Cornerville Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Perhaps the Bills 12th overall pick, and a 3rd, for LB Lance Briggs and Chicago's 31st overall pick? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Perhaps out 12th overall pick, and a 3rd, for Briggs and the 31st overall pick? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 looks like the Washington deal is more likely right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 27, 2007 Author Share Posted March 27, 2007 I take it you do not like the proposal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 27, 2007 Author Share Posted March 27, 2007 looks like the Washington deal is more likely right now... Really? What are they offering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 No. We just got rid of that pain in the ass Rosenhaus, we can get our own LB thank you. Besides I believe that Briggs was more of a product of the system than anything else. We just got rid of a crybaby, why jump back into the fire with another one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Perhaps the Bills 12th overall pick, and a 3rd, for LB Lance Briggs and Chicago's 31st overall pick? Thoughts? I don't think it would happen, but I would jump at that deal. Walker, Briggs and still 3 day one picks? That would be a great thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 27, 2007 Author Share Posted March 27, 2007 No. We just got rid of that pain in the ass Rosenhaus, we can get our own LB thank you. Besides I believe that Briggs was more of a product of the system than anything else. We just got rid of a crybaby, why jump back into the fire with another one? Points well taken...maybe the Bills are better off not inviting that kind of trouble to the team right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 No. We just got rid of that pain in the ass Rosenhaus, we can get our own LB thank you. Besides I believe that Briggs was more of a product of the system than anything else. We just got rid of a crybaby, why jump back into the fire with another one? Wouldn't that be a good thing for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Really? What are they offering? The Washington Redskins and Chicago Bears are considering a trade that would send the 6th overall pick to Chicago for Bears linebacker Lance Briggs and the 31st overall selection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Perhaps the Bills 12th overall pick, and a 3rd, for LB Lance Briggs and Chicago's 31st overall pick? Thoughts? i don't think so...........first off the redskins have offered their #6 pick for briggs plus the bears #31 in return. second i think even if our offer was attractive we would never be able to afford briggs. giving up our #12 pick wouldn't be so bad,but remember briggs is not happy that he was franchised. i mean he is not happy at over 7 million per year.he is out of our league.just my opinion..means nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDW1968 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 No way in hell do you do you make that fu en dill. Keep your pick and take M. Lynch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper13 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 That's the kind of deal Tom Donahoe would go and do. The Bills are not spending more than real salary cap. No way they give up their 12th overall pick and then pay a LB over $7 million a season with a huge bonus. It's just not going to happen. Why did they get rid of Spikes? $4.5 million was too much for him and DT was more of a need position. They got a DT and saved over $3 million in real cap space. We all have to ask "What would Marv do?" and realize it's not trading away a high 1st rounder for Briggs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 i don't think so...........first off the redskins have offered their #6 pick for briggs plus the bears #31 in return. second i think even if our offer was attractive we would never be able to afford briggs. giving up our #12 pick wouldn't be so bad,but remember briggs is not happy that he was franchised. i mean he is not happy at over 7 million per year.he is out of our league.just my opinion..means nothing its not that he doesnt like $7mil/year. its that the franchise tag only gives him ONE YEAR of $7mil. he wants a longer deal in case of injury or something. it makes sense from a player's perspective. although, i feel since the Union negotiated and signed the CBA, the players have no right to complain when certain aspects of that CBA are applied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horus Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 im curiouse as to who the bears would want at #6 and if it messes with anybody we want to fall to us? would they possably want willis or pos to go along with urlacher? or maybe brady quinn and finnaly say ok grosman sux? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Gun10 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 im curiouse as to who the skins would want at #6 and if it messes with anybody we want to fall to us? Okoye i bet ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horus Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 Okoye i bet ya. sry I edited my post after i realized i retardedly wrote skins with the #6 instead of bears...but yea I could see the bears wanting a good DT too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 That's the kind of deal Tom Donahoe would go and do. The Bills are not spending more than real salary cap. No way they give up their 12th overall pick and then pay a LB over $7 million a season with a huge bonus. It's just not going to happen. Why did they get rid of Spikes? $4.5 million was too much for him and DT was more of a need position. They got a DT and saved over $3 million in real cap space. We all have to ask "What would Marv do?" and realize it's not trading away a high 1st rounder for Briggs. Because Spikes production on the field is not worth $4.5 mil. Briggs plays the outside. The Bills really need Willis to play MLB in the cover-2. If they are to spend money on a LB, it needs to be at MLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombstone56 Posted March 27, 2007 Share Posted March 27, 2007 it might take till draft day for briggs to be traded ,, if willis is there we take him ,but if he s gone make the briggs deal and then pick up a mlb ( siler) n the second,,espn.is discussing the skins trade for briggs ,sounds like its agent talk only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts