Why I'm Retiring From Discussing Matt Forte's Contract Situation

Why I'm Retiring From Discussing Matt Forte's Contract Situation

There is no way to win a debate over player contracts/salaries. Such is clearly the case with Bears running back Matt Forte.

In one corner sit the diehard fans and former players who believe Forte is a great player and should be paid like like an elite running back (Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson...etc.). They do not care about the salary cap implications, shifting league strategy or possibly debilitating knee injuries. "He is great," they say. "Pay him accordingly."

In another corner sits Blue Collar Bob - the guy who has no patience for a football player unwilling to accept more than $8 million for a single season of NFL ball. He's the guy using arguments like "I'd play for a nothing" and "in this economy, with so many folks out of work...". These gents can not be defeated in debate because they ignore the most simple fact about NFL athletes: they are worth more than the rest of us because they can do things the rest of can't do. Sure you would play for nothing and that would be an accurate evaluation of your worth on the football field.

I want Matt Forte on the Chicago Bears next season. I want Matt Forte on the Bears for two and three seasons after that. But it is becoming abundantly clear that Emery and the folks at Halas Hall have no intention on paying him what he wants. (Rumors are $20 million guaranteed.) They seem perfectly content to play hardball with Forte and force the back's hand as the summer progresses and camp moves along. Will it work? Yes I think it will. The Bears have capable running backs on their roster and the addition of big-ticket wide receivers means you will see Forte's ability to catch the ball significantly devalued.

But this is the last I'll write about it until a decision is made one way or the other. Unfortunately every time I write a column understanding the organization's financial philosophy I am painted by a myriad of ex-Bears as anti-player and anti-Forte. Neither is true. But how can we fault the Bears if they DO believe Forte's knees an issue? Isn't not concerning himself enough with player injuries one of those attributes that made fans loathe Jerry Angelo? How can we fault the Bears if they DON'T believe Forte is worth $20 million guaranteed? Shouldn't we allow the new general manager to institute his vision for the ballclub? Agree with Phil Emery or don't agree with Phil Emery, that's up to you. But I have no interest in a GM without the gaul to implement his own agenda. Emery has that.

So here's hoping the Double Deuce is there in Bourbonnais and adding a pivotal piece to what may be the most exciting Bears offense in many a moon. If he's not there I will be Michael Bush's number one fan. In the meantime I am going dark on the matter. Lights fading. Fading. Fading a bit more. Out.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Jeff, the smart fan understands this. You are a smart man. He he.

  • I wonder if those "myriad of ex-Bears" think what analysts think: AP and Chris Johnson were overpaid. DeAngelo Williams was overpaid.

    Ask Titans fan about how they feel about CJ's contract.

  • fb_avatar

    Sure, the Bears are "smart" by not paying him, but they won't release him either.

    If Forte is smart or serious about the issue, he sits out the first 10 games of the season. $2.89 million for six games is still significant raise, and he is protecting his "arthritic knees", putting the Bears' braintrust at ease.

    That should also torpedoe the Bears' playoff delusions, allowing Forte even more rest.

    The man simply wants to earn fair market value for his services. If the Bears feel he is not worth it, release him.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Jeff, I think I just found an un-smart one. Hee hee. All in good fun Pete, welcome aboard, or is it welcome back?

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Is that a purple Favre jersey as your avatar?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    That's a gift for my 2-year old cousin. Was trying to set him up with positive role models in life. Now, he just cowers in a corner anytime the Saints are on TV, though. Best laid plans .....

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Bwah!
    I'll keep it clean, in spite of it being Favre, because a 2-year old should be able to like an athlete in spite of the stupid adult crap they do.
    Welcome aboard...

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Playoff Dilusions? You must have manure for brains, Pete

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    He's being offered fair market value - but why would we release him when we could trade him?

  • It's all posturing.
    When he's not suited up in Navy & Orange in September, then I'll worry.

  • What it comes down to is what does Forte think? Is having a long term contract worth not being the team that wins the Lombardi in February? Ask Todd Bell which he'd rather have now, a Lombardi or a few extra cars in his garage. Last I checked, you can still only drive one at a time.

