jackie hayes

How much cap space would get cleared by cutting him? Honest question. The Bears started, iirc, with $23 mil in space. Briggs takes up $7.5 or so, Archuleta takes up almost $3 (? -- I'm just guessing the average). The Bears would like to resign Ruben Brown and sign a tackle, maybe Scott. It doesn't seem like a $2.4 mil salary would be prohibitive, but I'd like to see the numbers. Some interesting articles on this trade. Danieal Manning will get tried out at cornerback, according to the Sun-Times and the Southtown, and the Southtown states that "return man Devin Hester is being moved to the offense", which is more definite than what I've seen before. Sun-Times link, and Southtown.

I understand it, I just don't like it. Really, really don't like it.

Uhhh...

Can't spend a high pick on safety now, even if Michael Griffin is there. But a second-day safety, at least, still looks like a good bet. My first thought is that this move makes me feel a little better about picking up a receiver with one of those two top picks.

I just remember the name being on the depth chart, I never noticed him on the field.

Not sure where to put it, but it doesn't seem to merit a new thread, so I picked the dt thread. Alfonso Boone signed with KC. Good luck to him, he's a good role player. It would be nice to resign Scott, I just find it hard to believe it can be done. He should get better offers.

Well, yes, but that's neither here nor there. Neither set of physical needs is served even half-adequately by eating prison food and lifting in a small room.

No, this will absolutely hurt his conditioning. Look at Jamal Lewis after he got out. Lifting a lot doesn't do nearly the good a balanced routine would, like he would have on the outside. There's just no silver lining in this.

Same jail time Jamal Lewis got. Yeah, those seem to be commensurate crimes. I'm thinking more and more that the probability of a first-day dt is pretty high.

It may average out to that (I don't know), but there's far too much variance to consider that (half) a rule. Porter is getting $20 mil out of $32 mil guaranteed, while Clements is getting only $20 mil out of $80 mil guaranteed. Heck, what did Urlacher get, something like $15 mil guaranteed out of $56 mil? Until I know the numbers, I'm not assuming anything about that offer. I think the Bears are doing exactly the right thing now. I just don't see the point in trying to come up with judgements about what Briggs did a year ago based on virtually no information. He didn't think it was fair, fine by me.

Based on what? The headline number is nearly meaningless in many NFL contracts. We have no idea how much guaranteed money was involved, when the bonuses were paid, how much backloading was involved, etc. In any case, he turned out to be worth much more than that, so it's pretty hard to question his judgement.

Personally, I think he'd be good value in the first. (Depending on who else is left, of course.)

Completely agree, it was very strange reading that polite bs after his remarks the other day. At this point, I guess it's all pr, but I wonder who they think they're fooling.

Did he say "fair salary"? I remember reading something like, 'acceptable to me'... Edit: Landry's too high, I can't see us trading up that far. Am I the only one who likes Michael Griffin?

I don't think it will affect the team. I think rookies & fas (or at least their agents) know that ANY team would do this in certain situations and, if anything, the Bears are less likely than most to franchise someone. One problem is that the Bears can't seek trades, only listen. Angelo has let it be known that his ears are open, but it would be foolish to take offers made by teams looking to cash in on this situation. I'm willing to wait it out. I understand why Briggs is upset, I just don't care. No, we can franchise him again. The NFLPA has the full text of the CBA on its website. Here's the relevant part, from XX.17.b: If he's not playing by the tenth week, he's out for the season, but the Bears still have the right to franchise him again.

That makes no sense. He's guaranteed only $7-8 mil now. He may be guaranteed $8-9 mil a year from now, IF he performs as well, IF he sustains no serious injury, and IF he is franchised again. In other words, it's not guaranteed at all. If you were not franchised, he could get $20-30 mil guaranteed NOW. I'd be pissed, too, if I were missing out on that kind of money. Not that he should be taking it in this direction, but anyone who acts like they'd be grateful in his situation is not thinking seriously.

No surprise, but it's official -- Briggs is vowing to sit out the year rather than play for the Bears. The only real news is that Briggs says he'd really prefer to play someplace else, to get out of Urlacher's shadow.

I post this not as any disrespect to TJ, just b/c I think it's gut-busting funny when you consider the reason he demanded a trade. The things you gotta say in the NFL. Jones in NY: Link, lof'nl.

Turner could still be had in a trade, I bet. It's easy to overestimate the value of rbs. If the Colts couldn't get a second-rounder for Edge a couple years back, the Bears aren't getting that and more for Jones. TJ has been very good for the Bears, but he's not a superstar, and he's got some mileage. Neither rb was going to accept the current situation next year. The Bears went with the younger back with a higher ceiling. They parlayed the other guy into a high-value pick. Is it a risk? Sure. But in the course of building a team, as you're choosing which risks to take, this is an easy choice.

A high 3rd round pick. Roughly equal to the 3rd pick in the 3rd round

That's not enough for Briggs. Moving from 31 to 20 in the first is a 250-point move, a tiny bit less than we got for Jones. (It's the equivalent of the fourth pick in the third round.) I think the post you were referring to was suggesting a straight up swap of Briggs for the pick, not Briggs and our pick for theirs.

Btw, as to the original rumor, noone's picked it up, so I wouldn't put too much faith in it.

They'd work out a new contract.

Well... I don't agree with Sb on Benson, but that fumble was a pretty costly play. I think Benson is really good, but I don't think it's too controversial saying he didn't show up for the SB. When an important guy plays little, and hurts you in that time, well...

Insist on the first rounder. I don't see the second rounder happening, but if it's there, forget the fifth, and run. Either way, if the Giants are willing to give up that first round pick, a deal should get done.