Brian needs a reality check

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Just because Urlacher is paid and says things doesn't mean I have to agree... Urlacher isn't all bad as a mouthpiece. He did say some good things. But his stupid comments tend to outweigh his good ones. And recently, it's been virtually all stupid. Sayers has been away from the team for a while...Url hasn't stopped whining since he didn't accept the contract the Bears (the only NFL team to do so) offered to him.

 

Urlacher isn't paid to be a Bears historian. The hope from his network is that he says something negative about the Bears so that there becomes a story... The only insight I've ever gotten from Urlacher's mouth is a window into his pettyness.

 

Let's not forget the difference between anyone's right to say something stupid, and someone's right to be irritated by those stupid comments.

 

And yet our collective RIGHT is to not acknowledge him if he does say something "stupid". Yet the author that Connor quoted (who actually is a bit of a twit himself) only perpetuated the opportunity for URL to talk and be heard. If it's so "horrible", why even bring it up? Let's all "move on".

[Connorbear]

And yet our collective RIGHT is to not acknowledge him if he does say something "stupid". Yet the author that Connor quoted (who actually is a bit of a twit himself) only perpetuated the opportunity for URL to talk and be heard. If it's so "horrible", why even bring it up? Let's all "move on".

 

I didn't quote him. I posted a link to his column. Anyone who works in the press has a certain amount of work, that is topical, that they have to complete each day/week/etc. This is what he was doing.

 

Peace

[selection7]

I quit reading after the first few paragraphs. The writer was so comfortable stating half-truths and lies, it doesn't really matter what he thinks. I bet he gets a good link-click count though.

[Connorbear]

I quit reading after the first few paragraphs. The writer was so comfortable stating half-truths and lies, it doesn't really matter what he thinks. I bet he gets a good link-click count though.

 

Whenever you see "I" in a published piece, it is normally a column which is an expression of opinion. I'm curious about what you think he is lying about.

 

Peace

[madlithuanian]

Agreed! I think Cutler is the defacto head of the team now. And I think he's doing a decent job of it. Marshall is as well. In fact, ridiculously good. The baton got passed from D to O...

 

I hope the next great young D player we get plays better than Url, is a better leader, and classier. Lot to ask for!

 

Good point Mad...but I would like someone with a little more class to be the front head of the Bears...but you may be right...I need to think about it.

 

[madlithuanian]

I'm not sure who voted that the "collective" is 100% behind never calling out Url for saying silly stuff. In fact, I think the vote would lean in the other direction.

 

It's like any thread you don't like...don't comment and odds are it'll die off. If you comment, it fuels the fire.

 

Url made the comment...he hasn't moved on. Once he does, his detractors (in what he says) will too.

 

 

 

And yet our collective RIGHT is to not acknowledge him if he does say something "stupid". Yet the author that Connor quoted (who actually is a bit of a twit himself) only perpetuated the opportunity for URL to talk and be heard. If it's so "horrible", why even bring it up? Let's all "move on".

 

[Stinger226]

I'm not sure who voted that the "collective" is 100% behind never calling out Url for saying silly stuff. In fact, I think the vote would lean in the other direction.

 

It's like any thread you don't like...don't comment and odds are it'll die off. If you comment, it fuels the fire.

 

Url made the comment...he hasn't moved on. Once he does, his detractors (in what he says) will too.

Anytime the Bears do something he will have something to say, we just react to stories because that is what blogs do. Your right,people say they dont want to talk about it and then make a comment. For me, he's a tool and anytime I can call him out I do.

[madlithuanian]

I'm right therE with ya!

 

 

Anytime the Bears do something he will have something to say, we just react to stories because that is what blogs do. Your right people say they dont want to talk about it and then make a comment. For me, he's a tool and anytime I can call him out I do.

 

[BearFan2000]

Having read the article I think he makes good points as to why Urlacher is wrongly wallowing in his sour grapes.

