shipps Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 03:57 PM) This is what the common sense interpretation of what we just saw today would be. A respectful farewell to one of the best players in recent franchise history. Nope. They should have low balled him and pissed him off enough so that he is publicly bitter until the next regime comes in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 03:18 PM) I bet you were saying that the Bears should get rid of Thomas Jones and keep Cedric Benson. Cause you know, RBs over 30 are always worse than younger rbs. LOL HAHAHA HAHAHAHA Paying 30 year old RB's rarely works out. The Bears agree with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 03:59 PM) Nope. They should have low balled him and pissed him off enough so that he is publicly bitter until the next regime comes in. Why wouldnt the best option be: "Hey Matt we think you are an amazing player and we appreciate everything you have done. Unfortunately there is a salary cap in the NFL and while we would love to have you back we think that you are going to get a multi-year offer that is far in excess of what we can afford at this time. If that doesn't materialize or if you want to try and work out something that is extremely favorable to us, please contact us to discuss." Different strokes for different folks, but to me that is the best option. And I dont think its really comparable to Urlacher wasnt likely to be signed to a big contract where the Bears could go "The money didnt make sense." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:04 PM) HAHAHA HAHAHAHA Paying 30 year old RB's rarely works out. The Bears agree with me. You act like the Bears are a successful franchise that deserves being given the benefit of the doubt. (edit) And the part I love is that people are acting like Id suggest bringing Forte back. I doubt that he will make sense given what his likely contract will be. That being said, I think the Bears handled it wrong. Those are 2 different arguments. Edited February 12, 2016 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:10 PM) You act like the Bears are a successful franchise that deserves being given the benefit of the doubt. (edit) And the part I love is that people are acting like Id suggest bringing Forte back. I doubt that he will make sense given what his likely contract will be. That being said, I think the Bears handled it wrong. Those are 2 different arguments. Okay. I disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:04 PM) Why wouldnt the best option be: "Hey Matt we think you are an amazing player and we appreciate everything you have done. Unfortunately there is a salary cap in the NFL and while we would love to have you back we think that you are going to get a multi-year offer that is far in excess of what we can afford at this time. If that doesn't materialize or if you want to try and work out something that is extremely favorable to us, please contact us to discuss." Different strokes for different folks, but to me that is the best option. And I dont think its really comparable to Urlacher wasnt likely to be signed to a big contract where the Bears could go "The money didnt make sense." There is a big difference between what is said in public, and what is said in private. We only know what was said in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:29 PM) There is a big difference between what is said in public, and what is said in private. We only know what was said in public. And I have no idea what was said in private, which is why my first post was merely wondering why theyd take such a stance. For all I know both parties agreed that this is what they would publicly say (which would answer my own question.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:33 PM) And I have no idea what was said in private, which is why my first post was merely wondering why theyd take such a stance. For all I know both parties agreed that this is what they would publicly say (which would answer my own question.) Besides, if fans can't figure out what a simple statement like the one they released today actually means, why would the Bears release something that contains an element of unknown and really confuse them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:34 PM) Besides, if fans can't figure out what a simple statement like the one they released today actually means, why would the Bears release something that contains an element of unknown and really confuse them? Well I always suggest that you remain silent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panerista Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 12, 2016 -> 04:04 PM) Why wouldnt the best option be: "Hey Matt we think you are an amazing player and we appreciate everything you have done. Unfortunately there is a salary cap in the NFL and while we would love to have you back we think that you are going to get a multi-year offer that is far in excess of what we can afford at this time. If that doesn't materialize or if you want to try and work out something that is extremely favorable to us, please contact us to discuss." Different strokes for different folks, but to me that is the best option. And I dont think its really comparable to Urlacher wasnt likely to be signed to a big contract where the Bears could go "The money didnt make sense." Nothing about Forte money makes sense. Not signing him is safe. The Bears aren't that close. Edited February 13, 2016 by AustinIllini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 I loved Langford since he was drafted, so I'm down with this. Gonna miss Forte though. Great career as a Bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 In other news, Peyton is scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 13, 2016 -> 02:18 PM) In other news, Peyton is scum. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 13, 2016 -> 01:18 PM) In other news, Peyton is scum. Cam left a press conference dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2016 -> 01:41 PM) ? http://m.nydailynews.com/news/national/kin...ticle-1.2530395 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2016 -> 01:41 PM) ? Shaun King posted a one sided hit piece on him in the NY Daily News about his sexual harassment lawsuit from when he was in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 In other 15 year old news, Peyton is scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panerista Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 While I'm not sure how I feel about the Manning stuff, it's amazing how little airplay it is getting on ESPN. Just more proof ESPN is an arm of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 Well...I've always said I hated Manning and I had heard stories about the Mannings from some pretty keyed in people, but wow is all I can say. They are football's version of the Kennedy's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 QUOTE (AustinIllini @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:26 AM) While I'm not sure how I feel about the Manning stuff, it's amazing how little airplay it is getting on ESPN. Just more proof ESPN is an arm of the NFL. ESPN has and will coverup articles to protect certain elements and they will likely continue to. Of course the one item I know about them keeping quiet (covering up might be the wrong word, rather decide not to cover), isn't near to the extent of what is happening here. You'd think Sports Illustrated or a competitor would be all over something like this though (if there were serious legs to it). The article was pretty damning (presuming all the information contained within it is true). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 I could throw that same post in the Cosby thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 QUOTE (raBBit @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 10:48 AM) It's funny in sports media when people accomplish things (not that Peyton did anything in SB50) you have the social justice warriors come out of the woodwork and bring up some old story and rewrite some story that's already been out for years. When crooked politicians get elected there's nothing but blow job pieces. Where is the medium here? It has been tied into the larger lawsuit brought against UT about covering up rapes, not really out of the woodwork as much as bad timing for Peyton. He made some bad decisions about this entire thing though, he should have shut up about it a few times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shipps Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 11:07 AM) It has been tied into the larger lawsuit brought against UT about covering up rapes, not really out of the woodwork as much as bad timing for Peyton. He made some bad decisions about this entire thing though, he should have shut up about it a few times Hasnt he already paid the girl in civil suit money...twice? To me its over and has been settled. Does it show Manning is probably a pretty bad guy? Yeah, but it should've have been his story line years ago. I really don't care for Manning but this just seems like the media controlling the public opinion of a guy as they collectively deem to fit for the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 QUOTE (shipps @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 11:48 AM) Hasnt he already paid the girl in civil suit money...twice? To me its over and has been settled. Does it show Manning is probably a pretty bad guy? Yeah, but it should've have been his story line years ago. I really don't care for Manning but this just seems like the media controlling the public opinion of a guy as they collectively deem to fit for the moment. Yea there is a gag order on it for both of them now. His book comments were the last comments he made about her. Its strange, on one hand i agree that this is over and done with, it was public record (although rarely spoken of) and nobody said anything until he won the superbowl this season. One the other hand, he and UT destroyed this womans reputation. You cant get that back, i feel bad for her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 While I'm not sure how I feel about the Manning stuff, it's amazing how little airplay it is getting on ESPN. Just more proof ESPN is an arm of the NFL. It got pretty extensive discussion on Mike&Mike this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts