Bears best move is the one they didn't make

**short faced bear** · 03-14-2013, 07:54 PM

Dan McNeil

7:19 p.m. CDT, March 14, 2013

Even the most pessimistic types have to tip the cap to the Bears for the big splash they made as free-agency season opened this week.

Martellus Bennett has a chance to be more of a difference-maker at tight end than the Bears have had since Mike Ditka.

As a bonus, Bennett, who joins his third team in seven years, seems delightfully flaky.

Jermon Bushrod gives the Bears something they haven't had since John Tait — a professional offensive tackle. Marc Trestman's offensive line is going to need more than just one newbie, but the former Saint instantly makes the Bears better up front, and his position — left tackle — isn't going to be changed. No more "Musical Bears."

What has me grinning, however, is the move the Bears didn't make. They let Tuesday's 3 p.m. opening bell for the meat market come and go without reupping with middle linebacker Brian Urlacher.

How refreshing. General manager Phil Emery, devoid of sentiment, willfully invited one of Chicago's favorite sons to hit the bricks. Bravo.

It's true the Bears have not prepared for life without Urlacher, but I like the calculated gamble. Urlacher's camp was seeking $5 million.

It's a good thing Emery didn't consider public opinion and blindly cling to the best player in a Bears uniform over the last 25 years.

Let the Vikings overpay for a 35-year-old, once-great player who is destined to spend training camp in an ice tub. Whether it's Minnesota, Dallas or Arizona (all rumored to be interested), it's a lock Urlacher's new best friend will be the trainer.

Emery, now in his second year, perhaps learned from the mistake he made last offseason. I suspected the two-year contract he extended to Matt Forte was an effort to keep peace in the locker room, where Forte has been popular.

This isn't hindsight. I said it and wrote it before the deal. The Bears would have been smart to put the franchise tag on Forte and let him prove his chops one more year before making a large commitment.

The NFL isn't a business that lends itself to sentimentality. I marvel at some of those who've used words like "disrespectul" and "insulting" when analyzing Urlacher's financial arrangement with the Bears.

Was the moody Hall of Fame-bound linebacker "respectful" of his employer when he whined and threatened to hold out — while under contract — a half-dozen years ago? Foolishly, Jerry Angelo placated Urlacher and gave him several million dollars when he wasn't even obligated to buy him dinner.

If Urlacher's teammates are "hurt" by his departure, they'll get over it. Those veterans who remain — Lance Briggs, Charles Tillman, Julius Peppers, maybe Israel Idonije — will be banging heads to protect their own financial futures.

And it's likely at least three of those players won't even be wearing football gear when the contracts of Emery and Trestman reach maturation.

The guys who wear helmets are expendable. Those who wear hats and neckties aren't.

The GM and the new coach are on the most solid ground that exists at Halas Hall. It's a breath of fresh air they're acting like it.

When Urlacher, with bad knees, hamstrings, a surgically repairing cervical spine and who knows what else, calls it quits, it then will be time to throw bouquets at him for his remarkable Bears career. Now is not the time to honor what he was.

What he will be is the guy in Bennett's rearview mirror when the tight end gets behind him in coverage and burns the once-special linebacker.

If Urlacher wears purple, Bennett and his new teammates will have two chances to do that next season.

If, that is, Urlacher dresses for both NFC North meetings.

Chicago Bears: Bear best move was not re-upping Brian Urlacher - chicagotribune.com

**wannabe** · 03-14-2013, 10:01 PM

Dang, this guy doesn't like Urlacher too much, does he?

**Papa Bear** · 03-14-2013, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by wannabe

Dang, this guy doesn't like Urlacher too much, does he?

I don't know that he doesn't like Urlacher. This is probably more a response to all of the meatheads that call into his radio show spouting off about needing to bring BU back at all costs.

**kevperro** · 03-14-2013, 11:30 PM

I think Lach has been a fantastic Bear and I genuinely hope he retires a Bear but... let's face it. This is a business and you don't get paid for yesterday's greatness.

It is best to understand that as a player and take advantage of your options while in your prime. In the twilight years of your career you may get a chance to play year-year for a few extra dollars for the highest bidder but I don't really see why a HOF player would need to. You hopefully have made enough money and handled it correctly so you can play your last years where you want to play.

Welker impressed me..... he supposedly turned down more money and went to a team where he thought he had a chance at a ring. I think it is a smart move and one I respect even though he left the team/system where he enjoyed his success. So it isn't so much being loyal to a team but being loyal to your priorities.

Urlacher going to the Vikings would be going to a team solidly in rebuilding mode with little chance of a SB. He would be leaving a Bears team that wants and needs him and has in my opinion a much better chance of earning a ring. Why would you make that move?

**BossK** · 03-14-2013, 11:39 PM

That is a nudge out the door from a jackass reporter. Way to gently push 54 away by insulting him publicly, something Emery said the organization would not do (which they aren't, and likely won't). Nobody is saying meet his every demand or overpay him, but many feel that we would like 54 back manning the middle for at least one more year in the hopes of getting him a ring before he retires, as a Bear. There is no need for the acrimony. STFU Dan McNeil

**soulman** · 03-15-2013, 12:01 AM

Whether we re-sign Urlacher or not it's a crappy piece. Wishing one of your HOF icon MLB well when he dons purple and gold? Come one man! I'm not always looking for "homer" sentiments but this isn't news is the expression of an opinion, and a critical one at that, from a guy who for whatever reason doesn't like Urlacher and based on an article like this it may be for a good reason that Urlacher doesn't like him or give him the time of day either.

