MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: damuts222 on March 05, 2010, 08:51:36 AM
-
It seems as if the pressure to win this year has allowed the deep pockets of the Bears organization to go after signing Julius Peppers (which may be done by this afternoon), and Chester Taylor. Word was that the Bears were in it for the former Cardinal Antrel Rolle but that seems to have changed as he is believed to be visiting 3 teams today.
As a Bears fan they needed to have a splash in free agency not only to show the fans that they want to win this year but beyond. People keep complaining about the Bears not going after offensive lineman in this years free agency, but tell me what good ones are out there. The Bears will most likely use all of their picks on secondary help and offensive lineman. Go Bears!
-
As a Bears fan they needed to have a splash in free agency not only to show the fans that they want to win this year but beyond.
I think signing Peppers is a real smart thing because they need a good pass rusher in Lovie's cover-2. However you're smarter than the line above...that's just an empty cliche. Are you saying that the Bears didn't "want to win" previously?
-
I actually like the Chester Taylor signing more than Peppers. Will they now look to move Alex Brown or Ogunleye(sic) for another draft pick?
-
Do either of them catch passes??? ?-(
-
The rumor was also out there that the Broncos were trying hard to get the Bears to take Marshall for a draft pick.
-
However you're smarter than the line above...that's just an empty cliche.
I understand that. Yet the trade for Jay Cutler did cost us more than people realized at first glance, with the first round draft picks.
It may be cliche but the fact of the matter is the Bears high draft picks overall haven't been as good as their late round additions, we will have to see how the trade plays out in the long run. Having said that I loved the trade and still do. Plugging the holes they have now for next year with immediate help was going to be done only in 2 ways trades or via free agents.
-
The rumor was also out there that the Broncos were trying hard to get the Bears to take Marshall for a draft pick.
What draft pick? I don't think the Bears have one until 2013 as it is.
-
Do either of them catch passes???
I do like how strong some of the receivers came on, and there are some veterans out there that could help even for this year but there are bigger holes.
Even though I heard the Cardinals only wanted a 3rd round draft pick for Boldin.
-
When do the Bears finally select in the draft...4th round?
-
3rd
-
As a Bears fan they needed to have a splash in free agency not only to show the fans that they want to win this year but beyond.
This happened a year ago ... Cutler
-
I think they're wasting their money on Peppers. He takes too many plays off and is past his prime I like the Taylor signing for the right price, though.
They're going to sign Rolle, mark my words.
They're going to need some luck to get any decent DBs or OLs in the draft, since bonehead Angelo traded their high draft picks for a headcase (Cutler) and the unfortunate (Gaines Adams).
-
I think Angelo has also said he is not going to go after a veteran WR, he liked how the young receivers came along and the Bears are going to go with them.
-
Past his prime?
He had 10.5 sacks last year, 14.5 the year before, and was hurt on and off the year before that. I think its a great signing.
The thing about this year is that the only unrestricted free agents have to have been in the league for 6 years so their not restricted free agents. Meaning that unrestricted free agents are at least 27 or 28 years old. The Bears do not have the draft picks to give up by signing a restricted free agent.
-
Chester is a great guy and could quickly turn into their #1 option . At worst, as a #2 he's a guy that can run and catch passes on 3rd down. Loved in Minnesota.. I hope he's back with the Consensus this season.
-
Interesting tidbits from John Clayton on NFL Free agency this year.
Whole blog:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4965069
Basically explains what the final eight teams in the playoffs can and can't do in free agency.
4. The Final Eight Plan. This is perhaps the most confusing issue of the uncapped year for fans, but the concept is pretty simple. The deeper a team went in the 2009 playoffs, the less it can do in free agency. For example, the final four teams in the playoffs -- the Saints, Colts, Vikings and Jets -- can sign an unrestricted free agent only if they lose a free agent. Don't expect these teams to be in the free-agent bidding. Those four teams have 24 free agents combined, and few of them are starters -- particularly if the Colts re-sign Brackett and the Saints re-sign Sharper. The four teams that lost in the divisional playoff round -- the Cowboys, Ravens, Cardinals and Chargers -- have a limited ability to go into free agency. They can replace a lost starter, but they can also sign one unrestricted free agent with a first-year salary of around $5.5 million. Basically, the top eight teams of 2009 have to take a wait-and-see position on free agency.
-
I hope he's back with the Consensus this season.
