The Bears unwillingness to spend money is definitely a RECENT trend, I am not saying they are a cheap franchise, I am just saying they have been lately (basically since after the Super Bowl ended). The only real things they've done since then is give out one expensive and in my opinion wise contract in Lance Briggs, and some absolutely idiotic contract extensions (Tommie Harris and Brian Urlacher come to mind).

The Harris extension depends on his health I guess. Where the f*** did that guy go? Based on his performance level at the time, it wasn't a bad deal at all. Urlacher on the other hand, that was just... yeah. Had Urlacher not been declining, I would've been ok with it.

The Bears try to keep their team together. It doesn't seem like they spend because there's never too many new guys. It's because guys like Harris, Vasher, Tillman, Clark, Hester, and Urlacher are getting extensions.

100% correct.

The Harris extension depends on his health I guess. Where the f*** did that guy go? Based on his performance level at the time, it wasn't a bad deal at all. Urlacher on the other hand, that was just... yeah. Had Urlacher not been declining, I would've been ok with it.

I dunno...the Harris Deal was signed last offseason. That was what, 1.5 years after his injury, and he hadn't yet shown that he had recovered from it? It was a rough move. You can argue they had no choice, otherwise he'd be on the FA market right now and he might have had a Haynesworth year...but that deal was iffy at the time given the nature of his injury.

 

The Urlacher extension IIRC wasn't a major cap hit, it was a pretty minor increase, and it was for a guy who was really the face of the franchise. I think that one's hard to argue with because it didn't change things much, ifmy memory is accurate.

The Bears were closer to using up their 2008 cap space than any other team in the league. I think 2007 they were close to that as well. Argue that they're putting their money in the wrong places, argue that they're going cheap this year, but the data doesn't back up a claim of cheapness in the last couple.

In 2007 they were using 108 of 109 million I think. 2008 was loaded because Angelo (or Stine which is Angelo by extension) likes to pay a lot of the guaranteed money up front if he can.

The Bears try to keep their team together. It doesn't seem like they spend because there's never too many new guys. It's because guys like Harris, Vasher, Tillman, Clark, Hester, and Urlacher are getting extensions.

 

That is probably where I had the confusion. But most of those extensions were really bad decisions in my opinion, which brings up a seperate but still important problem.

The Bears unwillingness to spend money is definitely a RECENT trend, I am not saying they are a cheap franchise, I am just saying they have been lately (basically since after the Super Bowl ended). The only real things they've done since then is give out one expensive and in my opinion wise contract in Lance Briggs, and some absolutely idiotic contract extensions (Tommie Harris and Brian Urlacher come to mind).

 

It does not matter WHO the spend the money on. They spend money. I was all for the Tommie Harris signing at the time and I know I was not in the minority. They gave Urlacher a little money to shut his mouth. It was either that,trade him or take a chance it would not carry into the season. Sure they were wrong in a couple areas, you can't always bat 1.000. Even New England could have been pretty close to giving Cassell all that money and try to trade him when it is too late. Mistakes happen. It does not mean they don't spend money.

It does not matter WHO the spend the money on. They spend money. I was all for the Tommie Harris signing at the time and I know I was not in the minority. They gave Urlacher a little money to shut his mouth. It was either that,trade him or take a chance it would not carry into the season. Sure they were wrong in a couple areas, you can't always bat 1.000. Even New England could have been pretty close to giving Cassell all that money and try to trade him when it is too late. Mistakes happen. It does not mean they don't spend money.

 

What was Urlacher going to do if they didn't give him a little money to shut up? Nothing, because there is no market for an aging linebacker on the downside of his career with a bad neck. And I think most people were against the Tommie Harris deal at the time because of his injury concerns.

That is probably where I had the confusion. But most of those extensions were really bad decisions in my opinion, which brings up a seperate but still important problem.

It looks worse than it is because some of these guys took the big money and just started sucking immediately after (Vasher), or they gave them when the player looked like they could've just been having a down year (Urlacher, Harris). If these guys maintain their performance levels then the deals look great. The only one who's done that off the top of my head is Alex Brown.

It looks worse than it is because some of these guys took the big money and just started sucking immediately after (Vasher), or they gave them when the player looked like they could've just been having a down year (Urlacher, Harris). If these guys maintain their performance levels then the deals look great. The only one who's done that off the top of my head is Alex Brown.

 

That is correct, and even Alex Brown has always had an overrated performance level IMO (his career high in sacks for a single season is 7).

Edited April 1, 200917 yr by whitesoxfan101

That is correct, and even Alex Brown has always had an overrated performance level IMO (his career high in sacks for a single season is 7).

Brown is a pretty good all-around DE though. Not a Pro Bowler but a solid starter.

I guess I'm alone with the Harris signing. I was ecstatic at the time. He was a premier DT who was 24 at the time of the signing.

That is correct, and even Alex Brown has always had an overrated performance level IMO (his career high in sacks for a single season is 7).

 

You must not watch the games. Alex Brown is underrated because most fans LIKE YOU judge a DE solely on their sack numbers.

I guess I'm alone with the Harris signing. I was ecstatic at the time. He was a premier DT who was 24 at the time of the signing.

His injury just worried me too much. I don't see their medical reports and I don't see him in practice, but that was a bizarre, possibly career-threatening injury and he was signed before he showed any sign that he'd be back to his old form.

 

He might prove the doubters wrong this year, especially if the team coaches better.

I guess I'm alone with the Harris signing. I was ecstatic at the time. He was a premier DT who was 24 at the time of the signing.

No, you're not alone. And in the places I go to talk about the Bears, they were happy too. His injury wasn't really being talked about then, not until a few games into the season where you saw his picture on the back of milk cartons everywhere.

You must not watch the games. Alex Brown is underrated because most fans LIKE YOU judge a DE solely on their sack numbers.

 

Who are you, Greg Blache (who once said "sacks aren't important.) Sacks aren't solely the way to judge a defensive end, but any d end who puts up 5 or 6 a year like Alex Brown is EASILY replaceable. Most good franchises just let guys like him go without batting an eye and replace them with cheaper draft picks.

Who are you, Greg Blache (who once said "sacks aren't important.) Sacks aren't solely the way to judge a defensive end, but any d end who puts up 5 or 6 a year like Alex Brown is EASILY replaceable. Most good franchises just let guys like him go without batting an eye and replace them with cheaper draft picks.

 

Sacks are very important. There are so many intangibles. Are you willing to say Michael Strahan's record breaking sack season was the best single season ever for a DE?

 

What is more important, 3 sacks in garbage time when your up 38-0 or a blocked fg to send your team into overtime with playoff chances on the line?

 

 

 

This is Alex Browns game. He is very scappy and makes things happen.

<!--quoteo(post=1856979:date=Mar 31, 2009 -> 11:01 PM:name=whitesoxfan101)-->

<!--quotec-->Who are you, Greg Blache (who once said "sacks aren't important.) Sacks aren't solely the way to judge a defensive end, but any d end who puts up 5 or 6 a year like Alex Brown is EASILY replaceable. Most good franchises just let guys like him go without batting an eye and replace them with cheaper draft picks.

 

Sacks are very important. There are so many intangibles. Are you willing to say Michael Strahan's record breaking sack season was the best single season ever for a DE?

 

What is more important, 3 sacks in garbage time when your up 38-0 or a blocked fg to send your team into overtime with playoff chances on the line?

 

 

 

This is Alex Browns game. He is very scappy and makes things happen.

 

I'm not going to argue with this, but it doesn't change the fact that Alex Brown is a very replaceable player. He's solid against the run and "scrappy", but a guy like that who has 5 or 6 sacks a year comes a dime a dozen in the NFL.

Edited April 1, 200917 yr by whitesoxfan101

Alex Brown is one of the Bears most underrated players.

 

Playing DE is also about stopping the run and taking care of your responsibilities (cutback).

 

Mark Anderson may have had a ton of sacks, but when they started him he gave up way to many huge runs on cutbacks. He deflects passes, etc. For his price tag he is a pretty good deal.

I'm not going to argue with this, but it doesn't change the fact that Alex Brown is a very replaceable player. He's solid against the run and "scrappy", but a guy like that who has 5 or 6 sacks a year comes a dime a dozen in the NFL.

 

He is not a dime a dozen. Batted passes are pretty damn important.

He is not a dime a dozen. Batted passes are pretty damn important.

 

Alright fine, a quarter a dozen because he can bat down passes.

Alright fine, a quarter a dozen because he can bat down passes.

 

Ok I want my Quarter back Now.

 

 

Can you make it Cutler?

Alex Brown was underrated like 3 years ago when he was constantly in the backfield pressuring the qb (even if he didnt have the inflated sack total)....now hes slow and gets garbage sacks and hardly applies any pressure and is overrated. He plays the run as well as any DE in the league, i'll grant him that...but in the tampa 2....you better be in that backfield forcing quick throws, forcing the pocket to collapse and/hurrying the qb and forcing him to move or your zone is gonna be exposed and picked apart....and thats exactly what happened last year....Strahan is a bad example cuz he was beast at getting to the QB and was also good vs. the run. A better example is Freeney, who couldn't do s*** in his career vs. the run.

The Broncos want a 1st in 09 and in 2010 plus a 2nd rounder this season.

 

And the Bears could have a valuable pick in #18. Why? Because that's 1 pick ahead of Tampa Bay, who themselves are looking for a young QB.

 

The Broncos could take Freeman at #18 in a trade with the Bears.

The Broncos want a 1st in 09 and in 2010 plus a 2nd rounder this season.

 

And the Bears could have a valuable pick in #18. Why? Because that's 1 pick ahead of Tampa Bay, who themselves are looking for a young QB.

 

The Broncos could take Freeman at #18 in a trade with the Bears.

The Bears need to negotiate that down a bit, but its not totally unreasonable.