Very basic. Very simple. Here I come.
FRANCHISE BERNARD BERRIAN
This is the smartest football move to make right now. Bernard is the best receiver on the open market and using the franchise tag will enable the Bears to both avoid a cumbersome signing bonus and give the player another year to elevate his play to the level of a number one receiver. If he does, he gets paid.
SIGN LANCE BRIGGS
Why make linebacker a liability with this much cap space? The money's there and the player's earned it. Don't repeat the errors of eighty-six.
CUT ADAM ARCHULETA, RICKY MANNING JR.
Why these two moves haven't already taken place is beyond me?
FREE AGENCY? OFFENSIVE LINE.
The Bears aren't signing a big name running back and aren't finding a starting safety. These moves will enable the Bears to focus on bringing in some immediate help on the offensive line.
#2 Max said . . .FIRST
February 20, 2008
#3 Jimbo said . . .This all sounds good. . . but if we resign Lance and franchise B-Squared, that takes out a huge chunk of change. And then who do we sign on the offensive line?? My first choice is Faneca but hes getting old as well plus he isnt going to be cheap either.
I say let Briggs go, franchise BB, sign 1 if not 2 O-linemen through free agency (Faneca, Flozell Adams, Jordan Gross, Ryan Lilja, or Maurice Williams), restructure Mike Browns contract to bring him back and then draft Kenny Philips with our first round pick, and O-line in the second and/or third.
Cut Ricky and please please please cut Arch. . . please
February 20, 2008
#4 Decatur Staleys #7 said . . .Article suggests we'll end up with an OT at 14, possibly Vanderbilt's Chris Williams.
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=137524
February 20, 2008
#5 Phil from SATX said . . .Arch Dud might not be easily cut with our current depth at the safety position
Ricky might be a cap victim,since we already drafted at that position last season.
Ruben future is tied to what we do in FA or the draft.
February 20, 2008
#6 Pissed Off said . . .It's looking like it makes sense to pick up a FA guard and draft a tackle with either our 14th or even better a traded down 1st round pick, because one of those good tackles will be around towards the end of the first round. Looking at my handy dandy draft value guide, a move down from 14th pick to 24th is worth 400 points or an additional mid-round 2nd round pick, if there is someone who wants our 14 spot - and that should be a pretty good spot to elicit some interest - not too expensive but there are elite guys available there that teams will fear won't be around later.
Here are a list of the free agent offensive linemen that haven't been franchised - this is not exhaustive but comes from a CBS guy's top 32 FA's list - so according to him these are the quality guys available (in his order, with their age following):
Flozell Adams T 32
Alan Faneca G 31
Jacob Bell G Titans 26
Ryan Lilja G Colts 26
Stacy Andrews T/G Bengals 26
Sean Locklear RT Seahawks 26
Maurice Williams T/G Jaguars 28
Max Starks T Steelers 26
Jake Scott G Colts 26
Look at the plethora of guys who are only 26, plus a 28 year old. The ages are changing my opinion - I sure hope we go this direction rather than grabbing another old "is this the year he starts breaking down" lineman in Faneca (31) or Flozell (32). Adding a proven 26 year old will add someone that we can build around for the long term. Don't freak out about the franchisees - Gross was apparently expected to be franchised. Every team is not going to franchise these guys - Lilja's free because Colts just franchised Clark. Steelers could only franchise one of their two that are on the list. There will be a quality guy available in FA to the Bears. If it's a tackle, the 14th pick is gone, traded for whatever they can get, including the always-disappointing next year's picks (unless maybe Phillips is available) - if it's a guard, the pick will still try to be moved but if they get no good offers they'll pick one of those Clady/Otah/Baker/Williams names at 14 - they should have a shot at all but maybe Clady.And we'll be good to go in 2008!