 

Where was his loyalty when he bitched about contracts he signed during the contract, even threatening to hold out if the Bears didn't rework his contract for more money. His words and attitude were often more like high grit sand paper than silk. Seemed like every contract after Brian's rookie deal was war for maximum cash from the Bears. Which to an extent we as fans understand but it seemed he was perpetually whining about money. In Brian's time with the Bears teammates came and went not a word of disloyalty from him about it, till he left by declining a the only contract he was offered, and ended up retiring. Now when the Bears let go of players, especially long term ones and ones he was close with, he throws out the loyalty card. Acting like the Bears should hamstring themselves for the sake of "loyalty." What Brian doesn't take into account is the last few years here were riddled with injuries. In fact that offseason before the contract offer he was posting youtube videos of him working out trying to prove he was back in football shape to play. His play had declined and what he conveniently forgot to realize was that aging vets who's skills have diminished tend to get lower offers commensurate with those declining skills. Brian's view of loyalty seems to be a one way street where he only see's what is done for him (but even then only at the moment forgetting about the millions the Bears overpaid him throughout his career).

 

The thing is this is a business, and loyalty is rare and it's not because a player, team, or organization wouldn't love to show it by players staying with the team that drafted them, or teams/organizations allowing that player to play his whole career there till the player decides it's time to hang em up. Free agency has changed that forever, and with salaries continually rising as agents seek the highest contracts possible for their clients (and thus highest possible percentage cut for themselves). Loyalty has become a rare thing. We as fans have learned not to get too attached to players because quite often they chase the money and if your team can't afford to keep them they are gone. I believe that the onus of loyalty is is more on the players and their agents than the teams by demanding more and more cash. Team owners have to make the tough choices of who to pay to keep and who they have to let go, and their job is to try to field a solid team sometimes that means letting go of long time players. Brian should take a look around the league and realize how many "long time players" end up finishing their careers with other teams because the cost of keeping said player was more that that team could afford or because the team needed that money to improve the product on the field and keeping them would not allow that.

 

One of the points he made that I agreed with was "That darn Emery, Rubik’s cubing the hell out of this team this offseason to shore up a defense the organization was so loyal to for so long that it withered into the worst in the NFL. And bringing back team leader Charles Tillman while he’s at it." Angelo and Lovie were extremely loyal to that defense till players were beyond useable. We stuck with players till it was clear they weren't helping or providing much of anything. Loyalty in this business can be good but it can also hurt your team in the long run. Granted age and attrition aren't' the only reasons the D fell off the map last year, but it was time to retool, and hanging on to aging vets wasn't going to help that effort.

 

I absolutely love the way the leadership on this team has changed. Marshall who was brought in and many cried foul that he would be a cancer, and would destroy this team, has done more to unify, and lift, and inspire greatness out of his teammates, Marshall has by far become one of my absolute favorite Bears. His past issues and immaturity have given way to a troubled player who gets it and has greatly matured, and now want's create a positive, hardworking, unity within the team. The pictures at the end of the article are priceless, and shows a great deal of unity that they would get together and workout together, hang out together, creating a brotherhood atmosphere. It's an atmosphere that will go a long way to selling the Bears to potential free agents who want to be part of something special. The old school tough love of Kruetz/Urlacher is no longer there.

[jason]

Which is why you acting like you know exactly what the Bears did in either case has made you look like a shithead all along. Glad you're finally coming around. Just because Url bitches like a scorned woman doesn't mean we're getting the truth out of him. And the FACT that literally nobody signed him is all anyone should need to know before they understood the Bears were in the right, although maybe not very nice. Hester still has value but he's one dimensional so not a fit for Trestman. End of story.

 

Listen dumbass...NOBODY KNOWS. However, there is Urlacher's side of it, and the team's side. Urlacher's side is supported by at least two other players: Melton and Hester. Both big enough stars to speak out and not worry about getting black-balled.

 

 

All three spoke the same story, and that story was that the team simply didn't negotiate.

 

One person and sour grapes? Sure. But THREE people? That's a trend. And it's likely the truth.

 

EDIT:

Having said that, the comment I made earlier about Brian's distorted definition of loyalty stands.

