Gros Membres! Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 ... OR Lance could play this year and put his guaranteed $7.2 million in the bank. Sounds like a better plan than sitting out, getting nothing, and lowering one's market value by coming off as a prima donna. This guy is a Rosie O'Donnell. I understand everything about being in Urlacher's shadow but if he were smart he'd take the money and contend for another year with a great defense. Build up his rep, mature, and run a defense then. It is Urlacher's show and who says Briggs will ever be a contender without him?? Briggs thinks too much of himself, I'd be surprised if he gets a blockbuster deal on the FA market and is leading a D next year. Sorry, that takes time and Briggs has shown me nothing to prove that he can do it by himself. And giving a guy over 7.2 on pure potential is ridiculous considering he already has some miles on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Briggs thinks too much of himself, I'd be surprised if he gets a blockbuster deal on the FA market and is leading a D next year. Sorry, that takes time and Briggs has shown me nothing to prove that he can do it by himself. And giving a guy over 7.2 on pure potential is ridiculous considering he already has some miles on him. Uhmmm. Did you see the contracts that were given out this year? I understand why fans are pissed, but I'd be willing to bet he holds out training camp and has a change of heart when the season starts. This song and dance has been done before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gros Membres! Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Uhmmm. Did you see the contracts that were given out this year? Yeah, I just think it's rare when this kind of an incident occurs for someone to leap out and pay a guy what he wants who obviously just wants to get paid. I think him bringing up the Urlacher thing is just to make him look like he's not a money grubber and is really a "character guy" who can change the face of a franchise with his good intentions. Maybe SF would be a good fit with Clements already in the bag for $30 mil. I also thought Adaelius Thomas would surely end up there. 2nd rounder + ? for Briggs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 briggs skill set is great for the cover 2, if he wants to continue his success he will need to play in that system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 I understand why fans are pissed, but I'd be willing to bet he holds out training camp and has a change of heart when the season starts. This song and dance has been done before. Agreed. Briggs has 7.2 million reasons to not hold out. Holding out for an entire season may also decrease his market value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 They should trade him to the Saints for Charles Grant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Agreed. Briggs has 7.2 million reasons to not hold out. Holding out for an entire season may also decrease his market value. My prediction: he sits out camp, shows up late and gets hurt by Week 5 because he isn't in proper shape but plays anyways. Seems to happen like that when holdouts occur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Agreed. Briggs has 7.2 million reasons to not hold out. Holding out for an entire season may also decrease his market value. Most teams are going to pay a lot of attention to the fact that he sat out, if he does. Most of them will be smart enough to realize he will by that time be desperate to take anything he can get, having had zero income for a year and never having been paid more than 3/4 of a million a year. I think LB is going to be up $hit creek if he continues in this direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 My prediction: he sits out camp, shows up late and gets hurt by Week 5 because he isn't in proper shape but plays anyways. Seems to happen like that when holdouts occur. Yes they do. Big difference between being in midseason form & being in your second week of playing - especially during the regular season when teams reduce hitting in practice. There's no way to prepare for the kind of contact that occurs in the NFL other than to be properly conditioned for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFreak Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Briggs is on local radio here in Chicago. He says he is willing to get something worked out. Backed down from his statments saying he would not play another down for the Chicago Bears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Briggs is on local radio here in Chicago. He says he is willing to get something worked out. Backed down from his statments saying he would not play another down for the Chicago Bears. Rosie O'Donnell. If you make noises like you're going to swing for the fences, don't lay down a bunt a couple of days later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFreak Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Rosie O'Donnell. If you make noises like you're going to swing for the fences, don't lay down a bunt a couple of days later. He said he is still willing to sit out but he is not against getting something done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 He said he is still willing to sit out but he is not against getting something done. He backed down completely. Where's his "I won't play another down for them" stance? He talked tough & got called on it, and now he's acting like a little girl. Nancy Briggs, OLB, CHI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 the funny thing is briggs has beef with da bears, but he should be vocal against the NFLPA not the bears. He should be less concerned about being the man on a new team, and more concerned on winning a superbowl, and he is on a team that just finished being there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 the funny thing is briggs has beef with da bears, but he should be vocal against the NFLPA not the bears. What would the NFLPA be able to do for him? The Bears appear to be playing by the rules and Briggs would be guaranteed $7.2 million this season if he shut his pie hole and went to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 What would the NFLPA be able to do for him? The Bears appear to be playing by the rules and Briggs would be guaranteed $7.2 million this season if he shut his pie hole and went to work. Because the NFLPA agreed to the Franchise tag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 What would the NFLPA be able to do for him? They could negotiate better so that teams are not allowed to slap the tag. He should be mad at them. Not the bears. The bears are just exercising something that the NFLPA negotiated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 (edited) the funny thing is briggs has beef with da bears, but he should be vocal against the NFLPA not the bears. With Rosenhaus as an agent I think you are seeing his negotiating style evident in all of this. They could negotiate better so that teams are not allowed to slap the tag. He should be mad at them. Not the bears. The bears are just exercising something that the NFLPA negotiated. They negotiated it with the players. Edited March 13, 2007 by Randall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 (edited) correct me if im wrong but I though that NFLPA represents the players and they negotiate with the league. and then the owners cast votes, if they agree with the terms negotiated. Edited March 13, 2007 by whitem0nkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 They could negotiate better so that teams are not allowed to slap the tag. Yeah, the owners ought to concede to all the player's demand, and then hand over another 37% of the gross revenues. Players are employees. They are very well compensated for the concessions they make in the CBA. No one is forcing them to play pro football, but as long as they are they need to abide by the CBA as agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitem0nkey Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 (edited) Yeah, the owners ought to concede to all the player's demand, and then hand over another 37% of the gross revenues. I was responding to this question. What would the NFLPA be able to do for him? And you should read why he asked that question. its because my point was his beef should be with the union not the bears. Edited March 13, 2007 by whitem0nkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 They could negotiate better so that teams are not allowed to slap the tag. He should be mad at them. Not the bears. The bears are just exercising something that the NFLPA negotiated. Agreed about the Bears playing by the rules, but LOL at Briggs being ANGRY at the NFLPA for guaranteeing him $7.2 million this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 correct me if im wrong but I though that NFLPA represents the players and they negotiate with the league. and then the owners cast votes, if they agree with the terms negotiated. They could issue signing statements and ignore agreed on issues they don't like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 (edited) I wonder why he turned it down? Small signing bonus, backloaded or just wants to break the bank. To answer your question, he wants a long-term deal: "The $7.2 million -- although it's a good number, it looks nice -- there's no job security in it," Briggs told ESPN. "I played four years as a third-round draft pick. I played four years as a third-round draft pick at the league minimum, and there've been no talks of a contract negotiation this year. ... In my opinion, there is no intention on a long-term deal here. "And if you don't have me in your plans for the long term, then I don't want to be here." Edited March 14, 2007 by Crazysight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 (edited) I can't say I really blame him...if I was looking around that team seeing other players who had 20 million, 30 million, etc. bankrolled and I was sitting there with only 3 million through 4 seasons after being a top linebacker in the NFL over the last 3, I'd want more for the long-term too. It's rough out there and you're only one serious injury from having it all taken away from you. Edited March 14, 2007 by Crazysight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.