Bears could have Devin for 2 more yrs

[Connorbear]

If 2010 is an uncapped yr, FA goes to 6 yrs from 4.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,1209508.column

 

Peace

[DrunkBomber]

If 2010 is an uncapped yr, FA goes to 6 yrs from 4.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,1209508.column

 

Peace

I believe that unless they put a new CBA into place before the end of the 09 season that the league will have to go back to the six year rookie contracts. However, I dont think theres a chance in hell that if this happened that the players union would strike.

[KiLoc69]

If 2010 is an uncapped yr, FA goes to 6 yrs from 4.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,1209508.column

 

Peace

 

 

Per PFT, this is innacurate. It's actually 5 years:

 

 

FIVE, NOT SIX, YEARS NEEDED FOR FREE AGENCY IN UNCAPPED YEAR

Posted by Mike Florio on May 21, 2008, 12:00 a.m.

One of the most widely reported inaccuracies regarding the uncapped year, which currently is scheduled to unfold in 2010, is that a player will need six years of service to qualify for unrestricted free agency instead of four.

 

As a league source pointed out to us tonight, Article XIX of the CBA states, in maddeningly roundabout fashion, that the minimum number of years for unrestricted free agency in an uncapped year under the current CBA is five.

 

Per Article XIX(a): “Subject to the provisions of Article XX (Franchise and Transition Players), any player with five or more Accrued Seasons, or with four or more Accrued Seasons in any Capped Year, shall, at the expiration of his Player Contract, become an Unrestricted Free Agent.” By implication, this sentence means that, in an uncapped year, five or more accrued seasons is the key to becoming an unrestricted free agent.

 

For players drafted in 2005 who’ll be hitting the market in 2010, the significance is huge. If the number were actually six years, those players would be restricted free agents.

 

For players drafted in 2006, who would have otherwise been unrestricted free agents in 2010, the CBA makes them restricted free agents if 2010 is uncapped. Notable players who’d miss their shot at unrestricted free agency include Texans linebacker DeMeco Ryans, Bears receiver/kick returner Devin Hester, Vikings quarterback Tarvaris Jackson, and Jaguars running back Maurice Jones-Drew.

 

The mistake regarding six years versus five has appeared in numerous places, including the Bears official web site and NFL.com, and in items published by the Associated Press, the New York Daily News, USA Today, SI.com, and, um, PFT.

 

The error apparently is the result of an assumption that the 2006 CBA extension incorporated the same terms as the prior CBA regarding the number of years of service necessary to qualify for free agency.

 

And the over/under on an AP or ESPN.com piece clarifying this rule without crediting the folks who first published it is 18 hours.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Here's an idea- just give him a 6 years, $48 million contract and call it a day. None of this would even be discussed if we'd just pay the man.

[Bears4Ever_34]

Here's an idea- just give him a 6 years, $48 million contract and call it a day. None of this would even be discussed if we'd just pay the man.

Exactly, he's the best player on the team, pay him like it!

[balta1701-A]

Exactly, he's the best player on the team, pay him like it!

He will be, eventually. But it's a capped league, for now. Makes sense to play a little hardball on both sides. The team won't let cap room go unused though. They've proven that repeatedly.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Exactly, he's the best player on the team, pay him like it!

And, he's the best player ever at his position, and he's going to be a solid, maybe even good or great WR some day. If he has a break out year at the WR position this year, he'll probably want $10 a year next season, so save some and give him $8 a year for the next 6 seasons.

[madlithuanian]

Agreed...

 

Here's an idea- just give him a 6 years, $48 million contract and call it a day. None of this would even be discussed if we'd just pay the man.

[nfoligno]

Disagreed.

 

Look, I get it. Hester is an unbelievable return man. But I still think the value, in terms of negotiating a deal, is very up in the air. One of the biggest things holding me back is history. What is the longevity of a return man? Dante Hall was considered an unbelievable return man who could change the game for his team, and forced opponents to kick away from him. While he was good for more than a few, he had about 3 awesome years, and then the decline began. Now I realize Hester is better, but how long should we truly expect Hester to be the game changer he is today. IMHO, history simply does not support the idea of giving a massive contract to a return specialist.

 

So for me, his value (if he wants that big time deal) must also be tied to his ability at a full time position, which appears to be WR.