Looks like the Packers are the slight consensus as of right now.
ODDS TO WIN THE 2010-2011 NFC CHAMPIONSHIP
Team Open Current
New Orleans 7/2
Dallas 4/1
Green Bay 9/2
Minnesota 11/2
N.Y. Giants 15/2
Philadelphia 10/1
Atlanta 10/1
Chicago 14/1
Arizona 20/1
San Francisco 20/1
Washington 25/1
Carolina 30/1
Detroit 40/1
Seattle 40/1
Tampa Bay 60/1
St. Louis 75/1
ODDS TO WIN SUPER BOWL XLV
Team Open Current
Indianapolis 13/2
New Orleans 7/1
Dallas 15/2
New England 17/2
San Diego 17/2
Green Bay 19/2
Minnesota 11/1
Pittsburgh 12/1
N.Y. Jets 14/1
N.Y. Giants 15/1
Philadelphia 18/1
Atlanta 20/1
Tennessee 22/1
Baltimore 24/1
Chicago 28/1
Miami 30/1
Houston 30/1
Cincinnati 35/1
Arizona 40/1
Denver 45/1
Jacksonville 45/1
San Francisco 45/1
Washington 50/1
Cleveland 60/1
Carolina 60/1
Detroit 80/1
Seattle 80/1
Buffalo 100/1
Kansas City 125/1
Oakland 125/1
Tampa Bay 125/1
St. Louis 150/1
-
Ok, I talked to my Bears "guy".
PRN-Bears will not sign Rolle. They knew ahead of time what Rolle wanted, and the Bears nixed that idea from the get go. Rolle's looking for $8 mil per, not going to happen in Chicago.
Peppers is far from a lock from signing, most likely Taylor will sign by this afternoon. If they lose out on Peppers, they're going to try and bring in Dansby.
They won't trade for any receivers (Boldin or Marshall). They have no problem with the trade compensation (2011 pick, 2nd round for Marshall, 3rd for Boldin), but it's the $$$ they'd have to give those guys in new deals.
-
none of this matters because
A) The Lions are close to signing Burleson and Vanden Bosch. That EASILY makes them the front runners for the Division
B) Since the cap is gone a lot of teams will be acting differently. Teams are going to dump the players that are overpaid and under performing without much worry. You're going to see an over saturated free agent market. Most teams are going to spend a WHOLE lot less on free agents. With the exception of a few players that will be ridiculously over paid, most players will see 1 year contracts at a cut rate. You could even see a baseball type thing where teams keep a team salary less than last years minimum to save as much money as possible before going into the lockout.
C) the bears still suck
-
I think they're wasting their money on Peppers. He takes too many plays off and is past his prime I like the Taylor signing for the right price, though.
Not past his prime, stricter drug testing has reduced his effectiveness.
-
Per Brad Biggs:
"Pats and Eagles have offers on table for Julius Peppers as well as Bears."
"Agent for S Ryan Clark says 6 teams (including Steelers) are in play for him. Everyone is gaga over Antrel Rolle. Ryan is a better player."
-
One of the main problems that I see with the Bears is the fact that the wealth of the owner's is completely dependent on the team. I don't know of any other teams where that is the case and it is a real problem when the family cares more about financial security than success on the field. George Halas was a really cheap guy but his passion and aptitude for winning in the NFL made up for it. In an uncapped NFL the Bears should be a force to be reckoned with due to the huge market from which they can draw revenues but they will not reach that potential with the current set of owners.
-
none of this matters because
A) The Lions are close to signing Burleson and Vanden Bosch. That EASILY makes them the front runners for the Division
KVB is overrated. And I hope you are trying to channel Jay Bee in an attempt to be funny.
-
none of this matters because
A) The Lions are close to signing Burleson and Vanden Bosch. That EASILY makes them the front runners for the Division
Too bad Matt Millen isn't still there, they'd probably draft Dez Bryant as well.
-
One of the main problems that I see with the Bears is the fact that the wealth of the owner's is completely dependent on the team. I don't know of any other teams where that is the case and it is a real problem when the family cares more about financial security than success on the field.
Their are other families that own teams and are in tne same position:
Arizona Cardinals = Bill Bidwill (1972)
Buffalo Bills = Ralph Wilson (1960)
Detroit Lions = William Clay Ford, Sr. (1964)
Oakland Raiders = Al Davis (1976)
Tennessee Titans = Bud Adams (1960)
And, like the Bears, they are all not very good. Your point about family ownership hurting the bears is valid, it's just they are not alone.
