Randall Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Mort said the Redskins are pushing this hrad but the Bears are reluctant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 from chicagosports.com Becoming Bears' franchise drag LB refuses GM's offer to remove tag after '07 By Don Pierson Tribune pro football reporter March 27, 2007 PHOENIX -- A one-on-one meeting between Bears linebacker Lance Briggs and general manager Jerry Angelo did nothing to ease tension Monday night in a contract dispute that just got uglier. Angelo's offer to take the franchise tag off Briggs after the 2007 season was flatly rejected by Briggs and agent Drew Rosenhaus, who agreed to let his client talk to Angelo alone. "I wanted to clear the air and let him know that neither side is winning this," Angelo said. "I told him, 'We're not happy, and you're not happy. So where do we go from here?'" Angelo called it a "good meeting" but reported no meeting of minds. Rosenhaus said before the meeting that if Angelo offered to take the franchise tag off Briggs after 2007, it wouldn't make his client willing to play for the Bears this year. "Nope. That doesn't solve our issue," Rosenhaus said. "Our issue is getting fairly compensated. We want a long-term deal or a trade." According to FoxSports.com, the Redskins told Rosenhaus on Monday that they would like to send their first-round pick, No. 6, to the Bears for Briggs and the No. 31 pick. Briggs arrived at NFL owners meetings from Tucson, where he played at the University of Arizona, after Angelo suggested the one-on-one meeting. Before the meeting, however, Rosenhaus took Briggs on a tour of national media outlets and introduced him to executives from other teams attending the NFL owners' meetings. "I have a three-ring circus going on," Angelo said. Angelo said he was willing to promise Briggs he would remove the franchise tag after the 2007 season in exchange for a full commitment by Briggs, who has publicly said he has played his last down for the Bears. The franchise tag took Briggs off the lucrative free-agent market and obligates the Bears to pay him $7.2 million for this season, the average of the five highest-paid linebackers in the league. Briggs, who saw players such as Buffalo linebacker London Fletcher-Baker get a $10.5 million signing bonus from Washington in free agency, has threatened to sit out this season. "He can do what he wants," Angelo said. "I just know this. If you don't play, you don't get paid. It's that simple. If he chooses not to play, which he has the option to do, we'll have to go on without him, and we're prepared to do that. That's not our choice. We need him, and we certainly want him because he's a very good player. "He just wants to make enough of a ruckus that we're going to get tired of it and let him go. That's not our plan." By rule, the Bears are allowed to apply the franchise tag again next season. But other teams have pacified players by promising not to use the tag in future seasons. For example, Seattle did so with All-Pro offensive tackle Walter Jones, then was able to work out a long-term contract with him. Until Briggs, Angelo had never used the tag, a tool agreed to in collective bargaining to enable teams to keep their best players. After Briggs turned down a six-year, $33 million contract offer before last season, he was warned the Bears could use the franchise tag to keep him off the market. Angelo is not apologizing for using the franchise tag even though it is not the tool of choice to keep a team intact. "You always anticipate the worst, and the worst obviously is having a negative attitude about it," Angelo said. "But again, I don't see it as being punishment. I see it as we respect the player, and that's why we did it. That's a lot of money you're talking about for one year." After arriving Monday, Briggs appeared briefly on the NFL Network, saying he had "no regrets" about threats to sit out the season. Rosenhaus then introduced him to several NFL general managers and coaches, including Philadelphia's Andy Reid and Baltimore's Ozzie Newsome. Also, the Bears won't find out this week whether Tank Johnson will be suspended during the season. They will consider themselves lucky to find out before the April 28 draft. Commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday he expects a revised personal-conduct policy before the draft, delaying a decision this week on what he called "a very complicated issue." Goodell also said he plans to proceed with scheduled hearings for certain players in early April, so Johnson still could be subject to discipline under old rules, which ordinarily would cap a suspension at four games. Though Johnson could escape a harsher penalty if the NFL continues to postpone its planned new policy, the Bears are planning to open their season without the defensive tackle, which is why they signed ex-49er Anthony Adams. However, contrary to a report from ESPN, the Bears did not sign free-agent safety Tyrone Carter, who re-signed with Pittsburgh on Monday, agreeing to a three-year contract. "Whatever they rule, we have to prepare for the worst," Angelo said of the new personal-conduct penalties. "We needed to bring somebody in anyhow. It takes pressure off the draft. I don't want to go into a draft with a need. "I hate doing that." I bolded two things: the first one you should take at face value. I don't think he's bluffing. That being said, it does seem to imply he will listen to the right offer. The second part is interesting: they ARE looking to shore up the secondary further. So maybe adding Archuleta wouldn't scare them off Landry. I still find this difficult to see happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 "He can do what he wants," Angelo said. "I just know this. If you don't play, you don't get paid. It's that simple. If he chooses not to play, which he has the option to do, we'll have to go on without him, and we're prepared to do that. That's not our choice. We need him, and we certainly want him because he's a very good player. "He just wants to make enough of a ruckus that we're going to get tired of it and let him go. That's not our plan." Can't say I wouldn't seeing them stand firm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Which means it'll most likely happen, because Snyder is an idiot. Ah, but he is a rich idiot. That's the worst kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 From the other side The Skins moved up to draft McIntosh, let the LB coach go after he didn't play him much even though he looked athletic when he did, and really don't need LB'ers. S and D line are bigger needs. The more you think about it the less sense it makes. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it doesn't make a lot of sense. While it wouldnt be my move, I can live with this one. It seems Williams is not sold on McIntosh or Lemar Marshall at weakside and Briggs is only 26 and solid. With Fletcher and Washington, that is a great LB corps. And the secondary is fine with Smoot, Rogers, and Springs, and Taylor and Stoutmire (we signed him from NO where he started last year) and some pretty good B level talent at backup safety. What we really need is a guard and some D line depth. But I can live with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disfunction Junction Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 IF they sign Briggs it will mean bye bye Chris Cooley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 IF they sign Briggs it will mean bye bye Chris Cooley. Excellent point. 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.