The NFL isn't a business that lends itself to sentimentality. I marvel at some of those who've used words like "disrespectul" and "insulting" when analyzing Urlacher's financial arrangement with the Bears. (So tell us something we don't already know and those you marvel at are just taking an opposing viewpoint to your own. You're an f'n sportswriter not an editorial columist. Grow the fuck up.)

Was the moody Hall of Fame-bound linebacker "respectful" of his employer when he whined and threatened to hold out — while under contract — a half-dozen years ago? Foolishly, Jerry Angelo placated Urlacher and gave him several million dollars when he wasn't even obligated to buy him dinner. (Oh for crap sake are you my ex-wife? If you're not you bring up ancient history just like she did. If you want to bitch about that the time to have done it was then not now. This is like writing a current critical review of The Godfather III and it's a little late for that don'tcha think? Besides he already addressed that issue already himself when he said he was willing to play for less because the Bears were good to him when he behaved like a "spoiled brat" (I believe those were his words) then so what's the point in YOU bringing it up? That's called piling on and it's a shitty way to write and article.)

Dan McNeil is a hose-bag sportswriter and radio show host who isn't even a regular Bears columnist. Put him and Rosenbloom in a room together and let them churn out all the negativity they want. Neither of them know enough about NFL football to even express an intelligent opinion about it so instead the Trib sets them to writing rants that aren't any better than blogger level crap. McNeil is an asshat.

If I'm gonna read rants I'd rather read jackiejokeman's.

**matsellah** · 03-15-2013, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by wannabe

Dang, this guy doesn't like Urlacher too much, does he?

No, he doesn't. Hasn't for many years now.

Originally Posted by Papa Bear

I don't know that he doesn't like Urlacher. This is probably more a response to all of the meatheads that call into his radio show spouting off about needing to bring BU back at all costs.

Possibly. More than likely what it is, is McNeil's continued ripping of Urlacher that started just a few years after Urlacher got drafted (shows you this guy's brilliance). It really took off for him when 'Lach held out in '08. Most people aren't aware that 'Lach asked for big money but wound up taking an offer from Angelo that was only slightly higher than The Bears initial offer.

The guy is local, been bouncing around Chicago stations for like... 30 years or so. He's a regular joe, a bit of a doofus and talks out his ass a lot.

Only difference is, this time his ragging of 'Lach might be more credible with current perception. Yay, McNeil... your flag is finally flying. You're still a tool.

And a jagbag.

**trackguy** · 03-15-2013, 07:16 AM

Originally Posted by matsellah

No, he doesn't. Hasn't for many years now.

Possibly. More than likely what it is, is McNeil's continued ripping of Urlacher that started just a few years after Urlacher got drafted (shows you this guy's brilliance). It really took off for him when 'Lach held out in '08. Most people aren't aware that 'Lach asked for big money but wound up taking an offer from Angelo that was only slightly higher than The Bears initial offer.

The guy is local, been bouncing around Chicago stations for like... 30 years or so. He's a regular joe, a bit of a doofus and talks out his ass a lot.

Only difference is, this time his ragging of 'Lach might be more credible with current perception. Yay, McNeil... your flag is finally flying. You're still a tool.

And a jagbag.

McNeil's stance wasn't as bad as Mike North's. I remember he championed for the Bears to draft Sebastian Janikowski with that pick. His rationale...the Bears lost 3 games that year due to missed field goals and that was the difference between making the playoffs and not.

North is a certified idiot, most people realize that. What confounded me was his stubbornness on the topic. When confronted with his asertion several years later (after Urlacher had already made several pro bowl visits), he still insisted he was right. lol. Moron.

**trackguy** · 03-15-2013, 07:20 AM

While I'm not a huge McNeil fan, I agree with him for the most part. I'm not totally opposed to bringing Urlacher back. But I want Emery to do...well, exactly what he appears to be doing. Be methodical. Determine how much you feel Urlacher has left in the tank, then ascribe a value to that. Compare that to your cap space and what that means in opportunity cost (who you can't sign if you do re-sign Urlacher) then make a decision. If a team like the Vikings wants to throw money at him....congratulations, Brian, we wish you the best.

**matsellah** · 03-15-2013, 07:53 AM

That may be all well and good. And I have no love for North.

We're talking McNeil here. The guy that's been on Urlacher's jock since 2007. You talk about stubbornness, here's a guy who was ripping Urlacher... when he was a Pro Bowler! 'Lach was in his prime in 07-08 and dipshit was using him as his banner for fame.

"Hmmm. I need to hitch a controversy wagon to a Chicago sports personality, so I can gain some exposure. Who shall that be?" *SNAP!* "I know! I'll complain about The Best Player The Chicago Bears have had in the past 25 years!"

Freakin' genius, right? Mental giant.

And we're suppose to take time and read his tripe?

Okay, McNeil rant over.

Right now, with Urlacher, I think this is the dance of death. I mean, I think both the player and the team realize the marriage is over. We all want it to continue, but if it has to end, we want it to end amicably, with class and a healthy dollup of honor, respect and a serious recognition of loyalty. The classiest way is to resign him for 2 seasons; the first for him to give it his all in one last shot at glory while he's still got something in the tank (and he does). The 2nd for him to pass the torch.

Because, after all, this is 54. The leader of the defense.

The defense. The Bear Defense.

You guys do remember the Bear defense.

Don't care? Means nothing? Attention span of a squirrel-culture.

Whatever. Me & McNeil are gonna go get a beer and yell at each other.

/end

Thread: Bears best move is the one they didn't make

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Bears best move is the one they didn't make

Posting Permissions