February 20, 2008
#7 Rancid said . . .The problem with franchising a guy is that you're paying him way more than he's worth. Berrian is not a top 5 WR and should not get top 5 WR money but if we franchise him thats what we're doing. Thats why a longer term, non-franchising deal is the way to go if you want to keep the guy. Franchising is a last resort. I dont know why a guy wouldnt want to be franchised, he'll make more money that year than probably any other in his career. My take is to sign Berrian if he wants to....to a 3-4 year deal or something if the money is right. If he is absolutely set on hitting the free agent market then he can walk unless our money is as good as the offers. I dont really want to franchise him, he'll be way too overpaid and he's not that great of a WR...its just nice for him this year cuz he's the best WR available, which is extremely sad, cuz he's not that good, so he's gonna get paid WAY too much either way.
Same with Lance, if he wants to come back, and he's said he'd like too, pay the guy. Thats fine, sign him to a long term deal if the money's right. Kind of the same situation with him as Berrian. We have guys to replace Briggs. Anyone looks good next to Urlacher. If I had my pick of the two, sign Briggs, let Berrian walk...and drop.....passes for some other team. Like Max said, we need some money for this O-line.
February 20, 2008
#8 Jimbo said . . .Phil - Stacy Andrews was franchised. These tags and re-signings are a concern as a smaller amount of available FA at a position increases their value. BB is a great example of that.When Crayton re-signed, BB's value went up.
1. With the increased cap space we now have with the recent cuts, I am not entirely opposed to the franchise tag on BB. I am not rabidly pushing for it either though. It is defenitely overpaying him, but I am not opposed to overpaying him IF we can afford to. But the drops still piss me off. With the cap number we were talking about a few weeks ago (20 M) I don't think it was possible. Now with it over the 30 M mark, I am a bit more comfortable with it, but I still don't love it.
2. I can't say what I would be willing to pay for Lance. Again, that number goes up with cuts, but I still think he will wind up with a massive payday and if we can throw that cash somewhere we need it more I'd still rather do that. I don't want the Caskets to save money, I want them to spend it elsewhere. I guess I'm not sold on the Briggs at all costs line of thought.
3. It has been said on here that Arch Deluxe costs us nearly nothing this year since we gave him all his money last year. I am unsure of Ricky's contract situation. It probably means we can at least wait to make those moves.
4. I am still pushing for hopefully 2 lineman in FA. If we could steal Gibril Wilson and his new superbowl ring that would be great too but it does seem unlikely. I've given my opinion before but I will again: If we can sign 1 or 2 lineman who can start for us, and Phillips is gone by #14, then I would prefer we trade the 1st pick for a 2 and a 3.
February 20, 2008
#9 Rancid said . . .As far as Briggs and the money being right, I just can't imagine that'll be the case. Briggs is demanding top dinero, and you gotta assume he'll get it given there's alot of teams with good cap space.
Nate Clements went for eight-year, $80 million... is that what we're talking about for Briggs as well?
February 20, 2008
#10 jeff said . . .After looking there are a couple other FA safeties to consider. Ken Hamlin (Dallas) and Madieu Williams (Bengals). Williams at least cannot be franchised as the Bengals used it on Stacy Andrews.
February 20, 2008
#11 Phil from SATX said . . .max the cap hit this year to resign briggs and franchise berrian would still leave us with almost ten million plus to play with. we're in a great place economically.
February 20, 2008
#12 Phil from SATX said . . .Your math works out, Rancid, but I still say there's enough guys to go around. Regarding Briggs, Jimbo, I think you're exactly right. A top free agent should be written off by the team losing him unless he is the very heart of your team - like a Brian Urlacher - and those guys tend to get taken of and re-signed early and long. We already tried with Briggs, and failed. Briggs is a top player, but not the very heart of our team. And the definition of being the top free agent on the market is that someone's going to grossly overpay for you. It can't be us. This is an exception to the rule of "pay the guys who are proven over the may be's and might be's." But Lance Briggs is not worth 8 years and $80MM - we still have bigger fish to fry to get this team where it needs to be. Will we miss Lance? Of course we will. But we can't participate in the feeding frenzy - it's just not good business sense.
Spend that money where it's needed - offensive line, a FA WR, maybe a FA safety. Losing Briggs will free up LOTS of money.
