Lance Briggs Quote

[RockRaines]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2788148

 

 

Under the right circumstances, two-time Pro Bowl linebacker Lance Briggs could play his entire career with the Chicago Bears, and be a happy man.

 

"The Chicago Bears team? The coaches, players, city and fans? Yeah, I could stay there forever. I love it. But the Chicago Bears organization? I don't want to be there anymore. I won't play for them and I'll do everything in my power to keep from playing there."

-- Lance Briggs

 

Under the restrictive terms of the franchise designation with which the Bears have marked him, though, and with the defending NFC champions apparently offering him nothing more than the one-year option it entails, Briggs said Sunday evening that he doesn't want to play another day for the club that brought him into the league in 2003.

 

"There's a difference between the Chicago Bears team and the Chicago Bears organization," Briggs told ESPN.com, when reached Sunday evening at his home in suburban Chicago. "The Chicago Bears team? The coaches, players, city and fans? Yeah, I could stay there forever. I love it. But the Chicago Bears organization? I don't want to be there anymore. I won't play for them and I'll do everything in my power to keep from playing there."

 

In a 30-minute conversation by phone, Briggs -- distressed by the restrictions of the NFL franchise tag, by his inability to shop himself in the free agent market, and by the recent departure of defensive coordinator Ron Rivera -- offered his first insights into his current situation.

 

And he offered, Briggs said, what is the only truly viable solution to an untenable circumstance.

 

"They need to either [rescind] the franchise tag, and let me move on, or trade me to another team," Briggs said. "Because that's about the only way this thing can have any kind of a positive resolution."

 

Having failed last spring to consummate a long-term contract with Briggs -- reportedly a six-year, $33 million deal on which both sides worked for several weeks before the negotiations collapsed -- the Bears employed the franchise tag last week to keep the four-year veteran off the open market.

 

It marked the first time under the stewardship of general manager Jerry Angelo, who in the past has acknowledged the potential acrimony that accompanies the franchise marker, the Bears have used the restriction.

 

The qualifying offer for a franchise linebacker is $7.206 million, the average of the top five highest paid players at the position. But only three days into free agency, top defenders such as cornerback Nate Clements (with San Francisco), edge rusher Adalius Thomas (New England) and middle linebacker London Fletcher-Baker (Washington) have signed lucrative contracts with new teams.

 

Sitting at home, watching the free agency parade pass him by, Briggs became, he acknowledged, increasingly frustrated by his lot. And not just, he emphasized, by the financial implications of the situation.

 

"You hate to get into that whole 'lack of respect' thing," Briggs said. "But you play four years for a team, do your best, exceed their expectations, right? And every year, it's like, 'You played great, Lance.' And they kind of dangle the carrot, like they're going to take care of you, and then it doesn't happen. I mean, I was a middle-round pick and I've played well for them. Four years and at just middle-round salaries. I haven't caused any kinds of problems. I've done everything they asked and them some. And I don't know if I ever really knew where I stood with them until they put the tag on me."

 

A former Arizona standout, Briggs was chosen by the Bears in the third round of the 2003 draft. He earned a starting job as a rookie, emerged by his third seasons as one of the NFL's top young weakside 'backers, and was chosen for the Pro Bowl in each of the past two seasons.

 

Even playing in the lengthy shadow of middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, with whom he has become close friends, Briggs is regarded leaguewide as a top defender and playmaker.

 

He did sit out the voluntary portion of the team's offseason workouts last spring, it should be noted, but reported for the mandatory workouts and was in training camp on time.

 

There is little doubt that if Briggs was in the unrestricted pool right now, he would be a coveted player. But the Bears seem inclined to force him to play for the one-year franchise offer and there have been no discussions on a long-term deal since last spring. Under the current rules, Chicago has until July 16 to sign Briggs to a longer deal or he must play 2007 for the franchise number.

 

Which is something, Briggs said Sunday night, he won't do.

 

"It's a great bunch of guys with a great future, but I can't see myself as being part of that future anymore," Briggs said. "Whatever options are available to me, I'll take advantage of them. But going back and playing for the Bears again, no, I don't see that as an option. Not one more day. Not at all."

 

 

Looks like Rosenhaus is giving him bad advice.

[Felix]

Have a nice life Briggs. It was nice having him in the system, but thats just what it is... a system. He can be replaced.

Edited March 5, 2007 by Felix

[RockRaines]

Have a nice life Briggs. It was nice having him in the system, but thats just what it is... a system. He can be replaced.

There are clearly good LB's in free agency. But how could he be unhappy about getting paid in the same level at the top 5 at the position? He wants a 6 year deal for twice what they almost agreed on before? Thats ridiculous.

[EvilMonkey]

respect does not equal money. And maybe they would have taken care of him like they have with most of their players if he wasn't b****ing about it all the time.

Edited March 5, 2007 by Alpha Dog

[Balance]

I have a hard time finding any sympathy for someone who's going to make $7 mil next year and cry poor.

[RockRaines]

I have a hard time finding any sympathy for someone who's going to make $7 mil next year and cry poor.