 

[Guest TerraTor]

Urlacher carried the team from 2000 to 2012... Give him credit where it is due. But writers will do anything when nothing is going on

[Mongo3451]

Urlacher carried the team from 2000 to 2012... Give him credit where it is due. But writers will do anything when nothing is going on

He was paid appropriately well to do what he did. So, there is the credit he WAS due. I've always been a fan and supporter, but his lack of grace has has me over it.

[Connorbear]

He was paid appropriately well to do what he did. So, there is the credit he WAS due. I've always been a fan and supporter, but his lack of grace has has me over it.

This 100%.

 

Peace

[CrackerDog]

He was paid appropriately well to do what he did. So, there is the credit he WAS due. I've always been a fan and supporter, but his lack of grace has has me over it.

 

Michael Jordan made a point of spitting on the Bulls on his way out of town. He was a much bigger star on a significantly less important franchise in Chicago. To this day he's not repaired that damage. Brian better start soon.

[CrackerDog]

Listen dumbass...NOBODY KNOWS. However, there is Urlacher's side of it, and the team's side. Urlacher's side is supported by at least two other players: Melton and Hester. Both big enough stars to speak out and not worry about getting black-balled.

 

After their "leader" Urlacher set the tone it wouldn't surprise me if all aging former stars bitch like old ladies as they leave the city. Just another reason he had to go. His leadership was toxic to anyone outside his little circle. Oh, and Peanut is telling a different story so I guess he's different than your two examples. Both your examples, by the way, had lost tons of value just before being shown the door, much like #54.

[Stinger226]

Listen dumbass...NOBODY KNOWS. However, there is Urlacher's side of it, and the team's side. Urlacher's side is supported by at least two other players: Melton and Hester. Both big enough stars to speak out and not worry about getting black-balled.

 

 

All three spoke the same story, and that story was that the team simply didn't negotiate.

 

One person and sour grapes? Sure. But THREE people? That's a trend. And it's likely the truth.

 

EDIT:

Having said that, the comment I made earlier about Brian's distorted definition of loyalty stands.

I really dont understand your point on this, I dont think its a matter who's right or wrong. When its a players time to go, this is usually the result of it. He thinks he could still play, and the Bears dont see valve in him and his skill set. Players have egos and it is hard to let go. Brian was my favorite player but I seen his skills erode due to injuries and age. I dont look at football thru rose colored glasses. I a huge Bears fan and want the team the best it can be.I think it was Brians time to go, the rest of the NFL agreed with the Bears, so there is no conclusion to this argument. For me, Url is crying because of money. They made him an offer, and he could have played for one more year.(good or bad), but the whiny little bitch was insulted because they didnt offer him more money.He was a good football player and a good teammate but he sucked when it came to the fans.His loyalty is measured by money. Screw him.

[bradjock]

I really dont understand your point on this, I dont think its a matter who's right or wrong. When its a players time to go, this is usually the result of it. He thinks he could still play, and the Bears dont see valve in him and his skill set. Players have egos and it is hard to let go. Brian was my favorite player but I seen his skills erode due to injuries and age. I dont look at football thru rose colored glasses. I a huge Bears fan and want the team the best it can be.I think it was Brians time to go, the rest of the NFL agreed with the Bears, so there is no conclusion to this argument. For me, Url is crying because of money. They made him an offer, and he could have played for one more year.(good or bad), but the whiny little bitch was insulted because they didnt offer him more money.He was a good football player and a good teammate but he sucked when it came to the fans. Screw him.

 

I don't quite get your anger at Urlacher. Yeah, I don't like his attitude towards the Bears. It's disappointing. But the guy played his ass of and is a future HOFer and I appreciate all he did. His disappointment in the franchise doesn't change his contributions. I'm not burning my #54 memorbelia.

 

When Tommie Harris was cut from the Bears, he took out a page add in the Trib thanking Chicago fans. That's classy. It's unfortunate Urlacher can't do the same. But it's not worth a "screw him" approach.

