Redskins / Briggs aggree on contract

wormer · Post by **wormer** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:18 pm

The Skins and Briggs have agreed on a contract 7.5 mil per year w/ 20 mil guaranteed.

It is now in the Bears hands.

Seems the main concern the Bears have is the guaranteed $ the #6 pick will get this year assumed to be 15mil +.

Of course, they could always trade down.....

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football ... 28.article

gibbs4president · Post by **gibbs4president** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:41 pm

wormer wrote:The Skins and Briggs have agreed on a contract 7.5 mil per year w/ 20 mil guaranteed.

It is now in the Bears hands.

Seems the main concern the Bears have is the guaranteed $ the #6 pick will get this year assumed to be 15mil +.

Of course, they could always trade down.....

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football ... 28.article

Damn it, I thought this was done.... Go away Bears, just go away...

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:45 pm

I might renounce my fanship if this goes through

Gnome · Post by **Gnome** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:50 pm

AWESOME!!!!!

This move is pure genius. As I stated in the offical Lance Briggs thread multiple times yesterday.

Linebackers win Championships.

I hope the Bears pull the trigger on the trade - but why would they, they're getting fleeced!

funbuncher · Post by **funbuncher** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 3:52 pm

You're talking crazy man. It's impossible to quit anyway.

I just read on the Washington Post that Gibbs said we are also talking about moving UP in the draft to possibly target CJ (love how we always leak who we're looking at). Apparently we are just fanning the fires of draft hype and keeping our options open.

Also just read on NFL.com that Bly has now signed with the Broncos, so I guess that trade option is gone.

This is fun, no?! Following the Skins is crazy.

wormer · Post by **wormer** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:15 pm

This is Danny's way of keeping the Redskins on the tip of everyone's tongue. I bet he has been going crazy this off season with no splashy moves.

Gotta keep the marketing machine running baby!!

It takes a LOT of beer, hot dogs and jerseys to equal 700 million.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:32 pm

The Pat's have some other holes to fill, yet they sign free agent Adalius Thomas to a big contract and it's a brilliant move. The Skins want to upgrade thier LB core by signing Briggs and it's a stupid move. :roll:

After a lot of thought, IMO, this is a great trade for us. Briggs was franchised, remember? That requires two 1st round picks as compensation.

THIS proposed deal would give us Briggs AND a 1st round pick for JUST OUR 6TH PICK; ONE 1ST ROUNDER FOR 2 STARTERS... and oh, by the way, one happens to be a Pro Bowler!

HanburgerHelper · Post by **HanburgerHelper** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:33 pm

If the Skins get the #31 for their #6 pick and Briggs, I think this is a great deal. There will still be quality people who can start for us at the need positions at that #31 spot and less pressue to pick the right guy (it should be more obvious by then who that is). No one is a real "shoe-in" in the top ten or so of the draft in my opinion. I like Amobi Okoya and Gaines Adams the most, but there are no guarantees these guys will be good or won't get hurt. Briggs, we know is good and #31 should be as good as most of the first round.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:50 pm

Why is no one thinking of the cap ramifications that this trade will bring. $7.5 per year seems to be a hell of and $20m guaranteed? At some point we are going to be last years tennesee titans. I don't care at this point. Nothing we have done has translated into wins. I am going to take on the "I hate every trade, transaction, cut, or draft pick" that we take stance for now on. Atleast the one victory i will have is the ability to say "I told you so."

Another thing, Vinny knows he's fired after the draft and this has to be his last ditch effort to screw us over.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:03 pm

Just how would we be getting screwed over?

Are you saying we're going to be in "cap hell"... again... like last year and the year before that? Doesn't the cap number go up by quite a bit next year?

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:03 pm

I don't like this deal at all!

All this deal does is get us the best linebacker core in the league on paper........AGAIN! We had Jesse Armstead, Jeremiah Trotter :puke:

, And LaVar Arrington. There was no chemistry with those guys at all! I know Greg Williams is no George Edwards, but I just don't think Marshall was that bad. Not to be placed on the bench anyway! And THEN give up our 6th overall pick...........

