I say that is something has never smelled right about this deal.

Their needs are clearly - overwhelmingly! - on the D-line, above all else on the team, much less the defense, so it makes no sense to devote significant resources to another spot on the team and, by trading down, reduce the team's ability to address that need.

Unless . . . unless there's a problem that we don't know about.

I admit I'm reading tea leaves here, but watch Rocky McIntosh and, to a lesser extent, Lemar Marshall. By adding Briggs, the Redskins would have new fewer than four starting caliber OLB's in Briggs, Marcus Washington, Marshall and McIntosh. This trade makes far more sense as a general matter if they added one of those guys presently on their roster into the deal and shipped him to Chicago. McIntosh, as a young promising 2nd year player would make the most sense; Marshall is also a capable WLB in the Cato June mold and could work too, but he's not as valuable in trade as McIntosh.

If they add one of those guys to the trade, then all is likely as it appears. If they don't however, and they come out of this trade with 4 OLB's, then to me that's a strong indication that Marcus Washington's health is in doubt. Remember that he had hip surgery this offseason.

Again, this is reading tea leaves and assuming reasonable mental health/sobriety on the Redskins' part - no small assumption! - but it's got me thinking . . .

 
Wonder if they'd treat him better if Drew wasn't his agent.

CHICAGO -- The standoff between Lance Briggs and the Chicago Bears took another turn Saturday, when general manager Jerry Angelo said he wants the Pro Bowl linebacker to return next season, but a multiyear contract is unlikely.

"I'm not ruling it out 100 percent, but in all probability, that's not likely to happen," Angelo said during the team's fan convention.

The Bears and Briggs have been at odds since the team slapped the franchise player tag on him in mid-February.

Briggs threatened to sit out the season, then agent Drew Rosenhaus said his client would sit out the first 10 games and report for the final six to qualify as serving one year as a franchise player.

Meanwhile, the Washington Redskins offered the sixth pick in the draft for Briggs and the Redskins' No. 31 selection.

"We'll digest what they offered Monday and we'll go from there," Angelo said, adding no other team has made an offer.

The Bears would likely have to pay the No. 6 pick a $15 million to $20 million bonus, although they could package the pick in another trade.

Chicago would owe Briggs about $7.2 million next season -- the average of the top five salaries at his position and approximately 10 times what he earned in 2006. But the franchise player tag makes it difficult for Briggs to market himself to other teams.

If he signs an offer sheet, the Bears have the right to match it. Otherwise, they would receive first-round picks in 2007 and 2008.

Briggs made it clear in early March that he was unhappy with the label, when he told ESPN.com and a Chicago radio station the team should remove it or trade him. He has repeated those sentiments in interviews with several national media outlets.

A week later, he told foxsports.com, "I've played my last snap for them. I'll never play another down for Chicago again," and basically said the same thing in an interview with ESPN.

Angelo believes Briggs really feels that way, and that he isn't being put up to it by Rosenhaus.

"When somebody speaks, I have to take it as that's what they feel," Angelo said. "I'm not going to characterize Lance as a puppet."

Angelo met with Briggs at the recent NFL meetings and used words such as "amiable" to describe the session. He also made it clear he wants the linebacker in Chicago next season.

"I wanted him to know exactly what our sentiments were," Angelo said. "It was very amiable, given that neither one is really going to get their way. We have to take the high road, move forward to make this the best we can because it serves everybody to do it this way."

Angelo told Briggs the public attacks on the organization weren't "in anybody's best interests."

If Briggs leaves, Angelo said the Bears would not pocket the money. They would use it to acquire and retain players.

A year ago, Briggs reportedly turned down a six-year, $33 million deal. He said it was for seven years, and was "below market value." Either way, Angelo warned him that the Bears might use the franchise tag.

Chicago spent some of that money earmarked for Briggs on center Olin Kreutz, linebacker Hunter Hillenmeyer, running back Adrian Peterson and cornerback Ricky Manning Jr.

Briggs made his second straight Pro Bowl, and the Bears won the NFC championship. Now, he's in a stare-down with management.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

 
bcr8f said:
Wonder if they'd treat him better if Drew wasn't his agent.
I doubt it. They offered him a decent long term deal last year. Decent, but not great. I think they were looking to get a bargain, in comparison to what Briggs will eventually get.I don't follow the Bears as much as others, but it seems like they have decided that the money it would take to sign Briggs to a long term deal would be best served elsewhere. Having that much money tied up in two linebackers is probably not their preferred plan. If that is their feeling, I agree with them. I think the Bears would love to get one more year out of him, then use that cash to tie up Harris and others. I don't think Briggs' comments, or his agent, really affect their mindset.
 
NFL Network said the Bears will ask for a player plus the #6. If they get McIntosh this will one of the most lopsided trades I can remember. At 6 they could grab a good DT or perhaps Brady Quinn.

 
NFL Network said the Bears will ask for a player plus the #6. If they get McIntosh this will one of the most lopsided trades I can remember. At 6 they could grab a good DT or perhaps Brady Quinn.
Wow...the Redskins are complete morons if they trade McIntosh and #6 for Briggs and #31.
 
NFL Network said the Bears will ask for a player plus the #6. If they get McIntosh this will one of the most lopsided trades I can remember. At 6 they could grab a good DT or perhaps Brady Quinn.
Wow...the Redskins are complete morons if they trade McIntosh and #6 for Briggs and #31.
Today the Skins are balking, but the Bears did say they'd want a player plus the pick. I didn't hear who. I'm not so sure Briggs would be better in that system than McIntosh.
 
Bears reject trade offer for Briggs

As of right now, Lance Briggs isn't going anywhere.

FOXSports.com has learned that the Bears have turned down the Redskins' offer of trading the sixth pick of April's draft for Chicago's Pro Bowl linebacker and the 31st pick of the draft. Redskins sources say Bears GM Jerry Angelo has phoned Washington with his decision.

For now the deal is dead, but that doesn't necessarily mean the deal is lost for good. It appears that the main sticking point is the fact that the Bears believe the pot isn't sweet enough as is.

Chicago would love the Redskins' young linebacker Rocky McIntosh in the deal to play Briggs' weakside linebacker position. Trading Briggs would leave Chicago without a starting weakside LB. However, the Redskins sources contend they do not want to part with McIntosh, even though he'll either have to move positions or wait for an injury to Briggs if he is to get on the field over the next couple of years.

One Redskins official said that, despite the logjam, they view McIntosh as a good young player who has too much upside to part with. Perhaps one option would be for the Redskins to include McIntosh but then ask Chicago for more as well to even it out a bit.

At this point, however, the two sides have hit a stalemate, putting them right back where they started before the NFL Owners Meeting last week in Phoenix.

Jay Glazer is a senior NFL writer for FOXSports.com.

Link : http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6640430

__________________

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top