 

Look, not to be a hard A, but he has absolutely no negotiating power. We own him the next two years, and further, if a new CBA is not agreed on, then we own him a year longer. I would rather wait another year and see if he can play WR. I don't need for him to become an elite WR to get elite WR money, but I do need him to prove he can at least be a #3 WR, in combination to an elite returner, before he gets that elite money.

[madlithuanian]

Disagree with you disagreement!

 

While I undersnatd your point...I simply think Hester is far too valuable. He's not Dante Hall. He's not Dave Megget. He's not Deion Sanders. He's Hester, and he's significantly better than all those guys! He gets more TD's than most other teams' WR's or RB's!

 

He is not just a pro bowler...he is a hall of famer! You keep guys like that happy! I can see waiting...but also, I want a happy camper. He has outperformed his initial contract. He's due some love I think.

 

 

Disagreed.

 

Look, I get it. Hester is an unbelievable return man. But I still think the value, in terms of negotiating a deal, is very up in the air. One of the biggest things holding me back is history. What is the longevity of a return man? Dante Hall was considered an unbelievable return man who could change the game for his team, and forced opponents to kick away from him. While he was good for more than a few, he had about 3 awesome years, and then the decline began. Now I realize Hester is better, but how long should we truly expect Hester to be the game changer he is today. IMHO, history simply does not support the idea of giving a massive contract to a return specialist.

 

So for me, his value (if he wants that big time deal) must also be tied to his ability at a full time position, which appears to be WR.

 

Look, not to be a hard A, but he has absolutely no negotiating power. We own him the next two years, and further, if a new CBA is not agreed on, then we own him a year longer. I would rather wait another year and see if he can play WR. I don't need for him to become an elite WR to get elite WR money, but I do need him to prove he can at least be a #3 WR, in combination to an elite returner, before he gets that elite money.

[nfoligno]

While I undersnatd your point...I simply think Hester is far too valuable. He's not Dante Hall. He's not Dave Megget. He's not Deion Sanders. He's Hester, and he's significantly better than all those guys! He gets more TD's than most other teams' WR's or RB's!

 

I agree he is better than those guys, but that does not negate my point. Return men simply do not dominate for a long period of time. In fact, they usually dominate for a very short period of time. Tell me. Do you believe Hester is going to be a returner for the next 5 or 6 years like he is today? I would freaking love that, but history is not on his side. Has there ever been a returner who dominated for such a long stretch?

 

Again, I am sure your argument will come back to his being the best, and while I agree w/ that, what I question is how long we should expect such a level.

 

He is not just a pro bowler...he is a hall of famer! You keep guys like that happy! I can see waiting...but also, I want a happy camper. He has outperformed his initial contract. He's due some love I think.

 

Hey, I want him happy, but not at all costs. I agree he has outperformed his initial contract, but that does not mean simply shell out to him as if he were an elite WR. You make the argument that he gets more TDs than most other teams WR or RBs. Replace "most" w/ "many" and I agree, but if he is going to demand to be paid as an elite WR, then I simply have to disagree. I would have no issue giving him a little bonus to make him happy (though teams never seem willing to do this) but unless his demands drop, I would rather make him prove himself more as a WR before I pay him like one.

[madlithuanian]

We've never seen the likes of a Hester...EVER! It's a gamble. I say it's a good one. Better than giving lots of money to Ricky Manning Jr's, etc... History wasn't on his side when he returned all those kicks the last 2 years either... No one has done that before. I'm willing to to chance some loot on this guy. Nothing's guaranteed in this league... This to me seems as good a gamble as any.

 

I expect a level of brilliance for years... It's not just his speed. It's his vision. He may slow down a bit and not get as many TD's...but I look at him as having as big an impact for this team as any single player on the roster. And, if he remotely pans out as a WR...the sky's the limit. The ceiling on this guy is almost unfathomable. Sure, there is a floor. But, as a fan, I want this guy locked up indefinitely.

 

I don't think I ever said at all costs...but I'm not far away from that. There should be some sense of resonability...but for the most part...this guys is worth almost anything you pay him. With an aging Urlacher and not much else. He is all this team has as marketability. He will fill stands, sell jerseys, sell bobble head, will sell MCFarlane figures, will sell t-shirts, etc... Some costs have more value than the actual dollar amount being spent.

 

I don't think going into frugal-mode is the answer for this guy. I've seen enough. Get him signed and happy.