 

 

[Stinger226]

I don't quite get your anger at Urlacher. Yeah, I don't like his attitude towards the Bears. It's disappointing. But the guy played his ass of and is a future HOFer and I appreciate all he did. His disappointment in the franchise doesn't change his contributions. I'm not burning my #54 memorbelia.

 

When Tommie Harris was cut from the Bears, he took out a page add in the Trib thanking Chicago fans. That's classy. It's unfortunate Urlacher can't do the same. But it's not worth a "screw him" approach.

He was my favorite Bear, but he has a shitty attitude. I will relish his archives as a player, I think loyalty goes both ways, they paid him well putting him as the face of the Bears made him a lot of money. It comes down to him, he's a money grub, and I dont think thats right. I am a Bear fan first then an Urlacher fan, and when he gets his #54 retired I will be right there. He is being a tool and I am expressing my opinion. There is right and wrong I am thinking he is wrong.

[Connorbear]

He was my favorite Bear, but he has a shitty attitude. I will relish his archives as a player, I think loyalty goes both ways, they paid him well putting him as the face of the Bears made him a lot of money. It comes down to him, he's a money grub, and I dont think thats right. I am a Bear fan first then an Urlacher fan, and when he gets his #54 retired I will be right there. He is being a tool and I am expressing my opinion. There is right and wrong I am thinking he is wrong.

#54 won't be retired. The Bears have said they will not be retiring anymore #s. Besides #50 and #99 should go first if they did.

 

Peace

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I don't get the Briggs / Urlacher comparisons. Briggs has bitched about one thing, by and large in his career, his contract (from time to time). Usually he complains about once during his span of a contract. Sure he got his tizzy in a bit of a bundle after some key-cuts to some good friends...it happens, but by and large he's always went about his business and been a pro. He also did have his lamborghini mistake and learned from that. Urlacher runs his freaking mouth all the time, including after he's left the team. There is a difference.

 

Urlacher was also the better player but Briggs didn't get near the credit he deserved during what was a very long prime of his career. I hope Briggs still has some good football left with the Bears!!!

 

However...neither of them are Peanut Tillman for me. Not only a great player but a great dude, on and off the field.

[madlithuanian]

He didn't act like a pro when he watched GB pick up a loose ball and run it into the end zone.

 

I think he mailed it in last year. He might not this year since he's probably trying to land somewhere else.

 

Agreed...Peanut is the man!

 

I don't get the Briggs / Urlacher comparisons. Briggs has bitched about one thing, by and large in his career, his contract (from time to time). Usually he complains about once during his span of a contract. Sure he got his tizzy in a bit of a bundle after some key-cuts to some good friends...it happens, but by and large he's always went about his business and been a pro. He also did have his lamborghini mistake and learned from that. Urlacher runs his freaking mouth all the time, including after he's left the team. There is a difference.

 

Urlacher was also the better player but Briggs didn't get near the credit he deserved during what was a very long prime of his career. I hope Briggs still has some good football left with the Bears!!!

 

However...neither of them are Peanut Tillman for me. Not only a great player but a great dude, on and off the field.

 

[jason]

I really dont understand your point on this, I dont think its a matter who's right or wrong. When its a players time to go, this is usually the result of it. He thinks he could still play, and the Bears dont see valve in him and his skill set. Players have egos and it is hard to let go. Brian was my favorite player but I seen his skills erode due to injuries and age. I dont look at football thru rose colored glasses. I a huge Bears fan and want the team the best it can be.I think it was Brians time to go, the rest of the NFL agreed with the Bears, so there is no conclusion to this argument. For me, Url is crying because of money. They made him an offer, and he could have played for one more year.(good or bad), but the whiny little bitch was insulted because they didnt offer him more money.He was a good football player and a good teammate but he sucked when it came to the fans.His loyalty is measured by money. Screw him.

