lance briggs

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:52 pm

I think that Fletcher came here because he wanted to. He had other options. He was going to get paid where ever he went but this was the best situation for him. As for Briggs, he doesn't control where he goes except for the whole contract extension talks. But he will get paid anywhere. I think that he's at the point that he wants to just get out and he'll accept anything at this point. But knowing us, we will throw the house at him without really negotiating.

I would love us to hire someone who is known around the league for being a stern negotiator. Here is how I think it goes down:

Vinny, my client wants a $20 million signing bonus. He's a free agent and he is a good player.
Vinny says, "No thats too much money."
"Ok, well it looks like we are done here" Drew says.
Wait, wait, I'll make it happen. Give me a few minutes to change the figures of the contract. Your right, he did a great job on 2nd string last year. That should mean he's a good locker room guy. A good teacher. Yeah, thats how we will approach it." says Vinny.

And there you have contract negotiations between Vinny Cerrato and Drew Rosenhouse.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:05 pm

Justice Hog wrote:Remember when Trotter, that stud LB from Philly, came to D.C.? Remember what he did when he got here? Not a damn thing! Anyone else worried that the same thing will happen with Briggs?

That is a rhetorical quesion - the answer to everybody is obvious - Briggs is not Trotter and Trotter is not Briggs - Trotter did not make Philly look as good as Briggs and Urlacher did for Chicago - Briggs would be an addition, unfortunately, we do not really need him but the agent has the Bears in a bind.

I think we can do better with the 6 pick BUT ..............we shall see :lol:

I think it's funny that people think that we might consider a counter offer here! We made an offer...that's it. If it's not good enough then that's fine we'll do something else BUT the Bears might be up the creek without a player if this guy does not get signed - I think the agent did a great job and will appreciate the support we gave him by making an offer that is so one sided BUT that is how it works in the NFL.

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:32 pm

Vinny, my client wants a $20 million signing bonus. He's a free agent and he is a good player.
Vinny says, "No thats too much money."
"Ok, well it looks like we are done here" Drew says.
Wait, wait, I'll make it happen. Give me a few minutes to change the figures of the contract. Your right, he did a great job on 2nd string last year. That should mean he's a good locker room guy. A good teacher. Yeah, thats how we will approach it." says Vinny.

that's funny, sadly true

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:27 pm

Gibbs4Life wrote:
Vinny, my client wants a $20 million signing bonus. He's a free agent and he is a good player.
Vinny says, "No thats too much money."
"Ok, well it looks like we are done here" Drew says.
Wait, wait, I'll make it happen. Give me a few minutes to change the figures of the contract. Your right, he did a great job on 2nd string last year. That should mean he's a good locker room guy. A good teacher. Yeah, thats how we will approach it." says Vinny.

that's funny, sadly true

Funny? Yeah! We all think it's true, we really don't know, do we?

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:13 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
Gibbs4Life wrote:
Vinny, my client wants a $20 million signing bonus. He's a free agent and he is a good player.
Vinny says, "No thats too much money."
"Ok, well it looks like we are done here" Drew says.
Wait, wait, I'll make it happen. Give me a few minutes to change the figures of the contract. Your right, he did a great job on 2nd string last year. That should mean he's a good locker room guy. A good teacher. Yeah, thats how we will approach it." says Vinny.

:lol: that's funny, sadly true

Funny? Yeah! We all think it's true, we really don't know, do we?

I think more than anything, its how the picture is drawn up. I think that we just need to lay low from here on out and wait until the draft. We should pick up a few guys, see how they work out and if we have any other needs, we can see who's available after the June 1st cuts. We don't always need to go broke in free agency.

I've heard the phrase, If it ain't broke, don't fix it but what about, if it is broke. Then lets fix it because what we've been doing hasn't worked.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:20 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
Gibbs4Life wrote:
Vinny, my client wants a $20 million signing bonus. He's a free agent and he is a good player.
Vinny says, "No thats too much money."
"Ok, well it looks like we are done here" Drew says.
Wait, wait, I'll make it happen. Give me a few minutes to change the figures of the contract. Your right, he did a great job on 2nd string last year. That should mean he's a good locker room guy. A good teacher. Yeah, thats how we will approach it." says Vinny.

that's funny, sadly true

Funny? Yeah! We all think it's true, we really don't know, do we?

I seriously doubt Vinny negotiates any contracts. Once the team has decided on a player, Snyder most likely negotiates the contract with the assistance of cap expert Eric Schaffer.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 5:55 am

Bottom line - we don't need another highly paid linebacker. Certainly, Briggs is a good player (but don't try to impress me by saying how many pro bowls he's been to - we all know what a joke that little exhibition is), but how much would he improve our defence? We have Washington, Marshall and McIntosh at outside linebacker. We have no real idea how good McIntosh is, but we could always try to find out by, perhaps by doing something radical like using him. :roll:

And Marshall is, at worst, a considerable improvement over Holdman.

What this team needs most is defensive linemen - young, healthy and able to make an impact. That is the quickest way to improve the defence. Now, why throw away our best chance to improve that position, by tossing a draft pick to Chicago for Briggs? The draft charts can say all they want about the comparative values of the #6 and the #31 pick, but we have to factor in our needs. If we were proposing this deal in order to acquire another offensive tackle, another tight end, another running back, another wide receiver - would it make sense? No. Well that's exactly how I feel about making the deal to get another outside linebacker.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:30 am

UK Skins Fan wrote:Bottom line - we don't need another highly paid linebacker. Certainly, Briggs is a good player (but don't try to impress me by saying how many pro bowls he's been to - we all know what a joke that little exhibition is), but how much would he improve our defence? We have Washington, Marshall and McIntosh at outside linebacker. We have no real idea how good McIntosh is, but we could always try to find out by, perhaps by doing something radical like using him. And Marshall is, at worst, a considerable improvement over Holdman.

McIntosh played very little last year, why isn't really clear. What is clear is last year Washington and Marshall played hurt most of the year. The addition of Flectcher-Baker means Marshall can move to the outside for depth (if he dosen't start), that leaves Rocky in the same boat he was in last year (trying to get on the feild). Rocky couldn't unseat Holdman last year, to plan for him to step in and start would be poor planning, Marshall will be the main backup and MLB and can fill in at OLB. The truth is another starting cailber LB is needed. I don't look at it as Briggs replacing Marshall OR Rocky - I see it as Briggs replacing Holdman AND Posey.

UK Skins Fan wrote:What this team needs most is defensive linemen - young, healthy and able to make an impact. That is the quickest way to improve the defence. Now, why throw away our best chance to improve that position, by tossing a draft pick to Chicago for Briggs? The draft charts can say all they want about the comparative values of the #6 and the #31 pick, but we have to factor in our needs. If we were proposing this deal in order to acquire another offensive tackle, another tight end, another running back, another wide receiver - would it make sense? No. Well that's exactly how I feel about making the deal to get another outside linebacker.

The team said back during the combines they didn't like many of the D line at #6, so moving the pick was always a option. Getting more day 1 picks were/are my hopes for the #6 pick. Looking at all that has and hasn't happened this off-season, I'm not sure what the Skins are up to.
There are a few RFA defensive lineman out there that you would never give up the #6 pick for but with the #31st you can give it to a team for a DL and not have the entire fan base pissed at you.

Do you hold a Draft Day Party when you only have 4-5 picks and the highest pick is at 31

.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:28 am

1niksder wrote:McIntosh played very little last year, why isn't really clear. What is clear is last year Washington and Marshall played hurt most of the year. The addition of Flectcher-Baker means Marshall can move to the outside for depth (if he dosen't start), that leaves Rocky in the same boat he was in last year (trying to get on the feild). Rocky couldn't unseat Holdman last year, to plan for him to step in and start would be poor planning, Marshall will be the main backup and MLB and can fill in at OLB. The truth is another starting cailber LB is needed. I don't look at it as Briggs replacing Marshall OR Rocky - I see it as Briggs replacing Holdman AND Posey.

100% agree.

1niksder wrote:Do you hold a Draft Day Party when you only have 4-5 picks and the highest pick is at 31

I been wondering that for some time now. As we stand right now, the ONLY 1st day pick is at #6. Do you hold a draft day party for that? Leaves me to think they are up to something.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:37 am

1niksder wrote:Do you hold a Draft Day Party when you only have 4-5 picks and the highest pick is at 31 .

With some of the highest concession prices in the league - of course you do.

You know how much money you make selling people a water for the same price you bought a whole case for? :wink:

As if a good businessman would EVER miss a chance to exploit a captive audience.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:13 pm

I'll just throw this out there again for some response and thoughts.

Anyone think that this whole deal regarding Briggs is merely posturing by the Skins in an effort to create a perceived value of that pick, to in turn, entice another team to make a trade with us, with better value?

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:23 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:I'll just throw this out there again for some response and thoughts.

Anyone think that this whole deal regarding Briggs is merely posturing by the Skins in an effort to create a perceived value of that pick, to in turn, entice another team to make a trade with us, with better value?

No, I think the value of the #6 pick is a pretty well known quantity. The only thing to change its value much would be if a top 3 player like Russell, CJ or Joe Thomas fell to #6. Joe Thomas is probably the only one with a remote chance of falling that far. No one will deal for the #6 in hopes of that happening until it it really happens, on draft day.

John Clayton just said there is a 60% chance this deal will happen. The Bears are reviewing it and may make a counter offer to the Skins asking for a little bit more. (Hopefully the Skins stick to their guns and say "take it or leave it") The Bears, or any team for that matter, don't like it when another team and an agent work together to try and force their hand in a trade. So the Bears are probably taking their time to try and show their fans that they are in control, not Rosenhaus.

Personally, Ithink the last thing we need is another mtor mouth malcontent "star" player who will get a huge contract the moment he gets here. We need to field offers for a trade down from #6 (hopefully Adrian Peterson falls to #6 and draws interest from the Falcons or Texans) Even the trade down with the Broncos to #21 would be better than the Briggs scenario.

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:23 pm

I'm still marveling at how stupid this deal is. It really makes me start to lose faith in humanity.

Gibbs4Life · Post by **Gibbs4Life** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:24 pm

the pick is worth 1600 points

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:01 pm

The NFL Network replayed the Skins / Jags game this afternoon. Mercedes Lewis, the rookie TE for the Jags, just abused Holdman all game. It was pathetic. Talk about worthless... and Rocky couldn't unseat him?

Marshall made a nice tackle on a running play at the line of scrimmage, but other than that, he had little impact. Washington was flying all over the place and Williams blitzed him a lot in that game. Carter, Daniels and Evans all had sacks, 4 in total. The D-line pressured Leftwich all game, held Fred Taylor to 16 yards on 7 carries, and only gave up 32 total rushing yards to the Jags. Daniels also got a pick in that game, off a batted ball by Carter.

Based on that game alone, I can see why they feel the need to upgrade the LB core.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:21 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:I'll just throw this out there again for some response and thoughts.

Anyone think that this whole deal regarding Briggs is merely posturing by the Skins in an effort to create a perceived value of that pick, to in turn, entice another team to make a trade with us, with better value?

John Clayton says one of the reason the Skins are offering the pick is because they are having trouble finding a way to trade down.
He also says this is the best they'll get from the Skins, any counter offer will be rejected.

Check out the video feed

JJSKINS · Post by **JJSKINS** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:55 pm

It's MARcedes, not MERcedes. And, no, I have no idea what his parents were thinking. And, yes, Holdman was abused. I watched it, too, and that particular matchup was hard to stomach.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:27 pm

The best part of the video was that there is only a 60% chance of it happening. The longer they wait, the better chance we have to work out a trade. Take your time Chicago.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:02 am

I think the estimate is wrong! I think there is a 60% or more chance of it not happening.

The basic problem with this draft for the Redskins is twofold. There are only a few players worth "top 10 - draft pick money" and the Redskins need more opportunities to obtain players who will contribute than we have. We presently pick at 6 and then I think the next pick is like at about 140 :cry:

I am hoping we find a way to both get more players to help this D out, add some depth on the O line AND not give away any picks from next years draft - NONE :lol:

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:37 am

SkinsFreak wrote:I'll just throw this out there again for some response and thoughts.

Anyone think that this whole deal regarding Briggs is merely posturing by the Skins in an effort to create a perceived value of that pick, to in turn, entice another team to make a trade with us, with better value?

I think that because I wrote that last week, I even wrote the exact words "perceived value":

Fios wrote:It's entirely possible I am naive and stupid (not just one of the two) but I can't see the Briggs trade happening, I honestly think (hope/pray) the Redskins are trying to create as much swirl as possible around their plans in order to create a perceived value for the 6th pick should Millen be stupid enough to draft Quinn.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:53 am

Fios wrote:
SkinsFreak wrote:I'll just throw this out there again for some response and thoughts.

Anyone think that this whole deal regarding Briggs is merely posturing by the Skins in an effort to create a perceived value of that pick, to in turn, entice another team to make a trade with us, with better value?

I think that because I wrote that last week, I even wrote the exact words "perceived value":

Fios wrote:It's entirely possible I am naive and stupid (not just one of the two) but I can't see the Briggs trade happening, I honestly think (hope/pray) the Redskins are trying to create as much swirl as possible around their plans in order to create a perceived value for the 6th pick should Millen be stupid enough to draft Quinn.

Yes, I remember that. I wanted to bring it up again. You know, everyone has their poker faces on right now. We have no idea if the Skins have something brewing with another team. It's gonna be interesting to watch though. How many folks actually thought we were going to select a DB (Rogers) with our 9th pick a couple of years ago? Or moving up to get Campbell? Fun trying to figure it out though, isn't it?

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:54 am

SkinsFreak wrote:The NFL Network replayed the Skins / Jags game this afternoon. Mercedes Lewis, the rookie TE for the Jags, just abused Holdman all game. It was pathetic. Talk about worthless... and Rocky couldn't unseat him?

This has been debated before, but is it McIntosh 'couldn't unseat' Holdman, or wasn't allowed to? We all know Williams is reluctant to play rookies, so we'll never know if McIntosh's lack of playing time was due to his abilities, or purely the pro-veteran bias of the coaching staff. Look how long we had to tolerate Brunell!

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:44 am

Mursilis wrote:This has been debated before, but is it McIntosh 'couldn't unseat' Holdman, or wasn't allowed to? We all know Williams is reluctant to play rookies, so we'll never know if McIntosh's lack of playing time was due to his abilities, or purely the pro-veteran bias of the coaching staff. Look how long we had to tolerate Brunell!

There was a guy that was drafted the same year as Rocky, it may have been a few rounds later but I'm pretty sure he qualifies as a rookie also. He started 12 games for Williams and the pro-veteran biased staff.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:33 am

1niksder wrote:
Mursilis wrote:This has been debated before, but is it McIntosh 'couldn't unseat' Holdman, or wasn't allowed to? We all know Williams is reluctant to play rookies, so we'll never know if McIntosh's lack of playing time was due to his abilities, or purely the pro-veteran bias of the coaching staff. Look how long we had to tolerate Brunell!

There was a guy that was drafted the same year as Rocky, it may have been a few rounds later but I'm pretty sure he qualifies as a rookie also. He started 12 games for Williams and the pro-veteran biased staff.

Golston? While what you say is true, the D-line doesn't have the same cerebral demands of linebacker. Rarely does a DT have to go into coverage.

Plus, seems like the injury issues were worse on the line than the linebackers, but I don't remember who all was down how long - there were so many injuries last year.

funbuncher · Post by **funbuncher** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:34 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01038.html

Post article confirming that the Bears will counter, likely asking for...

"a player in addition to the sixth pick, which they likely would trade to stockpile more first-day draft picks. Sources say the Bears could ask for middle linebacker Lemar Marshall, who started the last two seasons but will be a backup with the arrival of London Fletcher. The Bears also might ask the Redskins to part with either linebacker Rocky McIntosh, for whom the Redskins gave up two draft picks to select in the second round of last year's draft, or defensive tackle Kedric Golston..."

It also said this:

Though Chicago does not have a ready replacement for Briggs, the deal appears to favor Chicago, according to sources who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of negotiations. However, according to league sources, the Bears want more.

...Hopefully Snyder still reads the Post.

This is hopefully false even though we keep reading it...

Meantime, the Redskins emerged as the only outside bidder for Briggs at last week's owners' meetings in Phoenix, after a suggestion by Briggs's agent, Drew Rosenhaus, that the Redskins initiate a trade with Chicago.

... OBVIOUSLY, I really don't like to think that we hadn't even considered doing this until an AGENT comes up with the idea for us! But there is evidence to that in the fact that we made no effort to sign Adalius Thomas when he would have required no trade compensation AT ALL!

If it does happen, we will know once and for all, that either:

1) Joe is NOT in control, or
2) He is a GM/President, whose personnel decisions are initiated by the whim of an agent. :shock:

Hopefully, as all you positive thinking folks are saying, this is all just posturing, drumming up interest, or doing the due dilligence and finding out what's out there. None of this has happened, it's all just talk at this point, Coach Joe has this under control and will tell Angelo thanks, but no thanks. Right?

But the fact is, we have made the offer to the Bears. And even if this is/was a good deal and does or doesn't happen, shouldn't a decision this aggresive/costly be the result of intense research that led us to the conclusion that Briggs is the ONLY guy for us, and therefore worth the draft pick compensation/huge contract? Hopefully that happened. But this is the same Gibbs that continued to play Brunell for the last 3 years... and traded away a draft pick to get him, for the ultimate, bad-coach/bad-GM combo move!

Since we actually MADE the offer, it's no longer accurate to say that we are just feeling out the market. Unless our plan if they acepted it was to say "just kidding", and not file the paperwork with the league.

Surely, my childhood hero is not this doofus. What is the world coming to when a man as smart and decorated as Joe Gibbs, is suddenly the giddy, school girl puppet of Drew Rosenhaus?

This is tearing a rather painful hole in my Joe Gibbs centered football belief system.