Alaskan Grizzly

I agree with all of this. Still am curious what the "asking price" is/was. I saw a reply last night that said Ray Lewis' cap hit was $4.95 Million, but how does that translate to Urlacher's "asking price"? Did he or his agent ever set a number? Or are they simply hoping for more than the $2 Million that Chicago originally offered them?

Meh...camp fodder.

I'm curious; where did this $5 Million / year figure come from? I understand that Urlacher may have been offered about $2 Million per from the Bears but haven't factually heard where this upper number came from. I'm not sure what Lewis was paid to play for the Ravens last year. However I believe that Urlacher's presence on the team is immeasurable. However there is some similarity to what Lewis' presence was to the Ravens. That being said, I don't know that the mere presence of Urlacher on the team for one or two more years is worth $5 million per year (don't really think that he does either) nor do I think he should settle for $2 Million. Somewhere in the middle is more reasonable.

Intriguing, especially given his draft status. But with his off field issues he could become a liability. If Lovie were still coach I would definitely encourage it. Maybe help him in character and skill building. Too bad the team didn't work something with Roach (trade wise).

They said the same thing about Warren Moon. Lol

Although he just resigned with Montreal does the NFL trump CFL? (I know the answer, just thought I'd ask).

What about Anthony Calvillio? Sure he's older (so is Peyton) and under a new contract but... He knows Trestmans offense. http://www.timescolonist.com/sports/footba...parture-1.49186

Yes Connor, thank you for reminding me of that...again. And ML...'bite me'. I for one an glad to see Bowman back, gives us Alaska fans someone to cheer for.

There are a few options still on the team, although not entirely attractive, in DiCicco, Costanzo, JT Thomas or 'yes' McClellin. All of these guys could potentially be developed if thought to be of any worth.

Don't know that "love" describes it, more like respect. Respect for wha the team is right now in no small part to his contribution. I beg to differ that he is not "competent" but maybe not as capable as he once was. Does that mean we just give up? As far as whether he makes the whole season, I wouldnt take the bet that Jason made you as normally I'm not a betting man. But if I were I'd be more likely to think hes going to play more than 12 games. As others have pointed out, he's had a full offseason to heal and will be focused to see it through. Looking too far into the future can cause you to lose focus on the present. Roach is gone and in your opinion so too should Urlacher. I'm not so sure that it's a wise choice to be so hasty. Having two starting LBs gone at once sounds more like rebuilding than 'building on'.

Daventry, I said it once and I'll say it again: I support Lovie Smith, am disappointed he's gone but will 'hope' the new regime can do better. As MadLith and I discussd, I am juxtaposed to where he was once. When Lovie was coach I was optimistic, he not so. Now we are swapped. I have "acknowledged" it now you need to comprehend that is where I stand. The reference to the Eagles and Redskins dripped of sarcasm. If you were unable to comprehend that, my bad. Since opinions are like therory, they can be flawed until scientifically (or statistically) proven otherwise. You say mine "seem flawed" then Ill surmise that you mean to say that I could be right. I suppose the fact remains to be played out. It sounds like we are about the same age but whether either of us was a fan most of our 40ish years it doesn't take away from one being more right than the other. My youngest is a fan and has been most of her 9 years. Does that make her any less? You can deride me further if you feel I necessary but I'll stay pat on my original thought. That being Urlacher deserves another shot as a Bear. Ill leave the expertise of contract negotiating to the experts.

Being one of the only Lovie supporters left I should mention that Tim Jennings was a direct result of Lovie's "player development".

He didn't, I did. Picture of Tebow.

Mr Daventry, what YOU need to put into context is what Jason wrote earlier...to which I replied: "What's funny is, he (Urlacher) is EXACTLY what's best for the team. Part of the reason the Bears got Peppers was, no doubt, because of the atmosphere Lovie created. Like him or not as a coach, the players enjoyed playing for him. That permeated to other players around the league. It told them the Bears were an organization to play for. A family. Dropping Urlacher now, when we already know the disparity for contract is minimal, says exactly the opposite." I will not argue that "players want to get paid". That is why when Dan Snyder took over in Washington we saw the Redskins win so many Super Bowls the following years. Or when Philadelpha opened up its pocket book a few years ago to construct an all star team (the same one that Vince Young declared "The Dream Team") and win back to back championships. What I prefer, as do most traditionalists (aka some Bears fans) want is for stability. Trading old for young, pricey for cheap doesn't always translate to wins. And since you brought it up, I make no qualms nor apologies for my support of Lovie. As was mentioned earlier his style (coaching or personality) is what brought our Defense to what it was known for these last few years.

Isn't Isaiah Frey still on the roster? That was one of "Emery's picks" from last year. Something tellls me that he could figure into the big picture.

There is a deeper issue that you pretty much nailed in this write up. What you mentioned about Lovie's appeal to players and in part Urlacher's will no doubt effect how our team moves forward. The fact that some players like Peppers coming to Chicago had to do with Lovie and Urlacher being there and their recruitment efforts. And the possibility of Urlacher leaving because he's not happy could resonate to a player like Peppers...and Tillman...and Jennings and any other experienced defensive player in the NFL. That the Bears are a new team, a team run by an "offensive minded" coach and a GM that doesn't look (or possibly care) about history, just the bottom dollar. The fact that someone like Roach leaving for a team like Oakland at around $3-4 Million per year could also send a bad message. If Roach theoretically could have been that 'heir apparent' why didn't the Bears compete more for him? If Urlacher goes, not only does the team lose some of its respectability in history and tradition but also in experience and knowledge of the players already on the team. Players themsleves that may not want to stick around given the new track history.

This...^^ And despite what some will say, Urlacher was still more productive than Roach last year despite his (Urls) playing on 12 game to Roach's 16. Games Sack INTs Pass D FF FR Tack / Asst Urlacher (2012): 12 - 0 1 7 2 2 53 15 Roach (2012) : 16 - 1.5 0 4 1 1 50 15 (source: PROFOOTBALLreference.com)

Counting you and he, two peoples 'opinions'. Of which like a-holes, most everyone's got. Piece o' crap editorial. That is my 'opine'.

I think really the only way to get the 'closure' you're looking for on Bushrod will be when the season starts. And if the scheme he played in NO is similar to what will be used in Chicago then maybe you'll get an idea of how good (or bad) he is. AND if he's paired up with a Guard that is capable of holding their own on the inside. All things as they are and from what I've 'heard', I'm just not sold on him as of yet.

Outside of his being a good maybe decent blocker, he really hasn't consistently proven himself as the catching threat everyone is making him out to be. He wasn't super good in Dallas but he did improve once a Giant. But was that due more to Manning vs Romo more than anything? Kevin Boss is an example of what I'm talking about. Since leaving the Giants what has he done?

And we're supposed to buy that because he "went to two pro bowls" he is the solution over Webb? Is it possible it was more of the offensive team's doing (Brees et al) than Bushrod's individual effort? His and Bennet's signings bewilder me a little bit. I guess only time will tell.

Couldn't agree more. My feeling is that he (and to some extent the team) are testing the market. I'm not convinced that he really wants to go anywhere else. If he had to Dallas might be it only because that is where Marinelli went. As Jason said earlier it would 'sicken' me to see him in another uniform. Enough to where I would question the value of traditional importance this team has always held in high regard.

As an aside and sorta related to this topic. Interesting (perhaps intriguing) that Josh Cribbs is in a similar postion. Perhaps he could be a thought? http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/3/6/40577...leveland-browns

The more I've read from this site in the last few weeks, I'm of the mindset that the team should persue in an interior lineman (Guard/Center) before they look at spending gobs on the outside. I think it was SCS that suggested Webb could potentially be a lot better if he had decent inside help....to which I would have to agree. Especially given the example of his being put on an "island" with the likes of Jared Allen and Clay Matthews and not faring all that bad. Outside of the apparent lack of maturity (the recent drug charge doesn't help), Webb is a servicable Tackle.