stu_nna
03-30-2007, 12:29 AM
NFL network says that throwing an additional player like Marshall in would seal the deal, to complete the Lance Briggs trade. To me thats the deal breaker, check the link...NFL.com - NFL News (http://nfl.com/news/story/10095969)
EARTHQUAKE2689
03-30-2007, 12:35 AM
NFL network says that throwing an additional player like Marshall in would seal the deal, to complete the Lance Briggs trade. To me thats the deal breaker, check the link...NFL.com - NFL News (http://nfl.com/news/story/10095969)
screw the ****ing bears who gives a shit what they want for once lets try and stop pleasing the damn league and focus on what the redskins want and need and if the bears are too stupid and stubborn to take the deal we already have given them which is already in their favor then they can go to hell and lance briggs can just sit out screw the bears
SmootSmack
03-30-2007, 12:39 AM
"The Bears will have a need at linebacker if Briggs is gone, so a player like LeMar Marshall (104 tackles last year), who is going to be a backup if Briggs joins new addition London Fletcher on the Redskins defense, might interest Jerry Angelo."
This is not saying they want Marshall. This is Kirwan speculating.
Pocket$ $traight
03-30-2007, 12:59 AM
If they want Marshall, forget it. We would be worse off than before the trade.
GTripp0012
03-30-2007, 01:02 AM
I like Marshall, but honestly, getting Briggs eliminates a lot of the use he would have on this team. If we honestly think that Briggs is all that, I'm not sure why we couldn't spare Marshall.
Alvin#40
03-30-2007, 01:05 AM
I like Marshall, but honestly, getting Briggs eliminates a lot of the use he would have on this team. If we honestly think that Briggs is all that, I'm not sure why we couldn't spare Marshall.
Totally agree. Marshall is lucky to have a use anymore with an every down middle like Fletch.....If injury...we have much better LBs to replace Marshall. He proved he is much much to small last season.
Bears know it, we know it, kudos to the bears to try and scrape something else outta this.
Alvin#40
03-30-2007, 01:10 AM
I know there hasn't been a poll on it, but Marshall was the biggest dissapointment in my circle of skins fans in 06 BY FAR.
Pocket$ $traight
03-30-2007, 01:24 AM
Totally agree. Marshall is lucky to have a use anymore with an every down middle like Fletch.....If injury...we have much better LBs to replace Marshall. He proved he is much much to small last season.
Bears know it, we know it, kudos to the bears to try and scrape something else outta this.
Huh? If Fletcher gets hurt who would play the middle? Better Lb's to replace Marshall? Who? He was hurt all year last year and no one was good enough to bump him even as poorly as he played.
We need MLB depth for next year otherwise we are closing our eyes and wishing for the best.
stu_nna
03-30-2007, 01:37 AM
LOL! I got this from a Chicago Bear forum:
Do we ask for Marcus Washington?
Thu Mar-29-07 10:55 PM
I have seen many say we should ask for McIntosh, but I just don't see that happening. We so much spent on Fletcher and Briggs, I think Wash is going to make sure to keep Mac as a less expensive 3rd LB. That would mean Washington is the odd man out.
Washington is not cheap, but not that absurd either. He has about $6m in bonus remaining on 3 years, which Wash will have to eat. He has base salaries of $4m, $4.3 and $4.5m.
That isn't cheap, but he is a solid veteran that would, at minimum, buy us time to draft/develop a replacement for Briggs w/o any massive dropoff in the short term. Also, as we would not be on the hook for the bonus, we can cut him at any time w/o suffering any cap penalties. Heck, we could cut him next year if we find a cheaper replacement.
Washington is a solid LB who I think would be able to fill in. He would not be cheap, but would be cheaper than Briggs and buy us time. He can tackle and can get to the QB.
The other LB they have that could be interesting is Marshall, who is a year older, but might be an even better fit at WLB for our cover two.
I read, I think from Clayton, that we could counter asking for more by way of picks or players. Wash wants their big name (Briggs) but has some pretty good LBs in the fold now. I am not saying Washington or Marshall are pro bowlers, but they are solid and put them next to Urlacher, and they could provide us a replacement that would not be a massive drop in play on the field.
If we trade Briggs and do not get a LB in the deal, as good as the high pick may be (landry) we will at the same time create a huge hole. Adding a LB like one of these two would fill that void, while allowing us to go into the draft w/o feeling like we have to reach for an OLB.
stu_nna
03-30-2007, 01:38 AM
This ain't gonna happen...