No kidding. What does he really expect. I mean, sure, we will send you to the raiders or the Lions, happy career.

[Balta1701]

No kidding. What does he really expect. I mean, sure, we will send you to the raiders or the Lions, happy career.

See, everyone disagrees with me until there's a player's name attached.

[GoodAsGould]

Yeah I cant really feel any sympathy for a guy getting paid 7.2 million and is in the top5 paid players of his position.

[Scwible]

Cry me a river briggs. Now i know the bears do kinda suck as an organization and they don't do the right things sometimes but he could not have this career and go make 7.50/hr. I hate when people b**** about not getting paid.

[CanOfCorn]

Should we blame Lovie and his agent for this one? Because remember Lovie's agent went public. Not that Drew Rosenhaus needs any impetus to go public or anything. But, I wonder if Lance saw Lovie use the press as a power play and decided that if it worked for him, it'll work for me.

 

Buh bye, Lance. Rod Wilson is waiting for your job.

 

AND...why do players think sitting out a year helps their respect level? You aren't playing and you're being a baby...I wouldn't want that player on my team.

[DrunkBomber]

I may be alone here but i cant say i blame him. I think holding out is a little extreme but he was denied his shot at an open market. Sure he wants a ton of money but thats his right, and if theres a team willing to pay him that then oh well. What if he gets injured this year? He doesn't have any guaranteed money or a guaranteed contract. I know if I was a professional athlete I would try my best to stay with the same team but if I was ever franchised it would piss me off too.

[EvilMonkey]

I may be alone here but i cant say i blame him. I think holding out is a little extreme but he was denied his shot at an open market. Sure he wants a ton of money but thats his right, and if theres a team willing to pay him that then oh well. What if he gets injured this year? He doesn't have any guaranteed money or a guaranteed contract. I know if I was a professional athlete I would try my best to stay with the same team but if I was ever franchised it would piss me off too.

He's not playing by the rules. How can you NOT blame him? "I don't like the way the rules are affecting me, so I'll just hold out". Way to be a role model, lance. He had an opportunity for guaranteed money and a big contract. He wanted more. His right, his gamble. As for guaranteed contracts, noone in their last year has a guaranteed contract. Should everyone in their last year hold out for extensions? bears are following the rules and franchised him. If he doesn't play, that speaks very loudly towards his character. Suck it up, eat Easymac for a year and get by on your $7 million.

[CanOfCorn]

I may be alone here but i cant say i blame him. I think holding out is a little extreme but he was denied his shot at an open market. Sure he wants a ton of money but thats his right, and if theres a team willing to pay him that then oh well. What if he gets injured this year? He doesn't have any guaranteed money or a guaranteed contract. I know if I was a professional athlete I would try my best to stay with the same team but if I was ever franchised it would piss me off too.

 

Not to mention, his own players association agreed to Franchise and Transition Tags in the collective bargaining agreement. I can't believe Gene Upshaw doesn't get up these guys' arses about this. It's not only making a mockery of himself, but he's pissing on the NFLPA.

[RockRaines]

I blame him. Hes going to get paid as a top 5 player at his position. he is not a top 5 player at his position. He is getting paid as much as he should if not more. Agents are ruining sports.

[DrunkBomber]

Its a nice thought that stuff like this wouldnt happen but lets be realistic, it obviously is. Just as we have the RIGHT to franchise him he has the RIGHT to hold out. I dont like it and I wish it would be easier to keep players around but its not.

 

What did we expect was gonna happen with a Rosenhaus client? Im glad we franchised him though so we can get something for him in a trade but we knew the Bears were never gonna pony up the money to keep him here.

 

Is it greedy? yes. is it bad for the Bears? yes. It happens every day though. Look at what Plummer is doing right now. Look at what T.O. does everywhere. Whether we like it or not, players want to go where they can get the most money and this is a business. Just like it was a business move to franchise him for us, for him its a business move to threaten to hold out. Both sides are doing whats best for them.

 

If this is the situation were gonna have with him in the future maybe its better we trade him anyways.

[CanOfCorn]

Its a nice thought that stuff like this wouldnt happen but lets be realistic, it obviously is. Just as we have the RIGHT to franchise him he has the RIGHT to hold out. I dont like it and I wish it would be easier to keep players around but its not.

 

What did we expect was gonna happen with a Rosenhaus client? Im glad we franchised him though so we can get something for him in a trade but we knew the Bears were never gonna pony up the money to keep him here.

 

Is it greedy? yes. is it bad for the Bears? yes. It happens every day though. Look at what Plummer is doing right now. Look at what T.O. does everywhere. Whether we like it or not, players want to go where they can get the most money and this is a business. Just like it was a business move to franchise him for us, for him its a business move to threaten to hold out. Both sides are doing whats best for them.

 

If this is the situation were gonna have with him in the future maybe its better we trade him anyways.