The worse thing about this deal is that our defensive lineman are good, but with the exception of Andre Carter......they're all old! And this draft class was rich in defensive lineman. I just don't get it! I need a beer!

Skinna Mob · Post by **Skinna Mob** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:14 pm

AGAIN
The Redskins do not need anymore "pre-madonas"....
I understand that Briggs wants to be paid his value.
But the way you go about getting things done in life speaks volumes about your character...
And from what i have "read" about Briggs and him not playing for Chicago...and all the antics he will pull to be traded.
Why would the Redskins want him?
Havent they learned?
Redskins should not have to look any further than the "dead" money they are still paying "pre-madonna" players that have no affiliation with the team...to know this isnt a good move!!!

very angry 2 cents!!!

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:17 pm

I've felt sick for the last couple hours. This is just horrible. SUUUUUUUUCH a waste. Somebody should back Mel Kiper and let him buy the redskins. That would make my life.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:43 pm

Interesting, very different opinions on this one. I'm for the deal if it's our #6 for Briggs and their #31. I think when you have a chance at a talent like that and we still have a first round pick you don't pass it by.

My fear though is we'll cough up more to make the deal. Like Bailey for Portis I thought was a good deal except that we threw in the second round pick. That's the part I didn't get when CB's are more premium then RBs to begin with. That's the part of this that scares me. Danny's ready to go with the deal and the Bears balk and we give up the farm.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:55 pm

I dunno,....7 1/2 Million seems a bit much for a position they already have filled.

fredp45 · Post by **fredp45** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:00 pm

I don't like this deal at all -- if we wanted to improve our LB unit we could have signed Thomas from the Ravens for about the same salary cap hit as Briggs -- and NOT traded #6 for #31.

Is Briggs great or is he a good player on a team with outstanding DL? We don't have great DL, we have possibly a group that rates in the bottom 5-10 in the entire NFL. I can name only a handful of teams with worse DL/ If we do this deal, Briggs better get plenty of practice this summer working off blocks...he's not had to do that with the Bears!

For the guy who said Linebackers win championships...if you're serious, please name the 3 LBs on the Colts -- without looking it up.

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:03 pm

fredp45 wrote:I don't like this deal at all -- if we wanted to improve our LB unit we could have signed Thomas from the Ravens for about the same salary cap hit as Briggs -- and NOT traded #6 for #31.

Don't forget about Joey Porter! :puke:

This deal makes me sick!

gibbs4president · Post by **gibbs4president** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:04 pm

Gnome wrote:AWESOME!!!!!

This move is pure genius. As I stated in the offical Lance Briggs thread multiple times yesterday.

Linebackers win Championships.

I hope the Bears pull the trigger on the trade - but why would they, they're getting fleeced!

The move for great linebackers who can tackle well only accomplishes a goal if you have D-linemen who can get to the quarterback. The only guy on the Redskins roster who can even be considered a pass rushing threat is Andre Carter and even that's a stretch.

You talk about linebackers winning championships. Well, it may be true that the teams that won championships had great linebackers. However, they also had great defensive linemen who could not only occupy blockers and enable great linebackers to make tackles, but they could get to the quarterback as well.

This is especially true for teams who run the 4-3 defense like the Redskins do because they need a stronger rush off the edge that versatile linebackers provide in the 3-4. Look at the Colts this year and the Bucs in '03, the last two teams who ran a 4-3 to win the Super Bowl. They both had quick and strong DEs on the outside to get to the quarterback and cause havoc in the backfield

The Redskins set the all-time mark for fewest takeaways in the HISTORY of the NFL last season. How do you cause turnovers? By getting into the backfield and taking away the time the quarterback has to throw the ball.

Would Lance Briggs help the defense out? There's no doubt that he would. But would it make more sense to draft a DE? Definitely. That's what this team needs more, and that's strictly an on-the-field answer.

Last year I grew steadily more frustrated with the Redskins' inability to get to the quarterback and create turnovers. They need a DE...

