jason Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 You don't win by keeping a player for sentimental value. Professional sports teams know when it's time to move on. If the player doesn't know it's time to retire, what is the team supposed to do - keep them as long as they want to play? Ridiculous. I didn't said league minimum - I said somewhere around league minimum. League minimum for a veteran with over 10 years of experience is $940 k this year. I wouldn't pay him more than 2 million a year on a 2 year deal to keep him (much closer to the league minimum than his previous salary). Urlacher made millions playing for the Bears. If he is not willing to give a big hometown discount to stay with the team then it is time to thank him and move on. Peace See, you of all people shouldn't take this route. You're forever the "locker room"-guy. You've been opposed to just about any player who is not a choir boy. You should know that someone like Urlacher, while not as good as he once was, still provides a ton of value in terms of leadership, intelligence, role modeling, etc. I'm not saying he's kept around purely for sentimental value, but that has to factor into it somewhat when signing a veteran player who has given their entire career to your franchise. This is especially true with how players talk nowadays. The players talk, and one of the things about Lovie Smith - despite how much I disliked his coaching - was that his players stuck up for him, recruited for him, loved him. Simply dumping a guy because he isn't an allpro any more may work in some regards, but it's also a quick way for you to lose potential free agents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Agreed, his speed and burst is just not there anymore and due to the nature of his knee injury probably won't get that burst back...If they continue with the lame float him in the middle every play he might still be able to contribute but he won't be anywhere near the same sideline to sideline player. If they wanna bring him back at no more than 2 mill then sure but it may end up being a detriment to the team cause you know he's gonna start as long as he's here. I happen to think he still has sufficient lateral quickness to make tackles, but the problem of the past few years has been that Lovie & Co. have used Urlacher too much in that "lame float him in the middle every play"-mold. They need to let him attack the ball more often. Hell, if he weren't running backwards and defending passes 25-30 yards downfield, he would never have been hurt in that end zone play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 See, you of all people shouldn't take this route. You're forever the "locker room"-guy. You've been opposed to just about any player who is not a choir boy. You should know that someone like Urlacher, while not as good as he once was, still provides a ton of value in terms of leadership, intelligence, role modeling, etc. I'm not saying he's kept around purely for sentimental value, but that has to factor into it somewhat when signing a veteran player who has given their entire career to your franchise. This is especially true with how players talk nowadays. The players talk, and one of the things about Lovie Smith - despite how much I disliked his coaching - was that his players stuck up for him, recruited for him, loved him. Simply dumping a guy because he isn't an allpro any more may work in some regards, but it's also a quick way for you to lose potential free agents. Gotta say I agree with your side on things. Someone else here proposed the idea of a "transitional" type of contract. Where Urlacher is signed on for an additional 2 years and in that time the team can find a player (this year or next) that can learn from Url. Then at the end of the deal, Urlacher moves on. Hopefully with two rings on his hand. Realisitically though, earlier this year Url was asked about the potential of his retirement. I believe it was near the end of the 7-1 run. And he said that if they get to the Super Bowl he was done. So in his mind he's thinking about it. Obviously if he comes back its because he wants to try to get back to the Super Bowl one last time. I would much rather see him (and I would bet he too) stay in a Bears uniform and do all the things he still can do, like you mentioned. Otherwise the alternative is him playing for a team like the Patriots where his chances are even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 I have read they are looking at other LBers in FAgency, of which there isnt much to select from. Anybody know much about Wheeler that played in Oak last year? Philip Wheeler had a good year in Oakland last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Because I'd rather not have a high draft pick sit on the bench...Either draft an unfinished product in the mid-late rounds to develop or draft an LB that can start right away when Brian is gone. If they draft an LB in the 1st or 2nd this year and Brian is back I'll be ticked. You mean like the last 3 1st RD we drafted? Willians, Carimi, McC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 You mean like the last 3 1st RD we drafted? Willians, Carimi, McC Now now...I'll give you the first two, but SMC's impact remains to be seen. What I envision for him is a reversal of the Sophomore slump. Whether they try him as a Pass rushing DE (with more bulk) or a stand up OLB in a 3-4 configuration, I can see him having a blowout year this next