Bears protect themselves with Mike Brown...

[madlithuanian]

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...SPT-bear20.stng

 

Bears get injury protection from Mike Brown deal

Injury history cuts safety's '08 base salary to $950K

 

May 20, 2008

BY BRAD BIGGS bbiggs@suntimes.com

It's debatable whether the Bears have protection on the roster in the event veteran safety Mike Brown is injured again.

 

There is no question, however, that the team has some protection in terms of finances after reworking Brown's contract.

 

Brown has missed 43 regular-season games over the last four seasons -- including 15 last year after tearing the anterior cruciate ligament in his left knee in the opener at San Diego -- and will have to be healthy to earn the $2.44 million that was supposed to be his base salary this season.

 

Entering the final year of the five-year, $17 million extension he signed in July 2003, Brown now has a base salary of $950,000 for 2008. The $1.49 million difference can be attained in an unlikely-to-be-earned incentive that is tied to an unknown playing-time lever. If Brown is injured before the season starts, the contract includes a split that would reduce his pay to $320,000.

 

General manager Jerry Angelo said last year that the team was considering adjusting Brown's contract. But in a feel-good mode as defending NFC champs, the Bears showed respect for the team leader and captain by not addressing his contract after the Super Bowl season, in which he was shut down after the sixth game with a torn Lisfranc ligament in his right foot.

 

In 2005, Brown battled a badly pulled calf muscle at the end of the season, and a torn Achilles tendon in Week 2 ended his '04 season.

 

The good news is Brown is fully recovered from his knee injury and was running with the first team at free safety Monday in the Bears' first organized team activity.

 

''It starts with Mike Brown,'' coach Lovie Smith said last week on the team's Web site. ''I'm very pleased with what we've seen from him in the offseason.''

 

The Bears wound up changing their starting safety combination six times last season. Adam Archuleta suffered a broken hand, then was benched, and Brandon McGowan, currently penciled in as the starter at strong safety, also missed two games because of injury.

 

For a guy who has missed so much time, it's hard to say Brown is the glue that keeps the group intact, but when he's healthy, that is the case. The intangibles he provides are so strong, the team could not cut ties with him, despite concerns that multiple leg injuries have slowed the 30-year-old. The last four seasons have been in stark contrast to the first four of Brown's career, in which he did not miss a game.

 

Also in the mix are Danieal Manning, hard-hitting Kevin Payne and rookie Craig Steltz, a fourth-round pick. That should be ample depth, but the Bears thought they were dealing from strength in numbers when they traded Chris Harris to the Carolina Panthers last summer. Harris would have come in handy around Week 2.

 

NOTE: Running back Cedric Benson's initial court date has been rescheduled for June 30, according to his attorney, Sam Bassett. Benson's first date was to be Monday in Texas, where he faces Class B misdemeanor charges of drunken boating and resisting arrest. Benson, who has proclaimed his innocence, will not be required to appear at the next court date.

 

• • Assistant director of pro personnel Morocco Brown has left the Bears to take a job as director of pro personnel with the Washington Redskins. The Bears can promote assistant pro scout Kevin Turks into Brown's position or look outside the organization.

[azbearsfan]

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...SPT-bear20.stng

 

Bears get injury protection from Mike Brown deal

Injury history cuts safety's '08 base salary to $950K

 

May 20, 2008

BY BRAD BIGGS bbiggs@suntimes.com

It's debatable whether the Bears have protection on the roster in the event veteran safety Mike Brown is injured again.

 

There is no question, however, that the team has some protection in terms of finances after reworking Brown's contract.

 

Brown has missed 43 regular-season games over the last four seasons -- including 15 last year after tearing the anterior cruciate ligament in his left knee in the opener at San Diego -- and will have to be healthy to earn the $2.44 million that was supposed to be his base salary this season.

 

Entering the final year of the five-year, $17 million extension he signed in July 2003, Brown now has a base salary of $950,000 for 2008. The $1.49 million difference can be attained in an unlikely-to-be-earned incentive that is tied to an unknown playing-time lever. If Brown is injured before the season starts, the contract includes a split that would reduce his pay to $320,000.

 

General manager Jerry Angelo said last year that the team was considering adjusting Brown's contract. But in a feel-good mode as defending NFC champs, the Bears showed respect for the team leader and captain by not addressing his contract after the Super Bowl season, in which he was shut down after the sixth game with a torn Lisfranc ligament in his right foot.