February 20, 2008
#13 jeff said . . .For one Lance Briggs, we could sign a quality FA safety and a quality FA guard. We have our step-in linebackers ready. And we still would have oodles of space for other needs. We can get all of our holes fixed right now and maybe get to the luxury of drafting best athlete available in the draft.
February 20, 2008
#14 Pissed Off said . . .phil, i love you but that just ain't true. faneca is going to command huge money and a free agent safety that can be a difference maker commands bob sanders-type money. why is everybody so willing to give up one of the best linebackers in the game?
February 20, 2008
#15 Rancid said . . .Because everyone looks better than they are next to the best linebacker in football. Look at Hillenmeyer, I think that guy is damn good, Williams can be the next Briggs in this system, and for a lot less dough. A lot of Briggs successs is due to the system he's in, another guy can fit into the system too.
February 20, 2008
#16 Phil from SATX said . . .I would say for the money we would have to pay Lance Briggs we could get a solid O lineman and a solid safety, and probably have a bit left over. Neither of them would be the top available (sorry, no Faneca). Likely a Lilja/Starks/Bell/Scott type and then maybe Madieu Williams or Hamlin at safety.
I have to say that I would rather have 2 solid proven trustworthy players at those two positions than 1 Lance Briggs at LB. If Lance could be had in the 7 M a year range I start getting interested but this 10 a year number is not a wise move. Of course we are all saying 10 because of the Clements deal Jimbo mentioned in #8. I'm not positive but I am fairly sure shutdown corners do better than Pro Bowl Linebackers so maybe no one is paying him 10 M, and we're arguing about nothing. The real question to have a useful debate on this is: "What is the top amount the Bears should be willing to pay Briggs and will someone else offer him more"
jeff, when you said we could keep Briggs and BB and still have 10+, what ballpark number were you giving to Briggs?
February 20, 2008
#17 DTB said . . .Jeff, I love you too but I've already said we won't be the club to get Faneca. Those other guys will come at lesser dollars and still represent a major line upgrade to us. With our pressure, our shutdown corners and the still-best middle linebacker in the game, we would love but don't need a Bob Sanders for the strong safety spot - we just need a big athletic guy who can lay the wood. We screwed up/Briggs screwed us when we couldn't get him signed early. We paid $7.2MM last year to him and had an enormous defensive drop-off and finished 5-9 (I don't count the last two meaningless wins). It wasn't his fault but it just points out our needs are vastly bigger than one great weak-side linebacker. WE CAN'T AFFORD HIM because teams ALWAYS GROSSLY OVERPAY for the the top players. If you want to keep these guys you have to restructure them early.
I am guessing that we presented him with a very fair and expensive offer that is still 35% less than what some other team will offer him. Rosenmoney's gotta feed his family, so Lance Briggs will not be allowed to give the Chicago Bears a 35% home town discount. If you believe that keeping Briggs should be the #1 priority of the team, I think you are going to get very angry at the Bears when you learn the details of their offer and compare it to what he actually gets.
February 20, 2008
#18 Phil from SATX said . . .I have this gut feeling that what we are seeing here with the offense is a commitment to Rex and his strengths as a QB. With Moose out of the way and the presumed re-signing of B2 we have 3 recievers that basically fly. We know what we have in B2 and hopefully a steadily improving 23. Bradley is the unknown, but I honestly think that given Moose's playing time he could complie the same ammount of catches while adding the threat of taking it to the house every time he touches the ball. When could we ever say that about 87? I think what we have here is a commitment to a vertical passing game. If there is a secondary out there that could cover the speed that we will have, I'd like to see it. We have two quality possesion recievers with Des and Olsen to work underneath when the deep routes dont materialize. This could be fun to watch with Rex back next year.
