Thread: Bears Have Big Decision to Make Over Briggs...........

As much as we may hate to admit it the Briggs situation does constitute an immediate challenge and an important decision for Phil Emery. Here's a guy whose remained healthy and uber productive throughout his entire career. He's made 7 straight Pro Bowls and is usually second only to Urlacher in number of tackles. But there's also the factor of his being in a defensive system that features him to take into consideration as well. Would he ever have done as well outside Lovie's defense and could he if he played elsewhere?

What do you do? Extend him and toss a little more money his way like we did with Urlacher? Swap his 2013 salary into 2012 and offer a 2013 bonus if he makes the Pro Bowl again next year? Trade him and get rid of the problem? Or does Emery play hardball and simply tell him he committed to this deal four years ago and he's obligated to play it out as is?

If Emery decides to reward him we'd be better off if we extended him for another year with a bonus that could be stretched out over three years so that we didn't have to take a $2.5 mil hit against the cap this year if we swapped his salaries around.

If Emery decides to play hardball then I'd look into trade possibilities depending on what teams would give up for him. His production and his ability to stay healthy may be enticing enough to a team who needs to fill that gap desperately to make a trade. One suggestion was a Briggs for Osi trade with the Giants but that's trading a healthy OLB for a DE with knee problems. I wonder if there's a LT out there somewhere who could be gotten in trade?

A trooper and a greedy party pooper off the field at times... BUT he has meant a lot to the success of the Bear's defense.

Briggs has already collected roughly 70% of his 6 yr/$36 million contract to date... which included a $13 mill guaranteed and a $4 mill signing bonus (that's alotta comic books lance!)... he has about $10 million left to collect in his final two year. I say restructure the deal to include a 3rd year and include a team option for a 4th to show some loyality. Add in a roster bonus in the third year of $2-3 million so in case his production decreases they have an excuse to cut him after the 2013 season.

Originally Posted by draw2anderson35

A trooper and a greedy party pooper off the field at times... BUT he has meant a lot to the success of the Bear's defense.

Briggs has already collected roughly 70% of his 6 yr/$36 million contract to date... which included a $13 mill guaranteed and a $4 mill signing bonus (that's alotta comic books lance!)... he has about $10 million left to collect in his final two year. I say restructure the deal to include a 3rd year and include a team option for a 4th to show some loyality. Add in a roster bonus in the third year of $2-3 million so in case his production decreases they have an excuse to cut him after the 2013 season.

Yea, that sounds about right. I hate millionaire whiners, but market value is market value and if he's worth it to our defense, then do it, but for God sakes, don't break the bank on the guy...he's doin OK.

Originally Posted by draw2anderson35

A trooper and a greedy party pooper off the field at times... BUT he has meant a lot to the success of the Bear's defense.

Briggs has already collected roughly 70% of his 6 yr/$36 million contract to date... which included a $13 mill guaranteed and a $4 mill signing bonus (that's alotta comic books lance!)... he has about $10 million left to collect in his final two year. I say restructure the deal to include a 3rd year and include a team option for a 4th to show some loyality. Add in a roster bonus in the third year of $2-3 million so in case his production decreases they have an excuse to cut him after the 2013 season.

If we intend on keeping him and shutting him up I'd be in favor of adding another year to his deal as well. We don't need to put an team option in because NFL contracts aren't guaranteed. No matter how many years we add he can be cut anytime including after next season.

The only problem with the roster bonus in 2014 is it does nothing for him now and the fact that he's only getting $3.75 mil in 2012 is what he's complaining about. If we give him the $3 mil now as a SB and extend his deal through 2014 with a salary of $6.25 mil (same as 2013) in that last years we can spread that $3 mil out over the next 3 years so it only adds $1 mil to this years cap, $1 mil in 2013, and the last mil in 2014 and his cap cost would be $7.25 mil for 2014. If he's not worth that we cut him.

If we cut him prior to 2014 we only have $1 mil of "dead cap space" for the remainder of the SB and we save $6.25 mil in salary. It would be great if we could do it the way you're suggesting but what do you offer for a salary? If you give him another $3.75 mil plus his $3 mil RB his cap cost for 2014 would be $6.75 mil and I don't think we'd want to go much past that.

It would actually be better to give him a SB of $3 mil now than to swap his 2013 salary for his 2012 too. I think one way or the other he wants more now and if we decide to give it to him I'd make it as cap friendly as possible.

Why is it always a "big decision" when talking about big contracts? In 2009 the Ravens gave Ray Lewis (36!) a big-money contract, why can't the Bears do the same? Why is this team so cheap to spend some money on franchise players? Pay the men who deserve it!

Originally Posted by little bear

Why is it always a "big decision" when talking about big contracts? In 2009 the Ravens gave Ray Lewis (36!) a big-money contract, why can't the Bears do the same? Why is this team so cheap to spend some money on franchise players? Pay the men who deserve it!

Good question lb but was Lewis up for FA when that happened or in the middle of his deal? As draw2anderson points out Briggs got fronted 70% of his money and agreed to take a salary hit this year in exchange for that. Now that we're at that point he wants to undo that deal. Very few employers would allow you to tear up that agreement and renegotiate halfway through your contract. Up to this point Lance Briggs has not been underpaid one red cent so it's not cheapness on the Bears part.

I see this whole thing two different ways. Yes, Briggs has performed well and if he'd signed a four year deal, which he could have, he'd be a FA this year and in line for what would be his last big payday. But he got bad advice from Rosenhaus (lmao, who doesn't? even T.O. is saying it) and he wants to hold the Bears responsible for that. So he's under contract for two more years and you tell him to stick it in his ear and play football or you trade his ass so you don't need to listen to him whine for another two years.

Or, you toss him a bone by giving him an brief extension with a signing bonus now that you can amortize to keep the cap costs down. We need some serious bucks to be ultra competitive in FA and if we give him a $3 mil raise that comes as a direct cap hit of $3 mil in 2012. If we decide to do anything at all I'd make it as cap friendly as possible and let him know that it's not subject to negotiation. He has zero leverage at this point in time.

depends on the return... I may consider trading him and draft a LB with our 1st

Originally Posted by GermansbombedPH

depends on the return... I may consider trading him and draft a LB with our 1st

I would venture to guess that's being considered. He's contractually bound to play for $3.75 mil this year so he's a bargain at that price for the Bears or anyone else who wants him. If Emery doesn't want to deal with him are other teams will give him a signing bonus this year and extend his deal a couple more years then you set a price on him and let him and Rosenhaus see if there are any takers. I still think he may well find that once again he's not in as big of a demand as he thinks he is.