 

In 2005, Brown battled a badly pulled calf muscle at the end of the season, and a torn Achilles tendon in Week 2 ended his '04 season.

 

The good news is Brown is fully recovered from his knee injury and was running with the first team at free safety Monday in the Bears' first organized team activity.

 

''It starts with Mike Brown,'' coach Lovie Smith said last week on the team's Web site. ''I'm very pleased with what we've seen from him in the offseason.''

 

The Bears wound up changing their starting safety combination six times last season. Adam Archuleta suffered a broken hand, then was benched, and Brandon McGowan, currently penciled in as the starter at strong safety, also missed two games because of injury.

 

For a guy who has missed so much time, it's hard to say Brown is the glue that keeps the group intact, but when he's healthy, that is the case. The intangibles he provides are so strong, the team could not cut ties with him, despite concerns that multiple leg injuries have slowed the 30-year-old. The last four seasons have been in stark contrast to the first four of Brown's career, in which he did not miss a game.

 

Also in the mix are Danieal Manning, hard-hitting Kevin Payne and rookie Craig Steltz, a fourth-round pick. That should be ample depth, but the Bears thought they were dealing from strength in numbers when they traded Chris Harris to the Carolina Panthers last summer. Harris would have come in handy around Week 2.

 

NOTE: Running back Cedric Benson's initial court date has been rescheduled for June 30, according to his attorney, Sam Bassett. Benson's first date was to be Monday in Texas, where he faces Class B misdemeanor charges of drunken boating and resisting arrest. Benson, who has proclaimed his innocence, will not be required to appear at the next court date.

 

• • Assistant director of pro personnel Morocco Brown has left the Bears to take a job as director of pro personnel with the Washington Redskins. The Bears can promote assistant pro scout Kevin Turks into Brown's position or look outside the organization.

 

 

Smart move by the organization. I love the guy but he is soooooooo injury prone.

[selection7]

Is he injury prone? I competely understand where you're coming from, but Mike is an interesting example because he was Mr. 100% the first half of his career. So he became injury prone but wasn't before? Maybe. How about Cedric Benson and Rex (both were iron men before playing for the Bears)? If you can't look at many years of a football player's history (such as Rex, Ced, and Mike from high school, college, and up to part of the pros) and say "these guys will be reliable!", then how can you do the same with these guys' latest parts of their careers and say "these guys are injury prone!". The only thing I can think of in rebuttle is that high shcool and college don't wear you down like the bigger, faster, and longer season pros. ...still, we're not talking about going from typical to fragile, we're talking about going from "never misses a game" to fragile.

 

Actually, one more thing...previous injuries can be reinjured or help to cause new ones at other locations, of course. So there's that too.

[madlithuanian]

I'd ertainly say he's injury prone. I'd also say Benson and Grossman are as well. But I digress.

 

I really don't care about what happened before they becaome pros...all I care about is what's happened as pros.

 

Most definitley injuries cause other problems. I have a herniated disc. When it acts up, I usually end up pulling a back muscle over-compensating for it. Then I end up straining stomach muscles over-compensating for that. It's a domino effect.

 

Is he injury prone? I competely understand where you're coming from, but Mike is an interesting example because he was Mr. 100% the first half of his career. So he became injury prone but wasn't before? Maybe. How about Cedric Benson and Rex (both were iron men before playing for the Bears)? If you can't look at many years of a football player's history (such as Rex, Ced, and Mike from high school, college, and up to part of the pros) and say "these guys will be reliable!", then how can you do the same with these guys' latest parts of their careers and say "these guys are injury prone!". The only thing I can think of in rebuttle is that high shcool and college don't wear you down like the bigger, faster, and longer season pros. ...still, we're not talking about going from typical to fragile, we're talking about going from "never misses a game" to fragile.

 

Actually, one more thing...previous injuries can be reinjured or help to cause new ones at other locations, of course. So there's that too.

[selection7]

I'd ertainly say he's injury prone. I'd also say Benson and Grossman are as well. But I digress.

 

I really don't care about what happened before they becaome pros...all I care about is what's happened as pros.

Ok. I'm not saying I think you're wrong, just that I'm not convinced and obviously I'm confilicted about it. Though if all you care about is the pros i don't see how you can explain Mike Brown...other than the injuries causing injuies bit, which it isn't obvious is the case with Mike.

[madlithuanian]

With Borwn, I'm not even sure medical professional can explain why he's been so banged up. But, the bottom line is that he has. Whether it's dumb luck or something in his physical make-up...the injury gods don't smile on him.