-
none of this matters because
A) The Lions are close to signing Burleson and Vanden Bosch. That EASILY makes them the front runners for the Division
B) Since the cap is gone a lot of teams will be acting differently. Teams are going to dump the players that are overpaid and under performing without much worry. You're going to see an over saturated free agent market. Most teams are going to spend a WHOLE lot less on free agents. With the exception of a few players that will be ridiculously over paid, most players will see 1 year contracts at a cut rate. You could even see a baseball type thing where teams keep a team salary less than last years minimum to save as much money as possible before going into the lockout.
C) the bears still suck
Looking for teal.
As a Lions fan, I can assure you that is not enough to make them the favorites of the conference. These two signings, plus drafting Suh might get them to 7 wins. Desperately need secondary help, offensive line help, a running back, and somebody to lift the voodoo injury curse they have been under for the last 30 years.
-
KVB is overrated. And I hope you are trying to channel Jay Bee in an attempt to be funny.
Yes, yes I was. but with CJ, Burleson could have a huge upside
Granted if I ever had the chance. there is a lot of potential in Oakland and Detroit football. I loved to have a chance to run those organizations
-
Looks like the Packers are the slight consensus as of right now.
Are these currently offered odds by someone that include the uncertainly of whether the Vikings will have their QB back? Once Favre says, 'one more year!' and we have another stellar draft, we'll be a clear Consensus just like last year.
The combination of a Twins World Series in October / Nov and the Vikings Super Bowl in Feb will have the Twin Cities rockin!!!
-
Both are in for physicals with the Bears currently could be a presser this afternoon announcing their signings. (per Jay Glazer)
-
Are these currently offered odds by someone that include the uncertainly of whether the Vikings will have their QB back? Once Favre says, 'one more year!' and we have another stellar draft, we'll be a clear Consensus just like last year.
The combination of a Twins World Series in October / Nov and the Vikings Super Bowl in Feb will have the Twin Cities rockin!!!
While you are at it, let's throw in a Cup win for the Wild, an NBA title for the Twolves, and of course another Frozen 4 for the U.
-
6 years, $12 million/year, not sure on guaranteed money.
-
Chester Taylor immanent as well according to the Sun Times.
-
The Bears really signed Peppers for 6 years?
wow. Enjoy that Chicago.
Waste of money.
-
Yawn. Do they play OL? Do they play QB?
-
The Bears really signed Peppers for 6 years?
wow. Enjoy that Chicago.
Waste of money.
Total length is irrelevant. In my uneducated opinion this will like be torn up after 2-3 seasons and his non-gauranteed money will go poof.
-
Peppers deal will be signed within the hour. Don't know the total years, but $45 mil guaranteed the first 3 years. Essentially this will be a 3 yr guaranteed deal front loaded.
In an uncapped NFL, this is actually a very good signing. We'll see if it pans out, but good work by the Bears front office.
Love the Taylor signing. Fresh legs, has proved he can carry the load before. Great 1-2 punch with him and Forte.
-
The Bears really signed Peppers for 6 years?
wow. Enjoy that Chicago.
Waste of money.
I find it hilarious hearing all of the things about Peppers being overrated and so on. He gets double teamed and still gets double digit sacks, remember Brett Favre getting nailed last season repeatedly against the Panthers. Then the argument between Childress and Favre about taking him out because Peppers was single handedly beating him up. Good luck Packers O-line, since Clifton si now gone as well.
-
Yawn. Do they play OL? Do they play QB?
Bears don't need a QB. Cutler will be in the Probowl this year, unless his OL gets him killed.
-
I find it hilarious hearing all of the things about Peppers being overrated and so on. He gets double teamed and still gets double digit sacks, remember Brett Favre getting nailed last season repeatedly against the Panthers. Then the argument between Childress and Favre about taking him out because Peppers was single handedly beating him up. Good luck Packers O-line, since Clifton si now gone as well.
"He kind of gets a bad rep because maybe he doesn't get a sack per game," Panthers safety Chris Harris, a former Bear, said of Peppers. "He is the most dominant defensive player in the league, so he's going to get double-teamed. He's not going to get to the quarterback all the time, and people equate sacks to how hard he's working. It might not look like he's working because he does it so easily."
