Compromise the Only Fix for Forte.................

Compromise the only fix for Forte, Bears

By Mike Imrem

There’s a simple solution to Matt Forte’s contract impasse, but first let’s talk about why the issue made headlines last week. The reason is that if it’s March, the compelling sports subject around here must be

The NCAA Tournament? No. The Bulls’ and Blackhawks’ run to the playoffs? No. The Cubs and White Sox approaching Opening Day? No. The Bears belched?

Yes, Da Bears!


Actually, if it’s late March or mid-May or early July, the compelling subject around here must be the Bears. If it’s at noon or midnight or early morning or late afternoon or the breakfast table or lunchroom or suppertime, the compelling subject must be the Bears.

Yes, folks, it’s Bears, Bears, Bears around here, all day, every day, 25 hours a day, 40 days a month, 15 months a year, 20 years a decade.

So when the Bears added a second-string running back last week, a brush fire immediately flared into a wildfire. Forte, the Bears’ starter at the position, groused that the Michael Bush signing is another sign that the Bears don’t respect him.

Boo-freaking-hoo.

So what else is new? Nothing, but it does give fans here another reason to anguish. Look, Forte is going to play for the Bears next season despite being unhappy with his franchise-tagged contract calling for a mere $7.7 million.

OK, now for the obvious compromise: Forte agrees to not hold out this year and the Bears agree to not franchise him again next year. The dispute isn’t about this season. It’s about the following season and whether Forte can become a free agent.

A good guess is this compromise will be struck sometime early in training camp after a few more months of obligatory negotiating, sniping and news bulletins. Forte can’t afford to pay the daily fine for not showing up to work, and the Bears can’t afford to have a disgruntled Pro Bowl running back in the locker room.

My plan works for both sides. The Bears benefit because Forte will play hard in anticipation of free agency. He benefits because the Bears will be motivated to increase the guaranteed money in a multiyear deal if they want to keep him.

Each side has to understand that two of the NFL commodities currently in great supply are money and running backs. Forte will find another team willing to pay his price if the Bears won’t, and the Bears will find another featured back if Forte won’t accept the price they’re willing to pay him.

Neither side is at fault. This is just sports in the modern era. These people are just trying to support their respective families — he the Fortes and they the McCaskeys.

Matt Forte’s grouchiness last week left him open to charges he’s a bad teammate, if that’s possible in March when teammates are lounging in Hawaii, Aruba and the South of France.

Meanwhile, the Bears are open to charges they’re underpaying a valuable player, if $7.7 million ever could be a lowball salary when in the real world it would feed a village for a lifetime.

It just makes sense for Forte to surrender the option to hold out and for the Bears to surrender the option to hold him hostage for another year.

Once this is settled, we all can proceed to more serious issues like whether paying Brandon Marshall’s bail would count against the Bears’ salary cap. :bah:


mimrem@dailyherald.com

who says we have the cap space to franchise him again next year anyways

I think you either invest long term or trade him.

Here's another angle on the Forte contract dispute that may be a reasonable way to move off the positions that both are seemingly glued to right now. At the very least it may be a catalyst for both sides to review their current positions.

For Forte there is the opportunity to prove once again that he's among the elite RB's in the NFL and deserves a deal commensurate with that. At least this time he won't feel so underpaid while he tries to establish himself that way.

For the Bears the noise and griping goes away, the budget for him is fixed for 2012 and once again they have a very highly motivated Matt Forte on their hands who will be willing to run through brick walls and out run hell hounds for a chance at the bigger better deal.

Now the risks

Maybe Matt needs to have a brief talk with Johnny Knox who turned down $ 4 mil per year in hopes of that BBD and now faces the possibility that not only does he not get $4 mil in 2012 but that he may never get it or ever play the game again. Even if he returns he'll have much to prove before anyone will risk and long term deal for $4 mil per year on him. Matt needs to think about just how close he came to a career ending injury in that KC game and how if he'd have ruptured his ACL we wouldn't be posting about this today.

The Bears have to face the fact that if he proves to be the elite back he believes he is then they will need to fork over $40 mil and change next year or lose him with no compensation at all. Of course they do get the benefit of another outstanding year from him and the time to find a replacement if they do decide to let him go so that's a slight edge because they can still extend him if they chose to. Kind of another "look see" period before committing for good.

I think long before I entertained the idea of trading him, and with the hope of smoothing ruffled feathers for a while, I would at least advance this proposal and see what came from it. The Bears don't want to risk too much on a 4 year vet high mileage back and Forte doesn't want to be played too cheaply in what may be his only opportunity for a lifetime of security so this simple postpones judgement day for a bit so that both sides can reconsider their positions.

There's nothing to say that even with this agreement in place that the two sides can't come to an agreement any time between now and next February. At least this is a new thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motownbear

who says we have the cap space to franchise him again next year anyways

I think you either invest long term or trade him.

---

Nothing says we will or that we won't but if this is what it takes to get the tender signed and the animosity he has over the Bush deal lowered then it's not a bad thought. We can't even trade him if he's not under that franchise tender and until he signs it he's not. That's why all this bullshit about talks to trade him is just hot air.

Isn't this what we did w/T Jones also; the last really good RB we had? Tagged him, and to get him to sign it promised not to do it again?

we did that with briggs. TJ was still under contract when we traded him

I still think the closer it gets to camp and the more he realizes the risks the more likely he is to come to an agreement. Being a holdout or a no show as he puts it will only hurt him in the long run and I don't think it gains him anything in the way of leverage.

I think Emery is a pretty cool operator and I don't believe he'll do anything without a master plan for how it could all work to his benefit including some contingencies. Coming to the agreement suggested is just another way to change the view a little. Before I let him walk for free I'd have a trade plan worked out just in case it comes to that but I sure as hell wouldn't give him away to those rat bastards in New England.