 

Ok. I'm not saying I think you're wrong, just that I'm not convinced and obviously I'm confilicted about it. Though if all you care about is the pros i don't see how you can explain Mike Brown...other than the injuries causing injuies bit, which it isn't obvious is the case with Mike.

[Connorbear]

Great job by the Bears. Let's all hope that Mike makes his entire salary this yr!!!!!!

 

Peace

[BearFan PHX]

To an earlier discussion about athletes "whining" about getting more money, it was asserted that athletes demand renegotiation when they are doing well, but that teams never ask for any back (or can't) when they aren't. here is an example where they did.

 

Also in Urlacher's statement during his holdout he said: “’But this is the NFL, and if I’d signed it and I’d played like (expletive), they’d have cut me or tried to get me to take less. In my mind, there’s no difference. If they can ‘break’ a contract, I have a right to ask for more if I play well enough.’”

 

Only the signing bonus is guaranteed, so yes, in the NFL, both sides have leverage beyond the signing of a contract, and both do ask for more or less depending on performance.

[jason]

With Borwn, I'm not even sure medical professional can explain why he's been so banged up. But, the bottom line is that he has. Whether it's dumb luck or something in his physical make-up...the injury gods don't smile on him.

 

Part dumb luck previous years. Last year was just a dirty play by an opponent.

 

[Connorbear]

Part dumb luck previous years. Last year was just a dirty play by an opponent.

 

I was on vacation and never saw the play. When I heard about the injury I was heartbroken and never did view it until now. Does anyone know if Neil was fined for that?

 

Peace

[Mongo3451]

name='BearFan NYC' date='May 20 2008, 09:39 PM' post='39275']

To an earlier discussion about athletes "whining" about getting more money, it was asserted that athletes demand renegotiation when they are doing well, but that teams never ask for any back (or can't) when they aren't. here is an example where they did.

 

Also in Urlacher's statement during his holdout he said: “’But this is the NFL, and if I’d signed it and I’d played like (expletive), they’d have cut me or tried to get me to take less. In my mind, there’s no difference. If they can ‘break’ a contract, I have a right to ask for more if I play well enough.’”

 

Only the signing bonus is guaranteed, so yes, in the NFL, both sides have leverage beyond the signing of a contract, and both do ask for more or less depending on performance.

I get where you are coming from here. But, the argument is biased based on the CBA. The owners have the agreed upon right to do what they do, voted on by the players union. The players are in violation of their agreement with the team and don't have the CBA on their side if they do the same.

 

On a personal note, I always hope that a player gets market value for their services. I just don't see it in Url's case. He has not exceeded his contract. When he signed it, it was the richest LB contract in league history and well publicized as such. I also don't see many LB's making more money than Url to this date. If the Bears have offered additional money, he needs to shut up and take it. He's taking a huge gamble by not doing so.

[nfoligno]

But the key is the SB. If Urlacher signed a big deal, and then played like crap, he may be cut, but he would keep the SB.

 

So, IMHO, unless players are forced to give back bonus dollars, they do not have the right to holdout or make demands while under contract.

[selection7]

Here's the explanation of my perspective that specifically addresses the post a couple above mine:

 

If 100% of a player's contract was guaranteed bonus money, then when they were cut, it's economically not even like they're getting cut because they still get all their money. The NFL team gets shafted for the remaining $$ on the contract.

 

If 0% of a player's contract was guaranteed, the when they get cut, the player loses from 45-70% of his contract worth and the player gets shafted.

 

Reality is somewhere in the middle, usually between 30-50% (an educated guess). That means that if Urlacher "plays like (expletive)" he does not have to give back the remainder of his contract, but instead only 50-70% the remainder. Yet if he plays great and decides to hold out for a new contract that's worth his current market value, he gets to keep the windfall. How is that fair? Ogunleye and Urlacher are seeing things the way they want to see them. I don't blame them much, but it's hardly convincing.

 

The way I've always resolved this is that if a player wants to renegoatiate, a renegotiation penalty is assumed, sort of like refinancing your mortgage. The Urlacher situation is pretty egregious, because no one can say the Bears care more than a whit about securing Uracher's services at age 35. I totally get that the salary cap has increased more than anyone could have reasonably predicted (thanks for nothing DirecTV) and that Url signed a ridiculously long contract, so his situation might be unique. But after a down year, it still feels like he's just asking for a handout after.