-
Their are other families that own teams and are in tne same position:
Arizona Cardinals = Bill Bidwill (1972)
Buffalo Bills = Ralph Wilson (1960)
Detroit Lions = William Clay Ford, Sr. (1964)
Oakland Raiders = Al Davis (1976)
Tennessee Titans = Bud Adams (1960)
And, like the Bears, they are all not very good. Your point about family ownership hurting the bears is valid, it's just they are not alone.
I was more focusing on teams whose owners wealth was derived essentially from the team alone and you are right that I missed Bidwill, Wilson, and Davis. Adams and Ford are wealthy regardless of their teams though so they should be able to tolerate more risk than the Bears and the three you pointed out. But at the same time I believe that Bidwill, Wilson, and Davis are essentially single owners who have made the NFL their life's work - as George Halas did.
-
Bears don't need a QB. Cutler will be in the Probowl this year, unless his OL gets him killed.
He throws the ball to the other team quite a bit, as well.
-
Peppers deal will be signed within the hour. Don't know the total years, but $45 mil guaranteed the first 3 years. Essentially this will be a 3 yr guaranteed deal front loaded.
In an uncapped NFL, this is actually a very good signing. We'll see if it pans out, but good work by the Bears front office.
Love the Taylor signing. Fresh legs, has proved he can carry the load before. Great 1-2 punch with him and Forte.
$45 million guaranteed is a lot to committ to a DE who just turned 30. IMO, the Bears might have been better off trying to spread that money around and fix a few more of their many holes.
-
Peppers signing will have a huge effect on the Vikes and Pack. With Clifton possibly going to Washington, the Packers have to draft an OT with their first round pick. I realize they were leaning OT any way, but they better hope their guy falls to them now. Tough spot to be in.
I wonder how Bryant McKinnie feels right now. Peppers absolutely owned him in that Sunday night game last year. If you're a Pro Bowl left tackle, and you get benched, that's not a good thing.
-
$45 million guaranteed is a lot to committ to a DE who just turned 30. IMO, the Bears might have been better off trying to spread that money around and fix a few more of their many holes.
In the "old" NFL, you're right. This would have been a borderline terrible signing. In the "new" NFL, it's not, it's a great signing. They basically will have him for 3 years, again, with no salary cap. I posted this a while ago, but teams like the Vikes and Pack are going to have a difficult time in this new NFL. They just don't have the revenue streams to long term compete with teams like the Bears (it's just fact).
Agree there are plenty of holes to fill, but elite defensive ends don't show up on the open market that often (Pack fans know this all too well with the Reggie White signing). Not that Peppers is Reggie White at this stage, but if you can get an elite DE (and have to pay a lot for it), you do it, especailly when it's a need.
-
Plus it sounds as if the Bears are shopping Greg Olsen around since in Martz' offense they don't foresee using him much. Probably for a second rounder or an offensive lineman. There not done, there in it for Ryan Clark at safety.
-
Peppers got a bad rap because he's in Carolina and they've been a pretty bad team for awhile. Hard to get noticed that way
Wonder if the bears are banking on a Super Bowl before the lock out
With Jared Allen, Kyle Vanden Bosch and Julius Peppers in the division, packers are screwed unless they bulk up the o line
-
Love the Taylor signing. Fresh legs, has proved he can carry the load before. Great 1-2 punch with him and Forte.
Peppers signing is good as long as he stays motivated. I think Marinelli ill take care of that. He's got at least two, maybe three, good years left.
Not a fan of the Taylor signing. Good pass blocker, but someone neglected to tell the Bears that the problem with their running game last year was a garbage offensive line, and to the best of my knowledge Taylor doesn't have the natural ability to overcome that.
-
Plus it sounds as if the Bears are shopping Greg Olsen around since in Martz' offense they don't foresee using him much. Probably for a second rounder or an offensive lineman. There not done, there in it for Ryan Clark at safety.
Is Martz going to be there after next year?
-
Is Martz going to be there after next year?
We will see, as a Bears fan I still don't see them as being better than 9-7 or 8-8 and who knows what is required for Lovie not to be fired?
-
I posted this a while ago, but teams like the Vikes and Pack are going to have a difficult time in this new NFL.
Vikings...Yes
Packers...Not so much
-
Vikings...Yes
Packers...Not so much
+1
-
In the "old" NFL, you're right. This would have been a borderline terrible signing. In the "new" NFL, it's not, it's a great signing. They basically will have him for 3 years, again, with no salary cap. I posted this a while ago, but teams like the Vikes and Pack are going to have a difficult time in this new NFL. They just don't have the revenue streams to long term compete with teams like the Bears (it's just fact).