O-line is a different animal entirely. I can only point to 3 returning starters with Tait, Kruetz and (eek) Garza/Beekman. With that being sid I entirely agree with the idea of signing a guard and drafting a tackle. Screw Faneca, he'll pull a Ruben Brown. Produce a Pro-Bowl year or two and then break down. Lilja signed back with Indy so that leaves Scott, Bell, who else? But please aquire a solid young tackle. A group that blocks and doesn't jump offsides, they don't have to be dominant, just consistant.
Regarding the defense, I am fine with Briggs leaving. Unfortunately commiting to large contracts means coughing up big dollars up front. Unless a huge signing bonus is pro rated through the duration of the contract, we cant commit to 7 mil plus a year on a single player. Briggs' numbers are the result of 54, period. Its amazing what a dominant MLB can do for a 4th round draft pick. Lets see it happen again, FREE JAMAR.
I think that the BT has a solid grasp on what they want moving forward. The skills of the players that are expected to fill vacancies as of right now, are pretty exciting and I am looking forward the '08 brand of Bears football already. Solidify the O-line, bring in a S, draft or sign a RB that complements what we already have. I think we are moving in the right direction.
February 20, 2008
#19 Pissed Off said . . .I didn't realize Lilja was off the market - but the good news is he signed a 5 year deal for $20MM - $4MM per to stay with Indy. That's not that much money for a quality guard. I do realize with every signing there're fewer out there and their price should go up - but I expect us to move strong and fast on February 29 to get at least one lineman.
February 20, 2008
#20 Pissed Off said . . .I changed my mind. I don't wanna keep any of these guys. In fact, I'm done wasting my time reading and writing about this crappy football team. Time to go do somthing worthwile. I'm going to go big game hunting in Africa. See you losers later.
February 20, 2008
#21 JB said . . .#19 not me.....probably Mike.
February 20, 2008
#22 Phil from SATX said . . .big game hunting in africa...that's just an odd choice.
anyways, i can't see how ricky manning jr isn't the next to go, especially with the progress of the rook last year. Signing one of the 3 before FA would be clutch. I see a lot of talk of tagging berrian talk...i wonder if we'll see that soon or not.
February 20, 2008
#23 JB said . . .It sounds like from what I read, the Bears are likely to announce only one of two things re: Berrian - he's agreed to their offer, or he's tagged. They have to tag him before free agency starts, and cobbling together the statements Angelo's made, the Moose cutting and the Deep Throat Shady info, they're not letting this guy walk away.
I may be against paying him that much, but I would certainly be happy about knowing he'll be on the club next year, and especially since it apparently indicates a concomitant interest in Rex. DTB, I like the way you're thinking. Berrian, Hester and Bradley, Clark and Olsen, Benson, Wolfe and Joe RB, used correctly, with blocking provided by our new and improved line - I can't wait.
February 20, 2008
#24 jdawg said . . .i guess that saves the wearability of my berrian jersey for at least another year if that happens then.
February 20, 2008
#25 JB said . . .regarding covering Hester, Berrian and Bradley -- it won't matter unless the O-line is addressed. Please review the last SB tape.
A Steeler's fan popped in on another forum and warned against over-paying Faneca. According to this guy, Fanace's a great run blocker and a mediocre-to-lousy pass blocker and will soon be on the down-side of his carreer.
As far as Briggs is concerned, rumor has it that he wasn't too happy with the offer Angelo sent his way. Same with Ayenbedayo (sp?) and I'm assuming same with BB.
On the D side Harris is the most important signing.
And yes, I'd franchise BB if the remaining players are Bradely, Hester, Davis.
February 20, 2008
#26 Phil from SATX said . . .Well, if a steelers fan said that, then forget Faneca. I believe Davis is a FA right now btw. I would assume JA sent competitive offers. The only difference is that these guys have a bloated sense of self confidence right now. If I were in their shoes, I'd probably want to see what was out there. But your point about Tommie is one I tried to make about 4 months ago...signing him this off season is the most important move to make for the future of this franchise.
February 20, 2008
#27 Phil from SATX said . . .For whoever claimed the Bears continue to be cheap-asses, there were 22 clubs last year who had lower player payrolls than the Bears. Only 10 had higher. Not bad, McCaskeys!