 

You are right, he does have a right to holdout...although, it does him no good at all. Doesn't up his value "working out with a trainer," instead of actually playing. And the NFLPA agreed to this CBA. You don't like it, Lance? Be a player's rep and fight to get the tags taken off. Until then, deal with it and shut the f*** up.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are clearly good LB's in free agency. But how could he be unhappy about getting paid in the same level at the top 5 at the position? He wants a 6 year deal for twice what they almost agreed on before? Thats ridiculous.

 

I am sure he wants a long term deal. He wants the big signing bonus. He wants security. In other words - B O O H O O.

 

 

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I may be alone here but i cant say i blame him. I think holding out is a little extreme but he was denied his shot at an open market. Sure he wants a ton of money but thats his right, and if theres a team willing to pay him that then oh well. What if he gets injured this year? He doesn't have any guaranteed money or a guaranteed contract. I know if I was a professional athlete I would try my best to stay with the same team but if I was ever franchised it would piss me off too.

 

So it is the Bears fault that the NFL created the franchise tag? The Bears are not allowed to use the franchise tag now because it may upset someone because they are not allowed to hit the open market? Give me a break.

[DrunkBomber]

You are right, he does have a right to holdout...although, it does him no good at all. Doesn't up his value "working out with a trainer," instead of actually playing. And the NFLPA agreed to this CBA. You don't like it, Lance? Be a player's rep and fight to get the tags taken off. Until then, deal with it and shut the f*** up.

I completely agree. However, you know there will always be a team out there willing to overpay for top notch athletes. All hes getting accomplished for sure is a change of scenery.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 03:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its a nice thought that stuff like this wouldnt happen but lets be realistic, it obviously is. Just as we have the RIGHT to franchise him he has the RIGHT to hold out. I dont like it and I wish it would be easier to keep players around but its not.

 

What did we expect was gonna happen with a Rosenhaus client? Im glad we franchised him though so we can get something for him in a trade but we knew the Bears were never gonna pony up the money to keep him here.

 

Is it greedy? yes. is it bad for the Bears? yes. It happens every day though. Look at what Plummer is doing right now. Look at what T.O. does everywhere. Whether we like it or not, players want to go where they can get the most money and this is a business. Just like it was a business move to franchise him for us, for him its a business move to threaten to hold out. Both sides are doing whats best for them.

 

If this is the situation were gonna have with him in the future maybe its better we trade him anyways.

 

He has the right to hold out, but then he also is forfeiting his pay. That is his right, but that is pretty freaking stupid. Let me sit out and not get 7.5 million dollars this year? Then the Bears can franchise him again next year just to prove a point - which I would do. Yeah, I feel real bad for Lance Briggs.

 

By the way, everyone hates TO for this reason and a lot of people lost what little respect they had for Jake Plummer when he did what he did. Briggs is looking like a baby. Like he is trying to take his ball and go home.

[RockRaines]

I think Porter is going to make less on the market than Briggs is trying for at this point.

[knightni]

Poor Millionaire, can't feed his family.

[whitesoxfan101]

When Briggs turned down that very fair offer of 5 years at over 6 million a year a while back, he should have known this was the risk he was taking. However with that said, all those Bears fans who think Briggs can just be replaced by a Leon Joe or Jamar Williams are sadly mistaken. There is a reason this team was bad in-between Holdman and Colvin leaving and Briggs emerging, and it's not just the QB.

 

And this whole thing is pretty simple, it's about signing bonus. The 7.5 million number means nothing, just like the 80 million dollar number for Nate Clements means nothing. The only number in football that matters is singing bonus (aka guaranteed money), and Briggs isn't getting any here, hence the holdout.

Edited March 5, 2007 by whitesoxfan101

[DBAHO]

When Briggs turned down that very fair offer of 5 years at over 6 million a year a while back, he should have known this was the risk he was taking. However with that said, all those Bears fans who think Briggs can just be replaced by a Leon Joe or Jamar Williams are sadly mistaken. There is a reason this team was bad in-between Holdman and Colvin leaving and Briggs emerging, and it's not just the QB.

Briggs has probably seen what Adalius Thomas got, and is upset he can't get that type of long - term deal from someone, because the Bears won't let him.

[RockRaines]

Briggs has probably seen what Adalius Thomas got, and is upset he can't get that type of long - term deal from someone, because the Bears won't let him.

The funny thing is, in theory, that longevity means nothing at all. Its basically a bunch of one year deals in the NFL.

[whitesoxfan101]

Briggs has probably seen what Adalius Thomas got, and is upset he can't get that type of long - term deal from someone, because the Bears won't let him.

 

Well as much as I love Briggs, he can't hold the jock strap of Adalius Thomas, so if he wants that kind of money, I hope he enjoys that pipedream. But your right that he wants the long term deal (singing bonus), that's why he's pissed. What if he goes out and destroys his ACL and never returns to form a la Colvin? I can see his point of view here.

 

The funny thing is, in theory, that longevity means nothing at all. Its basically a bunch of one year deals in the NFL.

Yeah but Briggs would get probably 20 milllion in guaranteed paper on the open market, plus at least 18 milllon more in salary since I doubt he gets cut after less than 3 years. That is what he is thinking here.