 

My point was that it's not just Urlacher saying the Bears failed to negotiate. It's also Hester and Melton. The fact that they negotiated with Peanut only proves they are willing to negotiate with players they unequivocally want. Players they are questionable on appear to get a "take it or leave it" approach. Most people don't like being treated like that in any situation. There is no doubt Urlacher is mad about the money, but that's three different players basically saying the Bears didn't even really approach it in an open manner. That's the problem I have. We don't know for sure what discount they could have been had for, or if at all, but at least one (Urlacher) has publicly stated that he was willing to play for less than he originally asked. In that situation, it would behoove the Bears to simply let the situation play out. Offer, counter-offer, etc. If it ends up being too much, then so be it.

[Connorbear]

My point was that it's not just Urlacher saying the Bears failed to negotiate. It's also Hester and Melton. The fact that they negotiated with Peanut only proves they are willing to negotiate with players they unequivocally want. Players they are questionable on appear to get a "take it or leave it" approach. Most people don't like being treated like that in any situation. There is no doubt Urlacher is mad about the money, but that's three different players basically saying the Bears didn't even really approach it in an open manner. That's the problem I have. We don't know for sure what discount they could have been had for, or if at all, but at least one (Urlacher) has publicly stated that he was willing to play for less than he originally asked. In that situation, it would behoove the Bears to simply let the situation play out. Offer, counter-offer, etc. If it ends up being too much, then so be it.

 

They didn't offer Hester a contract. They were not interested in him playing for the team anymore. Why would they negotiate with him?

 

It's been over a year. The Bears organization wants to honor Urlacher. He needs to be a mature adult and sit down and talk with them.

 

Peace

[jason]

They didn't offer Hester a contract. They were not interested in him playing for the team anymore. Why would they negotiate with him?

 

It's been over a year. The Bears organization wants to honor Urlacher. He needs to be a mature adult and sit down and talk with them.

 

Peace

 

That's precisely my point. What's so difficult to understand? It makes no sense to completely shut off negotiations before hearing what the other side could potentially offer. It's not like he's crippled or bad. He was still one of the best kick returners in the NFL last year. What would it have hurt to simply sit down with him and see what he's asking for? If he says, "I want $4M." If the Bears ask whether he's willing to negotiate, and he says, "No," then it was worth the cordial sit-down. However, if Hester says, "I'm willing to sign for X," and it's a dollar value feasible to the Bears, then it was also worth the visit. Either way, it serves no purpose to completely stonewall on potential negotiations.

 

As for Urlacher, it's easy for you to say that, and somewhat ironic. So you expect Urlacher to be a "mature adult" and sit down to talk, when that's all he apparently wanted to begin with?

[CrackerDog]

That's precisely my point. What's so difficult to understand? It makes no sense to completely shut off negotiations before hearing what the other side could potentially offer. It's not like he's crippled or bad. He was still one of the best kick returners in the NFL last year. What would it have hurt to simply sit down with him and see what he's asking for? If he says, "I want $4M." If the Bears ask whether he's willing to negotiate, and he says, "No," then it was worth the cordial sit-down. However, if Hester says, "I'm willing to sign for X," and it's a dollar value feasible to the Bears, then it was also worth the visit. Either way, it serves no purpose to completely stonewall on potential negotiations.

 

As for Urlacher, it's easy for you to say that, and somewhat ironic. So you expect Urlacher to be a "mature adult" and sit down to talk, when that's all he apparently wanted to begin with?

 

Get this through your thick skull... The Bears didn't want Hester back so using him as an example in comparison to Urlacher doesn't make sense. Apples and oranges.

 

The Bears wanted Urlacher back but at a specific price. More than any other team in the NFL was willing to offer, in fact. But when his agent declined they knew from past experience that it was going to play out in the press and they'd ultimately lose or take a bath in a PR nightmare. They moved on quickly and it went over pretty well despite Urlacher's continued bitching.

 

So what the Bears have done is handle things like professionals, not like Jason Dipshit. And it's up to Urlacher as to whether he wants to continue this feeble crybaby bullshit. It might make him a little money short term but he'll lose in the long run. I've already provided the ultimate example. The last thing Brian ought to be doing is taking advice from you, Jason. You're a ferkin' moron.