If we're waiting for certain guys to be cut (i.e. Ricky Manning Jr.), some may not be cut until June 1 - the benefit of that is that any accelerated bonus cap hit gets to be distributed over 2 years vs. one year. If there are un-prorated amounts of cap left, that's a consideration in cutting people - the un-prorated amount gets slammed against this year's cap. Can be a reason to keep Arch D - money's already out the door AND there will be extra cap hit for cutting him.
By the way, speaking of Arch D, I wonder if there's any chance for any offseason resurgence from him? He has to be totally embarrassed by his 2007 performance, especially coming on the heels of 2006 - he's completely disappointed fans of two franchises in back-to-back seasons. Once upon a time this guy was a good football player - it sounded like the problems may have all come after a surgery he had.
But as much as we (rightfully) vilify him here, character is not an issue with him - he seems to be a very good guy and a good teammate presumably feels like shit and wants to do better for us, whether it's on special teams or whatever. I'd love to be able to talk to him and find out what happened and whether we could ever expect anything from him. Shady, sell him some pretty new jeans! Get to work!
February 20, 2008
#28 Smitty said . . .The team with the lowest payroll...
Won the Super Bowl a few weeks back. $75MM vs. our $104MM.
How did they do it? By drafting consistently well (always cheaper than buying FAs), and playing rookies.
February 20, 2008
#29 Polygonhell said . . .I just read a comment talking about the organization committing to Rex. I'm gonna be sick...I love the deep ball, don't get me wrong, but he is a TO machine. So tired of watching him lose the ball in one of his many ways.
February 20, 2008
#30 Serious said . . .The problem with re-signing Briggs for 8 Million a year is that it puts you in a position where you have to consider restructuring Urlacher's contract unless your comfortable (and he is aswell) with being the second best linebacker on the team.
Franchising Berrian might be a good move in the short term, it puts off having to pick up another wideout. I agree he's not "worth" a long term contract at the franchise price, but franchising is about an up front payment to defer havin to address a need long term. Not about what a player is "worth" on the open market.
I'm in two minds about Faneca, he is going to be very expensive and want a long term contract, so he's going to be a big cap hit now and in future years.
February 20, 2008
#31 mikebdot said . . .Jeff. I agree with everything you said above, except... dont cut AA. He sucks, but hes OK on special teams, hes not taking cap room, and sadly we're too thin at safety to justify the cut. If we have injuries like we did this year he might see some time at SS... and for the money we'll be paying him this year, hes the best option for 3rd string.
Also we NEED to tag BB if he doesnt go for whatever contract JA offered him this week. Hes the only bonafied WR we have. I'm not saying hes a solid #1 type... but he has that potential. I know everyone thinks of the dropped passes that KILLED rex and gresie... but remember the endzone catch against denver? remember the clutch playoff diving catch against N.O. in 06? I dont see Hester making this grabs. I dont see Book or any other FA guy knowing or offense as well, or having solid chemistry with Rex. Besides I like to say B-twice.
If Hester developed into a starting WR, with Berrian and M. Bradley, we would have the fastest WR corps in the NFC. Now that doesnt necessarly mean BEST... but if we can generate a consistant deep threat, then that will further help the run game.
Also I love Briggs... i'd like to see him line up next to #54 for the rest of their careers. I hope he takes a reasonable (albeit probably large) offer from the bears. Other teams will probably pony up more cash... so i hope he really values being in chicago. With that said, if he does leave, then we can put that money into the OL and RB. So its sort of a win-win. No doubt our D will be better with briggs then without him.
February 20, 2008
#32 Ffo dessip morf dekcuf pu htorn atokad said . . .Serious: The only way the deep threat will actually help the running game is if we actually complete passes there more than just "occasionally". When there is single coverage we have to find that receiver every time and have a QB that can consistently put it where only the receiver can catch it. None of the QBs on our current roster can do that, not even Grossman (though he is most likely to make that claim as he did it for one month in '06, the month everyone who loves him continues to crow about).