What do you make this statement based on? In the latest Forbes valuation, the Packers trailed the Bears in revenue by only $9 million. Is there something you believe will increase the disparity going forward? Both fill their stadiums and do well in merchandising. They get the same cut of the tv deal. I'm sure the Bears get a little more local revenue (radio, advertising..etc) due to the much larger market but I can't believe that makes a huge difference. The Packers are obviously in a tiny market, but the renovations and fan support seem to have them in very good shape financially.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html)
Yes, there is no salary cap this year, but who knows about the year after (if fb is even played). Just because teams have are able to spend a lot of money doesn't mean it is the best idea. This is a lot money to spend on a player for a team that seems to be very far away from making much noise. Please tell me why this is a great signing now, but would have been horrible under the old system, I must be missing something (not that familiar with how the NFL will operate this season and going forward).
-
In fairness, the "Forbes Franchise Valuations" are not taken seriously within the industry.
-
In fairness, the "Forbes Franchise Valuations" are not taken seriously within the industry.
I realize it's not the best source, but I wasn't sure where else I could find total revenue numbers. I know the valuations don't mean much but are the revenue numbers also taken with a grain of salt?
-
The only numbers you can take seriously are the ones pertaining to the Packers. Their financial numbers are the only ones released to the public and the only ones that are seen as credible.
The finances of private professional sports teams are very sensitive and kept very close to the vest. Forbes is just guessing, and executives often laugh at the valuations they put out every year.
-
As a Bears fan its a great move, then again you will see a lot of teams with less money to throw around drop players. For example Delhomme being dropped costing them 12 million. If the NFL does have a year of no football in 2011 teams will have to pay their players regardless if a down is played or not. That is why many teams that fear their will be a year off are unloading high salaried players, and why many veterans will not be signed at all.
-
Peppers got a bad rap because he's in Carolina and they've been a pretty bad team for awhile. Hard to get noticed that way
He got a bad rap because they've been a pretty bad team for awhile? Huh? Since he's been with them, they've never had fewer than 7 wins. That's pretty bad? 12-4 in 2008 was awful. 11-5 in 2005 was ugly. Sure.
He's never been on a team that hasn't won at least 7 games.. the Bears, Packers.. heck, even the Vikings... have all had worse seasons than Carolina during the time Peppers has been with them.
Peppers has gotten a bad rap because some think his work ethic is crap and that he is not a great teammate. He's good, but getting old. $45 million guaranteed is too high... unless you're a desperate franchise, shaking in your boots about the two-time defending NFC North Champions.
-
30 is not old for a defensive end, for a running back yes.
-
shaking in your boots
The only one shaking in their boots is the criminal/lazy ass kicked off the pro bowl team/love boat organizer/overrated Bryant McKinnie.
-
If the NFL does have a year of no football in 2011 teams will have to pay their players regardless if a down is played or not.
What world do you live in?
-
What world do you live in?
Misread an article, but the same one as you.
-
Misread an article, but the same one as you.
Not if you think players would get paid in a lockout.
-
He lives in a fantasy world.
at least that is what I have discerned from reading his posts in this thread. :)
-
No matter what the move is, when "your" team makes a bold move in the free agency market, I guess you have to be an optimist. Having said that, I don't really agree with the "this is a good move" stance Bears' fans are throwing out there.
1) 6 years is much too long for Peppers. In response to the poster who said that DEs dont cut off at 30 like RBs do, what are you basing this on? Last year, of the top 25 players with the most sacks there were 5 over 30 (and 3 of those were 30 exactly). There was 1 ranked in the top 10. Speed and agility have been gaining in importance over the last 10 years, and the best DEs are the fastest, not just the strongest. Peppers has made his name by being the most explosive, is that going to be the case when he is 33? He could age like Jason Taylor, but I wouldn't bet $45M on it.
2) The contract of Taylor was ok at best. Again, its too long (4 years) but he gets like 60% of the money up front this year when there is no cap. Great move there, but what happens with Forte. You know...the franchise RB? Is he going to be a 1-2 punch for the next 3/4 years? I don't think its smart to make someone "the guy" at 23, take it away at 24, and give it back at 27. Some think Taylor will keep Forte rested, I saw it stunts his growth. Oh well, I'm sure they will use their acumen gained by mismanging RBs for the past 7 years and get it right this time.