year. Heck, he might even be the answer for Urlacher's leaving the team someday (who knows?) If Emery is as good as everyone thinks he is, I believe this was more a pick based on his scouting more than anything, I think he'll (SMC) pan out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 See, you of all people shouldn't take this route. You're forever the "locker room"-guy. You've been opposed to just about any player who is not a choir boy. You should know that someone like Urlacher, while not as good as he once was, still provides a ton of value in terms of leadership, intelligence, role modeling, etc. I'm not saying he's kept around purely for sentimental value, but that has to factor into it somewhat when signing a veteran player who has given their entire career to your franchise. This is especially true with how players talk nowadays. The players talk, and one of the things about Lovie Smith - despite how much I disliked his coaching - was that his players stuck up for him, recruited for him, loved him. Simply dumping a guy because he isn't an allpro any more may work in some regards, but it's also a quick way for you to lose potential free agents. He is not the player he use to be and now every year he is getting hurt. He brings some valve , at 2 mill, I think we should bring in back, but do you really think thats all he wants? He whined like a little baby to get that extensive at 10 mil per year. I guarantee you he will want between 8 to 9 mil in a two year contract. No way is he worth that. We can resign Roach, and sign Wheeler for the same money for the next two years and have a better team. Time to move on, we have a new coach, were moving to an offensive focus, and will re build the defense on the run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 Philip Wheeler had a good year in Oakland last year. I have look up info on wheeler and I think he is a player starting to come into his own. He played in Indy for 4 years and is familiar with our defense, and I think he can be a above average player going forward. He will never go to the level of Urlacher, but his time has passed and we need to get younger and he is better now at this time in their careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 See, you of all people shouldn't take this route. You're forever the "locker room"-guy. You've been opposed to just about any player who is not a choir boy. You should know that someone like Urlacher, while not as good as he once was, still provides a ton of value in terms of leadership, intelligence, role modeling, etc. I'm not saying he's kept around purely for sentimental value, but that has to factor into it somewhat when signing a veteran player who has given their entire career to your franchise. This is especially true with how players talk nowadays. The players talk, and one of the things about Lovie Smith - despite how much I disliked his coaching - was that his players stuck up for him, recruited for him, loved him. Simply dumping a guy because he isn't an allpro any more may work in some regards, but it's also a quick way for you to lose potential free agents. I don't mind keep him around but I would not pay him more than $2 million a year for 2 years. He was been handsomely rewarded by the Bears and I think a nice hometown discount is in order if he wants to stay. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 I have look up info on wheeler and I think he is a player starting to come into his own. He played in Indy for 4 years and is familiar with our defense, and I think he can be a above average player going forward. He will never go to the level of Urlacher, but his time has passed and we need to get younger and he is better now at this time in their careers. Didn't Kelvin Hayden play for Indy in a "similar defense" for a few years? Hmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Didn't Kelvin Hayden play for Indy in a "similar defense" for a few years? Hmmm. so whats your point? Hayden didnt play well and Wheeler led the Raiders in tackles last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Long ago I came to realize that my fandom is about more than just how talented the Bears are and do they win. I would've jumped ship back in the Wannstedt years and been a Patriots fan by now otherwise. In general, a team needs to do what they need to do to maximize competitiveness even at the cost of tradition or loyalty or even entertainment. But Urlacher is special, to say the least. And it would be one thing if he were terrible now or wanted an elite payday, but neither appears to be the case (our D was pretty great with him in there this past year). Butkus, Sayers, Payton...all played their whole career for the Bears...in the old days it used to be more common. But count me on the side that says Url needs to do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Long ago I came to realize that my fandom is about more than just how talented the Bears are and do they win. I would've jumped ship back in the Wannstedt years and been a Patriots fan by now otherwise. In general, a team needs to do what they need to do to maximize competitiveness even at the cost of tradition or loyalty or even entertainment. But Urlacher is special, to say the least. And it would be one thing if he were terrible now or wanted an elite payday, but neither appears to be the case (our D was pretty great with him in there this past year). Butkus, Sayers, Payton...all played