February 20, 2008
#33 Pissed Off is a cock tease at North Dakota parties said . . .Franchise Bernard Berrian!?!? Bernard Berrian?!?! Heavens to mergatroid. That would be the pinnacle of stupidity. Berrian doesn't merit getting paid among the top 30 wide receivers in football, let alone the top 5.
Once the Bears draft OT Chris Williams at #14 they will have the ability to address wide receiver and running back in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. To augment whoever they pick up in the draft at wide receiver the Bears will sign a veteran cast-off from some other team. But not Marty Booker because Angelo is sending out signals he has zero interest.
February 21, 2008
#34 jeff said . . .Honest. His cousin Ernie from Fargo says so.
February 21, 2008
#35 Ralph Wiggums said . . .2nd and 3rd round receivers means sacrificing 2008. i ain't going for that.
February 21, 2008
#36 Pissed Off said . . .Sacrifice 2008? Please. Slapping the franchise tag on Bernard Berrian is assinine. Thankfully there is no way Ted Phillips and Jerry Angelo will do that. Let the overrated and imminently replaceable Berrian walk. There will be decent (not great) veteran wide receiver options available. Pick one of them and draft somebody in the 2nd and 3rd round.
The Bears have several major holes to fill making it therefore ridiculously presumptous to predict "great things" in 2008. The needs of the offensive line and at running back are acute. Even more so than the big need at wide reciever. And lest we forget that the QB position remains a clusterfuck. Also, last time I checked Angelo wasn't being widely proclaimed for his ability to evaluate and obtain offensive skill position talent. So tell me then where on earth does this great optimism for 2008 originate from?!?!
February 21, 2008
#37 Adam Archueleta said . . .Mike, your a fuck off. Mr. Moderator, can we have Mike banned from this blog please. He adds nothing to the conversation accept an overwhelming bias against Bernard Berrian (who I believe is the next Terrell Owens), Mark Bradley (who I believe is the next Jerry Rice), Rex Grossman (who I believe is going to shatter Brett Fav-rahs records).
February 21, 2008
#38 Jimbo said . . .I kept my job, I kept my job !!! Tra la la la la. See, it DOES pay off to give Lovie a handjob during film sessions.
February 21, 2008
#39 Phil from SATX said . . .Biggs article makes you wonder if we'll use the tag, deadline to do so is today. Otherwise, BB hits the FA market in a week unless we can lock him up before then.
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/805575,CST-SPT-bear21.article
February 21, 2008
#40 Pissed Off said . . .Jimbo, you beat me to it, although Biggs doesn't indicate why he thinks what he thinks, that's one of the first recent indicators I've seen suggesting that they won't do it. The article the other day suggested that Rex's and Berrian's futures may be intertwined - if Berrian doesn't get franchised today, I wonder if that says anything about Rex.
Here's where I won't be too psyched about our prospects: new QB, new#1 and #2 receivers (or conversely the BT suggesting that Bradley and Hester are ready for the #1 and #2 roles), new RB, new line, all needing to be prepared by the great Ron Turner. That's some scary shit to me. As I've said before, I'm okay with not coming to terms with BB, I'm okay with adding two new WRs to the mix, but I'm NOT okay with doing that without Rex. And if these guys start pulling some shit about Kyle Orton is okay to go into next year as the #1, I'll probably explode.
As Chalk Talk mentioned, the biggest ever differential between end-of-year offensive rating and defensive rating for the team was 2005 - 2nd on D, 29th on O. Piloted by none other than KN Beard. Has he improved? Yes. Has he overcome his inaccurate passing ways? No.
Assuming there will be no tag news out by 3 p.m. today, the next news I'm looking for out of Bears camp is Rex Grossman has agreed to a contract. It's got to happen - not because I'm so in love with RG, but because I don't see any other good options, and now particularly with the massive changes we're looking at in the O.
February 21, 2008
#41 Pissed Off said . . .#36 not me.
February 21, 2008
I LOVE MEN!
February 21, 2008
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.