Peter King's view on the Briggs deal

Pages : 1 [2]

12thMan
04-04-2007, 05:38 PM
Vice versa could be true. Maybe Briggs is the one bringing BU's game up. I am more concerned about them being system LBs more than anything. One good LB doesn't make another but only so much better.


You're right, it could be the other way around. I'm just not convinced that the Briggs we know of in Chicago can light it up here in D.C.

Pocket$ $traight
04-04-2007, 05:53 PM
King failed to point out that Briggs a) has Urlacher playing beside him and b) he had one helluva defensive line in front of him.

I have heard this argument one hundred times.

Urlacher also has Briggs next to him. That theory goes both ways. Urlacher is not Ray Lewis or Lawrence Taylor. He has definitely benefitted from having a great line and a pro-bowler next to him. I don't buy that Briggs is good only because Urlacher is next to him.

The Chicago D is good because they have studs everywhere, not just because of an over-hyped MLB.

Pocket$ $traight
04-04-2007, 05:54 PM
I think they play well together actually. But I'll say it again, unless Briggs is the top two or three at that position, then we have no business trading for this guy.

King seems to think that Briggs is that good.

dmek25
04-04-2007, 08:03 PM
this is a good piece of writing. come on Matty, give peter king some love:)

Misterbillysells
04-04-2007, 08:08 PM
Thank you Peter King for telling us what we already know and have been speculating about for weeks...the warpath should sue him cuz I'm sure he's using one of the 100's of threads on Briggs as his primary source

SmootSmack
04-04-2007, 09:10 PM
I have heard this argument one hundred times.

Urlacher also has Briggs next to him. That theory goes both ways. Urlacher is not Ray Lewis or Lawrence Taylor. He has definitely benefitted from having a great line and a pro-bowler next to him. I don't buy that Briggs is good only because Urlacher is next to him.

The Chicago D is good because they have studs everywhere, not just because of an over-hyped MLB.

I agree 100%

redskinsfanatic
04-05-2007, 11:18 AM
they would not be nearly as good without urlachler though!

RedskinPete
04-06-2007, 06:22 AM
King failed to point out that Briggs a) has Urlacher playing beside him and b) he had one helluva defensive line in front of him. A helluva line? I saw that line get run over by a Colt running game that by far is not the best in the NFL in the Super Bowl!

skinsfan69
04-06-2007, 10:25 AM
I don't put any stock into what Peter King says. The guy is a clown.

1. King said Danny Weurfuel was going to be the next Kurt Warner when OBC took over.
2. King at first said Monk shouldn't be in the HOF.

firstdown
04-06-2007, 01:21 PM
Another Briggs thread?

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum