Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

stu_nna · 03-30-2007, 12:37 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.

03-30-2007, 12:37 AM	#9
stu_nna Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Virginia Age: 47 Posts: 239	Re: Da Bears want Marshall 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.