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:07 pm

Every year you think things are on the verge of changing (if this happens), the same truths continue to come to the forefront:

1) Redskins value name more than game

and

2) The players see this team as nothing more than a:

Gnome · Post by **Gnome** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:11 pm

So, you gous would rather take your chance on an unknown at six - who odds are will be a bust to servicible. And stick with Rocky who didn't do anything last year, unlike Golston who started (so don't tell me GW won't play rookies)

Or you can get a proven LB, two time pro bowler who pretty much everyone says is a stud, AND keep a pick in the first round? What do you lose there? There is no difference between pick 6 and pick 31 statistically. Just as many guys at 31 have proven careers as guys picked at 6. AND maybe they want a player that they can get at 31 and don't need the 6?

Explain to me what you lose in this deal and how it makes the Skins a worse team?

VASkin27 · Post by **VASkin27** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:14 pm

Can somebody who is an ESPN Insider go to the rumer mill section and tell us what is going on. Apparently ESPN is saying that Chicago is refusing to deal Briggs to us, as for now.

Skin Diesel · Post by **Skin Diesel** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:27 pm

To quote Benjamin Franklin: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results." This move is yet another attempt to bring in a new guy and pay him lots of money, expecting that the high profile player will automatically add something positive to the team. Briggs was a great player in Chicago, when he was playing for that new contract that they ended up refusing to offer him. Based on his statements about that situation, it would not surprise me that his productivity will decline if/when he gets the money from Snyder. His motivation will probably not be the same; it's human nature, and some people are more that way than others. It's disappointing, to say the least.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:28 pm

The Bears do not have to do anything at this time - Rosenhaus is basically stirring everything up and has come up with a scenario that is not that great a deal for the Bears in the hopes of getting the best deal for his client. The Bears could choose to just keep Briggs and force him to back up on his threat to not play the first 10 games - this would cost him so much money that it seems ridiculous BUT can the Bears take that chance and do without him?

This is an interesting move - there is no question about the value of the player we would possibly be getting and we all know how Gibbs and Williams feel about the draft and college players not living up to their hype. So many DEs and DTs taken in the top 20 have proven to be not worth it that they have to consider this potential addition.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:38 pm

Skin Diesel wrote:To quote Benjamin Franklin: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results." This move is yet another attempt to bring in a new guy and pay him lots of money, expecting that the high profile player will automatically add something positive to the team. Briggs was a great player in Chicago, when he was playing for that new contract that they ended up refusing to offer him. Based on his statements about that situation, it would not surprise me that his productivity will decline if/when he gets the money from Snyder. His motivation will probably not be the same; it's human nature, and some people are more that way than others. It's disappointing, to say the least.

Okay, you have some good points! Name the guy that will be a pro bowl quality DE or DT - presuming that is who you will take with the 6 pick? Gibbs and Williams have seen too many of these top picks not be worth it. They know what this guy can do.

The reason that the Bears do not want to do this deal is because they know the quality of the player they are losing and they want 2 x # 1 picks!

Hey - I'd like to see our D line get better but I am sure that that will also happen PLUS we will have only traded some positions in the first round for this guy - we still have a pick in the first round :lol:

Snout · Post by **Snout** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:41 pm

Gnome wrote:So, you gous would rather take your chance on an unknown at six - who odds are will be a bust to servicible. And stick with Rocky who didn't do anything last year, unlike Golston who started (so don't tell me GW won't play rookies)

Or you can get a proven LB, two time pro bowler who pretty much everyone says is a stud, AND keep a pick in the first round? What do you lose there? There is no difference between pick 6 and pick 31 statistically. Just as many guys at 31 have proven careers as guys picked at 6. AND maybe they want a player that they can get at 31 and don't need the 6?

Explain to me what you lose in this deal and how it makes the Skins a worse team?

I agree that trading a draft pick for a proven player is usually a wise move. That was the basic strategy of the Beathard years, and it seemed to work out well. The only problem here is that we do not need another starting linebacker. We are in severe need of defensive linemen that can rush the passer. If we picked up a quality starting lineman plus the 31st pick I would be all for it.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Redskins / Briggs aggree on contract

Redskins / Briggs aggree on contract

Re: Redskins / Briggs aggree on contract