Here's the thing with the Lance Briggs situation. I'm not going to go back and re-hash who said what and when - this is a blog, not a short novel.
Lance wants big money and security (read: guaranteed money). He's in a dangerous profession, not to mention the danger of working with self-policing co-workers. Remember Benson getting teed off on in training camp last year? Think there's a code among NFL players that transcends team and league-mandated rules?
The Bears, naturally, want Lance to live up to his contract. If Lance has a problem with anybody, it should be Gene Upshaw and the Players Association, not the Bears. They're playing by the rules agreed upon by the league and the union. Don't like it? Too bad.
Yes, Lance could sit out. In some respects, he'd be smart to do that; his likelihood of suffering a career-ending knee injury is much lower not playing football. Yes the Bears could trade him, although the current offer out there - swapping 1st round picks with the Redskins - doesn't seem like such a good deal. A two-time Pro Bowl player like Briggs, at his age and position, commands a first round pick, straight up, in the opinion of this fan.
Until I get the kinks worked out of this time machine I've been assembling, we'll just have to wait and see. I'm guessing that the Bears let him sit the season out, if he's so inclined. The person that needs to get smart in this chess-game is Lance Briggs. His agent is setting him up for big money... or a career image issue as a bad team mate and a guy who doesn't do what he says he's going to do. Remember, Lance: that guy works for you, not the other way around.
1 comment:
This Briggs situation has put Jerry Angelo in a sensitive spot. At this point, there are two options: Briggs is traded, or he is kept as a Bear. Either one involves compromise from the Bears point of view.
If we keep him, Angelo send a loud and clear message that he has brass balls, and will not be intimidated or influenced in the least by the actions of players and agents, especially Rosenhaus. But does having this $7.2 million dead weight on the team for 10 weeks (assuming Briggs would hold out) really improve our chances of getting back to the Super Bowl? Do we really gain anything, other than proving a point?
And if we trade Briggs, does this damage Angelo's reputation around the league, due to the appearance of his giving in to a disgruntled player's demands? Do other players & agents take notice and try to do the same thing in the future? But as risky as those sound, doesn't it make better business (and football) sense to trade him? The guy is going to be expensive this year, playing a position that isn't critically important in this defense, and we have other guys like Tillman, Grossman, and T. Harris whose contracts are getting near the end and will need new deals in the next year or two. Plus, if he does sit out 10 games, how much of a factor will he really be in our success? And then he's gonna walk as soon as he can anyways. Wouldn't it make more sense to get something for him now, while we still can?
Post a Comment