their whole career for the Bears...in the old days it used to be more common. But count me on the side that says Url needs to do the same. The problem is how much money we pay him. I think he will want about half of what he made last year. $4.5 mil will be way to much. It aint worth paying him that kind of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Long ago I came to realize that my fandom is about more than just how talented the Bears are and do they win. I would've jumped ship back in the Wannstedt years and been a Patriots fan by now otherwise. In general, a team needs to do what they need to do to maximize competitiveness even at the cost of tradition or loyalty or even entertainment. But Urlacher is special, to say the least. And it would be one thing if he were terrible now or wanted an elite payday, but neither appears to be the case (our D was pretty great with him in there this past year). Butkus, Sayers, Payton...all played their whole career for the Bears...in the old days it used to be more common. But count me on the side that says Url needs to do the same. So what should they pay him? Whatever he wants? He has to be willing to accept a huge pay cut to stay IMO. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Jason - you never did answer my question. "What's is the team supposed to do - keep them as long as they want to play?" Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Jason - you never did answer my question. "What's is the team supposed to do - keep them as long as they want to play?" Peace Sometimes it's hard for me to devote the time to the message board I once did. Obviously the answer to your question is no, but there is definite gray area. Everyone wants to talk about how reliable the D is (I disagree to an extent), yet talk about how far Urlacher has fallen. Wasn't he a key component? Wasn't he the captain? Wasn't he the leader? To me the two are combined. He shouldn't be max or min. And I'd rather have Urlacher, with his experience and current ability, at (someone mentioned half of last year's salary) $4m than a FA LB for more. I think $2m per year is a slap in the face to the guy who has been the franchise marquee player for a decade. He's not a bad player. I guess the question is, what does an average starting MLB get nowadays? Settle on that number and add in a small gesture of thanks for being a Bear his entire career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Sometimes it's hard for me to devote the time to the message board I once did. Obviously the answer to your question is no, but there is definite gray area. Everyone wants to talk about how reliable the D is (I disagree to an extent), yet talk about how far Urlacher has fallen. Wasn't he a key component? Wasn't he the captain? Wasn't he the leader? To me the two are combined. He shouldn't be max or min. And I'd rather have Urlacher, with his experience and current ability, at (someone mentioned half of last year's salary) $4m than a FA LB for more. I think $2m per year is a slap in the face to the guy who has been the franchise marquee player for a decade. He's not a bad player. I guess the question is, what does an average starting MLB get nowadays? Settle on that number and add in a small gesture of thanks for being a Bear his entire career. i can live with that if he's healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Sometimes it's hard for me to devote the time to the message board I once did. Obviously the answer to your question is no, but there is definite gray area. Everyone wants to talk about how reliable the D is (I disagree to an extent), yet talk about how far Urlacher has fallen. Wasn't he a key component? Wasn't he the captain? Wasn't he the leader? To me the two are combined. He shouldn't be max or min. And I'd rather have Urlacher, with his experience and current ability, at (someone mentioned half of last year's salary) $4m than a FA LB for more. I think $2m per year is a slap in the face to the guy who has been the franchise marquee player for a decade. He's not a bad player. I guess the question is, what does an average starting MLB get nowadays? Settle on that number and add in a small gesture of thanks for being a Bear his entire career. Sure there is a gray area but do you think most of the team's wanted to let their old stars go? Of course they would love to have them retire with the team but they also want to sign them for a reasonable amount. I'm sure the players, in most cases, overvalue themselves and that is why they move on. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted January 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Urlacher was essentially playing hurt most of the year after that late knee surgery, so any assessment on his decline is sort of skewed. The deciding factor is going to be money anyway, everyone knows he can still play, and an average Urlacher is still a pretty damn good MLB and leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted January 31, 2013 Report Share Posted January 31, 2013 Very well said... Sometimes it's hard for me to devote the time to the message board I once did. Obviously the answer to your question is no, but there is definite gray area. Everyone wants to talk about how reliable the D is (I disagree to an extent), yet talk about how far Urlacher has fallen. Wasn't he a key component? Wasn't he the captain? Wasn't he the leader? To me the two are combined. He shouldn't be max or min. And