Thread: Matt Forte NOT HAPPY with Bush signing

It would take the average American 150 years to make 7.7 million. Good thing I'm going to live to 200.

Originally Posted by Bear Goggles

It would take the average American 150 years to make 7.7 million. Good thing I'm going to live to 200.

Wow...if I said to my boss at review time "There's only so many times a man that has done everything he's been asked to do can be disrespected! Guess the GOOD GUYS FINISH LAST"..He'd probably say "ok then, you LAST paycheck will be in the mail", and show me the door..

Restating this from another thread. Phillips holds the purse strings, The money that Forte (or any other player) gets paid is NOT decided upon by Emery or any other Bears GM.

Originally Posted by motownbear

he has a 7.7 mil contract and he is being disrespected lol. Good god how about we find out what he is calling fair compensation cause I think the contracts are there for what he should get.

and I would trade him to either Cincy or Browns for their first rounder since they have two of them. Fix the oline with that pick and it wont matter who the hell the rb is

This is what I been hinting at. One of the reasons for my saying this is a good time to pull the plug on the relationship is Forte's realistic market value is enhanced by the fact that this draft is weak in RB talent, but it's strong in other areas we need help or upgrades in. If this trade got us a DE like Coples AND an OG like DeCastro or Adams if we really think he could play LT because we had two choices to play with rather than having to choose it's something to consider.

Forte is being disrespected far less than Alex Smith was by SF. Michael Bush is a younger and bigger version of MB III and there's plenty of room for both him and Forte because just like last year Bush will be used for a different purpose. Every successful running team uses two RB. NY had Jacobs to do the heavy work and Bradshaw the rest so where is this any different?

IMO Matt Forte is beginning to get a little too sensitive about the Bears doing what they need to do to build a stronger offense AND protect themselves against HIS threatened hold out. HE'S the guy who hinted he may turn up missing when camp opens if they haven't cut a deal by then. The Bears didn't tell him not to bother to show up. I understand the risks he's talking but that's what the $7.7 mil is supposed to justify but apparently he doesn't see it that way.

Personally I'm getting tried of the trauma-drama surrounding it. If he can't accept the offer then do what I suggested doing with Briggs. Put a price tag on him and let him and his agent go find a team with high picks who'll pay that price and pay him. I mean it should be easy right. Look at how many offers Mike Wallace has to turn down daily from all the teams standing in line to give up a first round pick for him. (sarcasm included at no extra cost)

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

For 1 year yes, but the last 4-5 contracts are MUCH greater then his FT. He's right.

Nonsense. DWill's deal and the others have all averaged around $8 mil per year so what he's getting is in line with those deals. Where the stumbling block is an always has been in my estimation is what's being guaranteed and how it's guaranteed.

Many of these high end deals are guaranteed for injury but not for a loss in productivity beyond a certain point. Teams who are being asked to guarantee up to 50% of a deal are covering their backsides against these guys slacking off once the get the big dollar deals.

It's happened way too often and because of the cap rules surrounding signing bonuses which can create enormous amounts of "dead cap space" if a guy is cut or traded deals are being structured differently. More $$$ is going into "as earned" dollars and less into upfront cash. Look at how long we had to suffer with Benson before we were able to get rid of him without a huge cap hit. Teams like the Bears want to avoid that especially with a RB.