Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
When we were unhappy with a previous job, our dad gave us a bit of advice about not burning bridges. Even if the situation at the time wasn't ideal, at least it came with a paycheck. And one never knew how actions could impact things — either within that organization, or with others who might move on and could be of help down the road. Unfortunately, Bears linebacker Lance Briggs didn't seem to get the same advice from his dad.
Briggs — not happy with the Bears since they placed the "franchise" tag on him — continued to alienate himself from the Bears organization, as well as the fans and his teammates, by ever so clearly expressing his unhappiness with the national media.
In a FoxSports.com interview, Briggs told FoxSport's Jay Glazer, "I am now prepared to sit out the year if the Bears don't trade me or release me. I've played my last snap for them. I'll never play another down for Chicago again."
He went so far as to even suggest he'd take out loans to make ends meet if he had to sit out the 2007 season. "People think I can't afford to sit out the year — I can take out loans to get me through that year just fine because eventually I'll have a deal somewhere," Briggs told FoxSports.com. "There are things I can do to make sure I'm fine financially if I sit out."
One, even if he played at the league minimum for his draft status and seniority as he contended in a Tuesday evening interview on ESPN's SportCenter, how has he not put enough away to live for a year without a paycheck? Um ... Lance, your career could end any day. Sock a little away just in case ... it might also come in handy should your try to carry out your threats.
Since he clearly hasn't saved for a rainy day, we can only imagine how he can cut back to get by. Maybe stock up on ramen at Costco? Trade in his Hummer for a used Prius? Head to Old Country Buffet with friends rather than Gibson's? How long before such belt tightening convinces Briggs that maybe a $7.2 million salary isn't so bad.
Not that we're placing all the blame on Briggs for this situation. We do not understand why, when the Bears have a Pro Bowl linebacker who is still only 26, they wouldn't step up the plate and offer him the long term deal his play justifies. They made one $33 million, 7-year offer before last season, and that was below market. Yet another stellar year, and his value is that much higher now.
Ultimately, no matter how this situation plays out, both the Bears and Lance Briggs end up looking bad. Either Briggs backs down and plays, or he sits out and demonstrates that money's more important than a shot at the Super Bowl. Either the Bears hold firm and risk running one of their best players out or town, or they end up paying up and looking bad for using the "franchise" tag to gain additional leverage instead of simply making a fair offer in the first place.
Image via LanceBriggs.com.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The way the Bears defense is setup, Cover 2, it's made so the weak side LB can penetrate and make plays.
Sure Lance is a great athlete and all that, but honestly he plays next to one of the few great MLB's in the league. No one's stupid enough to run up the middle anymore, so they take it to the left or right (Briggs or Hillenmeyer).
I guess what I'm trying to say is, the deal that the Bears were willing to give him last year was fine. Could they have bumped it up a little bit this year? Sure why not. But we've got more important things to worry about, namely our secondary and O-line. LOLB are a dime a dozen, so if he goes, he goes.
humor a football know-nothing. what's the "franchise" tag thing all about?
Geek,
Each team has the right to "franchise" one player per season. This year the Bears chose to franchise Briggs. What that means is, he is paid the "franchise amount" (in Briggs' case, 7.2 mm which is the average of the 5 highest paid players in the league at his position) for one year. If other teams better that offer, the Bears have the right to either match it or receive two first-round draft picks in exchange (very good, relatively inexpensive compensation). Now, 7.2 mm is a lot of money for one year, which is why only good players are franchised. But Briggs is upset because it's just a one year contract and he wants a multi-year deal. If he goes and gets a career-hampering injury this season, he'll feel like he lost out on a lot of money. From the Bears' point of view, they want to keep him without committing a lot of money over a longer period of time.
The franchise tag allows an NFL team the privilege to designate a player who is an unrestricted free agent (one who has the ability to sign with the highest bidder) as a player that they can't afford to lose, and effectively sign him to a one-year contract equal to the average salaries of the top five players at that player's position. In this case, $7.2 million
Many teams do this in order to keep players they deem valuable to the team, while re-stocking at that player's position through other means. The implication with the franchise tag in this instance is that the Bears believe that they have no chance of re-signing Briggs, but prefer to keep him under contract long enough to find a replacement.
Long-term NFL contracts, however, can and are voided at any minute. The big money in the long-term contracts is in the guaranteed signing bonuses, which is what Briggs is really angling for here. He won't get that signing bonus as a franchise player, under NFL rules. And, since he's apparently stretched thin financially, that's the prize he has his eyes locked on.
One final bit Benjy forgot to mention is that Briggs' agent is Drew Rosenhaus, who, among other NFL players, represents Terrell Owens, and was instrumental in Owens' disrupting the Philadelphia Eagles two years ago. A lot of what Briggs is doing right now has Rosenhaus' fingerprints all over them.
Pay the man.
Chuck, T.O.'s antics have less to do with Rosenhaus than the fact that he is batshit crazy.
okay, thank y'all for the explanation. i did see him on espn last night saying something about T.O. but i didn't know what it was about.
TO is batshit crazy, but Drew Rosenhaus is a grade-A douchebag. Imagine the Jay Mohr character in Jerry Maguire, only much much worse.
I think the other reason he's throwing his hissy fit is that this offseason has been WACKY in terms of the stupid money everyone's been throwing around. ($3 million a year for a fullback?!?! Do offenses even use fullbacks anymore?)
So I really think Lance wanted to see what would happen on the open market (witness Adalius Thomas' fat contract with the Patriots) thinking someone (i.e.- Dan Snyder and the Redskins) would just shovel money at him for name recognition alone.