I'd rather have Urlacher, with his experience and current ability, at (someone mentioned half of last year's salary) $4m than a FA LB for more. I think $2m per year is a slap in the face to the guy who has been the franchise marquee player for a decade. He's not a bad player. I guess the question is, what does an average starting MLB get nowadays? Settle on that number and add in a small gesture of thanks for being a Bear his entire career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 He shouldn't be max or min. And I'd rather have Urlacher, with his experience and current ability, at (someone mentioned half of last year's salary) $4m than a FA LB for more. I think $2m per year is a slap in the face to the guy who has been the franchise marquee player for a decade. He's not a bad player. I guess the question is, what does an average starting MLB get nowadays? Settle on that number and add in a small gesture of thanks for being a Bear his entire career. Concur. Just because tradition suggests pay a player "X amount" means you have to pay the player "X amount". Urlacher has contributed his lion's share to the organization and what it is today. The defense is and was successful because Urlacher was and is a part of it. Just because physically he's diminshed does'nt mean he's diminished in knowledge and skill (mentally). And the point you make about paying him around $4million is a very valid point. Why would the team want to pay a FA LB to take his place at probably more cost? What you gain in youth (maybe) you lose in experience, knowledge, familarity, leadership... And to go a step further, why would you want to draft that replacement to start now only to save a few bucks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 We really do not know how good Url will be this year if he plays for the Bears. He is obviously older but the diminished performance last year was more due to his injury not allowing him to prep during the offseason as he is accustomed to combined with not being able to play any in preseason. He was never able to practice much during the weeks between games. His conditioning was off. He never really got into "game" shape. No one knows if he will remain healthy this year. If he does I think you will find he will be worth every penny he is paid. Obviously, at a lower salary than what he has been receiving. I would be willing, if I were the one to call the shots, to pay him at least the amount equal to the average $$$ paid to starting MLBs in the league. If he would accept that I do not think you will find a better replacement for the same $$$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 i can live with that if he's healthy. How do we know he will stay healthy? 3 of the last 4 years he has had injuries and he is older now. He now has a knee that will never be healthy. We should give him 4 to 5 mil because his name is Urlacher. 2.5 tops or we can get a healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward. OR we draft one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 How do we know he will stay healthy? 3 of the last 4 years he has had injuries and he is older now. He now has a knee that will never be healthy. We should give him 4 to 5 mil because his name is Urlacher. 2.5 tops or we can get a healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward. OR we draft one. I don't want a "healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward" if it means the centerpiece of our D and over this last decade-plus ends up in Buffalo. We can get a "healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward" a year or two later instead (or draft one now and let him learn from Urlacher)...and not perpetuate the sad trend of dumping future hall of famers when another option looks marginally better. Whoever would replace him wouldn't likely be able to replace Urlacher's intangibles, including the history he represents. Now, dumping Favre for Aaron Rodgers I get, but is something similar to that really what we're going to accomplish in this year's free agency? Not likely...unless you're talking about the draft and learn strategy, which not coincidentally is exactly how Aaron Rodgers was developed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 I don't want a "healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward" if it means the centerpiece of our D and over this last decade-plus ends up in Buffalo. We can get a "healthy FA LB that will play better and have more years going forward" a year or two later instead (or draft one now and let him learn from Urlacher)...and not perpetuate the sad trend of dumping future hall of famers when another option looks marginally better. Whoever would replace him wouldn't likely be able to replace Urlacher's intangibles, including the history he represents. Now, dumping Favre for Aaron Rodgers I get, but is something similar to that really what we're going to accomplish in this year's free agency? Not likely...unless you're talking about the draft and learn strategy, which not coincidentally is exactly how Aaron Rodgers was developed. We have to do the oline this year.. If we make replacing our ageing defense more important, we will never get it done. I want a FA ol and two ol in the draft. Get a FA lb to get by for a couple of years. We don't have the money or draft picks, to fill all our needs in one year. Bring Urlacher back if we can do it cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.