Thread: Coach vague about Brian Urlacher

I don't see the lack of comment as the "Red Flag" that some do. FA period hasn't started and the staff has to look at the bigger picture to see what they can afford to do with different players contracts. We have a VERY GOOD CAP specialist and many FA's to figure out. IMHO they will offer Brian a 1 or 2 year deal that is cap friendly and allow them to sign Melton and the rest of their own FA's along with maybe picking a couple more up. This will also allow his replacement to develop and transition smoothly when he retires as a Bear. It's just way too early in the process at this time.

Originally Posted by omc1969

I don't see the lack of comment as the "Red Flag" that some do. FA period hasn't started and the staff has to look at the bigger picture to see what they can afford to do with different players contracts. We have a VERY GOOD CAP specialist and many FA's to figure out. IMHO they will offer Brian a 1 or 2 year deal that is cap friendly and allow them to sign Melton and the rest of their own FA's along with maybe picking a couple more up. This will also allow his replacement to develop and transition smoothly when he retires as a Bear. It's just way too early in the process at this time.

I totally agree.

We really don't know squat regarding Urlacher yet. My guess though, is that he'll come back and be fine for this year - play wise & financial wise. It will work out.

There are a lot of variables that are unknowns right now, like you mentioned. As the next few months unfold we'll see the picture become clearer. The new coaches are probably still evaluating existing talent on the team - and I love the idea that the players are getting a fresh evaluation from objective sources. No more buddy system coupled with "Lovie's Doghouse" that skewed things. It sure looks like Trestman is an intelligent football-mind that will figure out our shopping list. Some of the shopping items we need will be picked up at the "FA Store" and then what's left over will have to come from the friendly "Draft Store" - followed up with a 2nd FA shopping spree once some team's players are let go between now and training camp (it's the "bargain bin" of the NFL year when this happens).

Good stuff though.

Vague = Playing cards close to the chest.

It doesnt make much business sense to let other teams know what your intentions are towards your FAs.

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

If Urlacher does not resign w/the Bears how does that effect FA or the draft? No way we go into next year standing pat at MLB w/no Urlacher.

I think there's a vry good chance he'll be back but if you want sign then watch what happens with Roach. He's the #2 MLB and also a UFA. They won't let both go although they may want Urlacher to shop himself to get an idea of what his market value truly is so they can agree on a number.

I'm sure Emery and his guys have there eyes on some young UFA MLB and rookie prospects as well. If there's a guy they like they'll go after him but chances are pretty good Urlacher will be back this year. If not then you Roach is he's resigned and after that DeCicco and Costanza.

Okay guys, this speculation is really silly. This defense is not anywhere near the same without Urlacher, Roach is trash at the spot (oh yeah, i forgot he gets like 7 more tackles a game when he plays MLB!!!) and wasn't Urlacher saying before the season started that he maybe had one or two years left in him, anyway? Even if Lovie hadn't left, Urlacher "gave away" his leverage before the season began. Odds are, he along with Marshall and Cutler, don't value being the highest paid anymore, as they all really want to win a championship. There are only 2 other 4-3 defenses on championship quality teams that any good (Denver, Seattle), but even if they were to want Urlacher, that would mean he was in it for the money and they can't even afford him. Don't give me the "well, he might wanna play a 3-4" because you don't know that. While i'm speculating over why Urlacher would choose to stay with the Bears, that is because I'm only using words he's said, not ones I'd imagine he would say. He's more valuable to Chicago than any other team, and Chicago needs him more than any other team. People like to remember the "Kreutz" situation as one Angelo screwed up by "LOLballing" him, but many neglect to remember that he was GARBAGE his last year here and we needed to move on from him anyway. He also never said the things Urlacher did, that would signal to people he would consider taking a lower number. That wasn't Angelo's fault, but if you believe it is, then you also likely believe Emery is better (I think i'm one of the 3-4 that haven't annointed Emery as our savior after the last season) and wouldn't low ball such a valued player.

Henry some of what you say I agree with and some I don't but I think you have the logic surrounding the Urlacher situation nailed pretty good. After struggling all season long to play while recovering from his knee surgery and not being in top condition the last thing he needed was that hammy injury late in the season of a crucial contract year. It threw up even more red flags and precautions.

I believe these two statements to be true.

Even if Lovie hadn't left, Urlacher "gave away" his leverage before the season began. Odds are, he along with Marshall and Cutler, don't value being the highest paid anymore, as they all really want to win a championship.

If Urlacher wanted to play the hard ball negotiation game he wouldn't have been saying all along that he wanted to return, the Bears have always treated him square money wise and he feels he should do the same, he's willing to play for a "discount", blah, blah, blah. My interpretation of that is, "hey I want to play and I want to play in Chicago so what can you afford to give me"? He's basically put the ball in their court and given them all of the advantage to go along with it. So I don't think Emery is worried about his playing elsewhere it's more about what's our overall plan for MLB now and in a year or two from now. If he spends a high pick on one then he almost has to play the guy or is it in the back of his mind to move McClellin to MLB?

All three of those guys are probably closer to a ring in Chicago then they might be anywhere else and I agree. Being the highest paid guy on a bad team doesn't interest them and it seldom does with great players. Winning and being paid fairly is what counts most to them. I don't know what they'll finally agree to but it seems to me that if Trestman sought him out to talk about the team then he's not planning on dumping him. I don't see that logic in that.

It all comes down to the big picture. How much $$$ for how much longer and how do we replace another Bears HOF LB? I think those things are what they're mulling over right now.

Yeah, i see the ONLY reason Urlacher doesn't come back is because his body just doesn't have it anymore. I could see some Jacksonville type team wanting him to get ticket sales going, as well as the potential to teach young players new things, but why the hell would he spend his last season on such a crappy team? BTW, in case the above post sounded like an attack on anyone, it wasn't; the thought just came to me, and it honestly makes sense.

Another way to look at Urlacher's situation(pure speculation), and why he'll probably stay in Chicago is to compare it to another Hall of Famer: Tony Gonzalez. If the Chiefs were as consistently good as they were in the early part of the last decade, no way he leaves. He's one of the greatest (and the best at TE, bar none), already has the accolades, money and nothing else to prove; nothing besides a championship kept him in the NFL the last few years, and may bring him back one last time. I think if Lovie had been fired after a disastrous season, I'd be on the other side of this argument (he'd either retire/go to another team), but the guy really wants to win a championship, and the '06 season is not what a player of his caliber wants as the pinnacle of his success.

I know that he wants to play and he wants to play badly but badly enough to play somewhere else? I don't think so but you can never say never for a guy who's as much of a warrior as he is. It may come down to saying OK Brian one more year or one year at a time and making him an offer like we did with Izzy although maybe the price would be a little higher....or maybe not.

This is a little like a Brett Favre kind of think but with the drama and Favre's ego involved. The pause for the cause gives both sides sometime to think it all through. No matter where Brian plays you know that he's gonna retire as a Chicago Bear so from my point of view it makes little sense to force him to play out his last year or possibly two on another team. He believes he can still play and lead that defense to a championship and I really don't doubt that.

Ray Lewis isn't the player he once was either but there's no doubt in my mind that Baltimore carried a "let's win one for Ray" mentality into the playoffs and that SB game. I still say 80% of Urlacher is still better than 100% of our options right now.