3) These signings make the team better this year, but to what end? This team is not competing with Favre's Vikes this year or the Packers' core for the next 3 years. After that? Then they have a 33 year old DE (on the ropes for thee years more), a 33 year old washed up RB, a 27 year old RB who has been jerked around between "the man" and "not the man" and most importantly, still a QB who likes to throw the ball with his eyes closed. As a Packer' fan, I say job well done.
-
What do you make this statement based on? In the latest Forbes valuation, the Packers trailed the Bears in revenue by only $9 million. Is there something you believe will increase the disparity going forward? Both fill their stadiums and do well in merchandising. They get the same cut of the tv deal. I'm sure the Bears get a little more local revenue (radio, advertising..etc) due to the much larger market but I can't believe that makes a huge difference. The Packers are obviously in a tiny market, but the renovations and fan support seem to have them in very good shape financially.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html)
Yes, there is no salary cap this year, but who knows about the year after (if fb is even played). Just because teams have are able to spend a lot of money doesn't mean it is the best idea. This is a lot money to spend on a player for a team that seems to be very far away from making much noise. Please tell me why this is a great signing now, but would have been horrible under the old system, I must be missing something (not that familiar with how the NFL will operate this season and going forward).
Packers are one of the best run organizations in the NFL, run far better than the Bears are. At the end of the day though, they play in the smallest market in sports. If the NFL evolves the way it looks like it's going to, the Packers long term may be in trouble. Hub has posted this in Pro Football Weekly a few months back, and guys around the league are very worried about what could be going down in the next 5-10 years. No matter how well run the Pack are, there's only so many revenue streams that the team can tap based on it's location. The only plus from having the NFL turn into MLB (where it's Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, etc), is the tv deal is still dispersed league wide. As much as people love the Packers in Wisconsin, at the end of the day, radio/media (non TV) revenue for the Bears/Giants/Redskins (etc) will make and be re-invested into player costs long term. I love Miller Lite and Allen Edmonds as much as the next guy, but will those corporations pony up what say Dr. Pepper will to be the corporate partner providing Cowboys football?
Point is, everything is chaning. Revenue streams that teams took in before will start going toward player costs (where they previously could not). Teams that draft well will be in great shape if the new rules stay after the new CBA. The Packers will be around, but could be at a huge disadvantage. I wasn't shocked for a second when they raised ticket costs this offseason. Eventually you'll probably see the Packers (and most NFL teams) over time develop a pure auction system for tickets. That day is coming real soon.
-
interesting Packers note:
Lions traded for Corey Williams today - gave up a 5th rounder and get Williams and Cle's 7th round.
Packers traded him away to Cle a year ago (to the dismay of many) for a 2nd rounder.
As an objective observer (Dolphins fan from GB [long story] ) not a bad deal for the Pack a couple of years ago. Yes, unforunately that pick became Brian Brohm, but at least the original deal was good... ;D
-
No matter what the move is, when "your" team makes a bold move in the free agency market, I guess you have to be an optimist. Having said that, I don't really agree with the "this is a good move" stance Bears' fans are throwing out there.
1) 6 years is much too long ...
2) The contract of Taylor was ok at best. Again, its too long (4 years) ...
I don't get why everyone is so worked up over the length of the contract. Delhomme's long extension did him a lot of good when he got waived... This is the NFL, where the non-guaranteed portion of contracts might as well be $1B per year since it is not getting paid.
-
No matter what the move is, when "your" team makes a bold move in the free agency market, I guess you have to be an optimist. Having said that, I don't really agree with the "this is a good move" stance Bears' fans are throwing out there.
The organization obviously wants to keep Lovie around and the Bears rarely are big players in free agency. If you look at the Bears DE's for next year it wasn't pretty. They somehow have a win next year approach, which made me laugh then and still does but too a lesser extent. This is a last ditch effort, by Angelo, Lovie and the gang to all keep their jobs especially since they were given the cash to spend. The only way to improve given the lack of draft picks is by throwing cash at it, thats the American way.
-
When do the Bears finally select in the draft...4th round?
Bears now have three first round draft picks that did not play for the team last year .....Peppers, C. Taylor and the other that everyone is forgetting about...Urlacher.
-
Regardless of contract lengths and money, less than 24 hours into the Free Agency the Bears are already a much better team in 2010. They still can add an OL or a safety especially if they decide to move Olsen.
-
Thanks for answering my question Dish, I didn't know some of those other revenue streams could now be used for player costs.
-
He got a bad rap because they've been a pretty bad team for awhile? Huh? Since he's been with them, they've never had fewer than 7 wins. That's pretty bad? 12-4 in 2008 was awful. 11-5 in 2005 was ugly. Sure.
He's never been on a team that hasn't won at least 7 games.. the Bears, Packers.. heck, even the Vikings... have all had worse seasons than Carolina during the time Peppers has been with them.
Peppers has gotten a bad rap because some think his work ethic is crap and that he is not a great teammate. He's good, but getting old. $45 million guaranteed is too high... unless you're a desperate franchise, shaking in your boots about the two-time defending NFC North Champions.
Ok I may have over stated bad. 3 years of playoffs since 2002 is ok. But their down years, of 7-9 or 8-8 on the in-between shows that they are mediocre at best. Delhomme has had pedestrian passing numbers. never a year over 29 TDs and never a (full) season with less than 11 touchdowns and the rest of the team has been inconsistent. It's not totally a knock on Peppers, but being as good as he is on a team that isn't a perennial playoff contender means you get over looked, which may be a reason for his attitude
-
Just ask the Redskins how big name free agent signings generally work out... in the NFL you build through the draft. The Cutler trade will probably end up being worth it in the long run, and the Gaines Adams situation was something that no one could have seen coming, so you can't really fault the Bears giving up those draft picks. BUT, just eating it for a year might be better than giving a bunch of 30 year olds big contracts
-
Packers sign Clifton. 3 years, $20 mill (7.5 guaranteed)
-
Packers sign Clifton. 3 years, $20 mill (7.5 guaranteed)
Excellent move by the Pack. Clifton still has the goods to play left tackle, and with Allen and Peppers playing the Pack 4 times a season, Pack made the right move by matching/beating the Skins offer. Gives them all kinds of options in the 1st round now as well.
-
Yeah, I'm not sure how good that contract looks in year three, but that's OK. The Packers need him to make a run.
-
Yeah, I'm not sure how good that contract looks in year three, but that's OK. The Packers need him to make a run.
I bet he retires after this year or next
-
Just ask the Redskins how big name free agent signings generally work out... in the NFL you build through the draft. The Cutler trade will probably end up being worth it in the long run, and the Gaines Adams situation was something that no one could have seen coming, so you can't really fault the Bears giving up those draft picks. BUT, just eating it for a year might be better than giving a bunch of 30 year olds big contracts
The problem with the Bears eating it for a year means that if that was their viewpoint they would have fired the coaching staff, if they were going to keep the level of talent on the team the same. But I do agree that in the NFL you build through the draft.
-
Packers are one of the best run organizations in the NFL, run far better than the Bears are. At the end of the day though, they play in the smallest market in sports. If the NFL evolves the way it looks like it's going to, the Packers long term may be in trouble. Hub has posted this in Pro Football Weekly a few months back, and guys around the league are very worried about what could be going down in the next 5-10 years. No matter how well run the Pack are, there's only so many revenue streams that the team can tap based on it's location. The only plus from having the NFL turn into MLB (where it's Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, etc), is the tv deal is still dispersed league wide. As much as people love the Packers in Wisconsin, at the end of the day, radio/media (non TV) revenue for the Bears/Giants/Redskins (etc) will make and be re-invested into player costs long term. I love Miller Lite and Allen Edmonds as much as the next guy, but will those corporations pony up what say Dr. Pepper will to be the corporate partner providing Cowboys football?
Point is, everything is chaning. Revenue streams that teams took in before will start going toward player costs (where they previously could not). Teams that draft well will be in great shape if the new rules stay after the new CBA. The Packers will be around, but could be at a huge disadvantage. I wasn't shocked for a second when they raised ticket costs this offseason. Eventually you'll probably see the Packers (and most NFL teams) over time develop a pure auction system for tickets. That day is coming real soon.
The Packers and Bears might be the only two properties to which Miller would pony up whatever it really took. Maybe the Vikings, Brewers & Red Wings too.
-
i think that says as much about Cowboys football as the sponsor. nothing has the regional influence and advertising power of the Cowboys. the combination of the adoration for the cowboys and their expansive fans make it one of the best investments a company could make.