 

Again, he's outperformed his contract in a big way...we need to rememdy that in my opinion. There are certian things that are legal (ie. he's still under contract), and certain things that are just morally right (getting the man paid for his services!).

 

 

While I undersnatd your point...I simply think Hester is far too valuable. He's not Dante Hall. He's not Dave Megget. He's not Deion Sanders. He's Hester, and he's significantly better than all those guys! He gets more TD's than most other teams' WR's or RB's!

 

I agree he is better than those guys, but that does not negate my point. Return men simply do not dominate for a long period of time. In fact, they usually dominate for a very short period of time. Tell me. Do you believe Hester is going to be a returner for the next 5 or 6 years like he is today? I would freaking love that, but history is not on his side. Has there ever been a returner who dominated for such a long stretch?

 

Again, I am sure your argument will come back to his being the best, and while I agree w/ that, what I question is how long we should expect such a level.

 

He is not just a pro bowler...he is a hall of famer! You keep guys like that happy! I can see waiting...but also, I want a happy camper. He has outperformed his initial contract. He's due some love I think.

 

Hey, I want him happy, but not at all costs. I agree he has outperformed his initial contract, but that does not mean simply shell out to him as if he were an elite WR. You make the argument that he gets more TDs than most other teams WR or RBs. Replace "most" w/ "many" and I agree, but if he is going to demand to be paid as an elite WR, then I simply have to disagree. I would have no issue giving him a little bonus to make him happy (though teams never seem willing to do this) but unless his demands drop, I would rather make him prove himself more as a WR before I pay him like one.

[nfoligno]

Again, he's outperformed his contract in a big way...we need to rememdy that in my opinion. There are certian things that are legal (ie. he's still under contract), and certain things that are just morally right (getting the man paid for his services!).

 

But it is still a two way street. IMHO, the Bears have already stepped up. Though I have no clue what sort of money they are thinking about, the fact is, they have mentioned Hester as a player they are looking at extending. Further, he is a player w/ two years remaining on his current contract, and the norm is still, for the team and the league, to extend players w/ one year, not two, remaining.

 

So I would argue the bears have already stepped up to a degree simply by entering negotiations w/ two years remaining on his deal.

 

The point is, while you as a fan want him signed at all costs (or nearly), teams have to find that fine line between frugal and Danny Snyder. I would like to extend him and see him in a bear uniform forever, but that doesn't mean we simply give him whatever he wants. He needs to also work w/ the team. IMHO, he should realize the team can have him on the cheap for 2 (maybe 3 due to the CBA), and factor that in negotiations. If he is unwilling to factor such, and continues to simply demand the sky, well then, he can play on the cheap and hope he is still a healthy stud in 3 or 4 years when he can finally be an unrestricted FA.

[madlithuanian]

I guess, I'm just not seeing the step up. Talk is cheap... Unless I hear an offer is out there, I don't think the Bears are stepping up. Yes, we do know the norm, but this is not a normal player we're discussing.

 

Maybe I am mis-informed, but there are legit negotiation going on? I wasn't aware.

 

Sure, we can all play hard ball with one another...but I do believe it will work itself out. I just would like to see it done sooner than later personally...

 

 

 

Again, he's outperformed his contract in a big way...we need to rememdy that in my opinion. There are certian things that are legal (ie. he's still under contract), and certain things that are just morally right (getting the man paid for his services!).

 

But it is still a two way street. IMHO, the Bears have already stepped up. Though I have no clue what sort of money they are thinking about, the fact is, they have mentioned Hester as a player they are looking at extending. Further, he is a player w/ two years remaining on his current contract, and the norm is still, for the team and the league, to extend players w/ one year, not two, remaining.

 

So I would argue the bears have already stepped up to a degree simply by entering negotiations w/ two years remaining on his deal.

 

The point is, while you as a fan want him signed at all costs (or nearly), teams have to find that fine line between frugal and Danny Snyder. I would like to extend him and see him in a bear uniform forever, but that doesn't mean we simply give him whatever he wants. He needs to also work w/ the team. IMHO, he should realize the team can have him on the cheap for 2 (maybe 3 due to the CBA), and factor that in negotiations. If he is unwilling to factor such, and continues to simply demand the sky, well then, he can play on the cheap and hope he is still a healthy stud in 3 or 4 years when he can finally be an unrestricted FA.