  • Forte may believe, and he may be right, that *he* is the difference between the Bears playing for the Lombardi and not doing so.

    The Bears will be a much better team with Matt Forte than without him.

  • Todd Bell can't answer that question, because he died at least five years ago from a heart attack in his 40's. I'm sure he would have taken the trophy though.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Dude, Todd Bell's dead.

  • Dangit, not only did I reply to the wrong post, but I wasn't even the first to point it out.

    I fail.

  • fb_avatar

    Giving Forte a $20m guarantee could severely handicap the team in future years. If he goes down, that's dead money. So the Bears would be at a disadvantage with every team that didn't have "dead money" on the books.

    Fair Market Value is the Franchise Tag. He's being paid the average of the top 5 backs in the league. It's a one year guarantee.

    I still believe he'll get a deal done. But if not, oh well. See you in camp.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Big Mike:

    Fair Market value is what one of 32 teams is willing to pay, not the Franchise tag.

    Given the timing (and the fact that many teams have spent their salary cap monies), Forte may end up with less that $7.7 million if release now. On the other hand, he may up with more.

    So, by releasing Forte, the Bears may end up signing him for less. Regardless, at least Forte will know exactly how other teams value his services - going forward.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Hmm......I like your style of poker Pete, but I think you play the strong hand in this case. The Bears have the stronger hand.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Pete -

    Just because the Bears don't want to pay the player what he is asking for, doesn't mean they MUST release him.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    You are misinterpreting a basic rule of valuation. The rule is that Fair Market Value is equal to the price a willing seller and buyer agree to. In this case, the FMV is the average of what the top 5 RBs have agreed to. With the buyer being the club and the seller being the agent.

    You are proposing a transaction where the seller is the Bears and the buyer is one of the other 31 owners. The Bears already own the contract for Matt Forte's services. They are not a willing party to the transaction you propose.

    You are asking the Bears to take a gamble they don't need to.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Big Mike:

    Actually, it only takes one buyer to set fair market value. You are ignoring how buyer needs (or desparation) may drive up the price for any commodity.

    For example, say hypothetically, the Bears pull back the franchise tender. Forte is an unrestricted free agent.

    Now, say you are sitting in Detroit, and believe that a top 10 running back is all that separates you from legitimate Super Bowl contention. Under that premise, Detroit may be willing to meet Forte's contract demands, while 31 other teams may not.

    The fact that one buyer is willing to pay establishes what Forte's (or any other commodity) market value is.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    The fact is that one buyer did not create a Fair Market Value on their own. In you hypothetical, you created a situation where there is a willing seller (Forte) and a willing buyer (Detroit).

    However, you also created a hypothetical that has the Bears releasing Forte for no reason at all. Right now, the Bears are the Seller. If someone wants Forte, it will cost them whatever they are willing to pay Forte and whatever it would take to pry Forte away from the Bears.

    I think the ask price (what the seller wants) for Forte is a 2nd Round Pick. Which I don't think any buyer would meet.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Is this shit gonna be on the exam?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Big Mike:

    Also, no guarantee he will be in camp.

    The last two years, the Bears have proved that their offensive line cannot protect Cutler when trying pass-oriented schemes at start of each season.

    Can the Bears survive in '12, if Forte holds out? Is Bush really an everydown running back?

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Hey Pete, firstly, the Bears are willing to Pay Matt. If he signs the franchise tender, they will in fact pay him handsomely. Secondly, if Matt holds out, he may actually delay a new deal for even another year. Thirdly, his value will only go down after this season, not up. Holding out will be the biggest mistake of his career. See GP's Todd Bell comment.

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    That's Doc's comment. I woulda just done something highly distasteful, like a Todd Bell limerick.

    There was an old safety in a cts-v,
    Who had sudden pain shoot up through his knee;
    When he said, 'Is this the end?'
    God replied, 'Yes, it is!'
    'And then he smashed into a tree'

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Sorry Doc, a 1000 pardons sir!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGGYFZidPfE

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    I was expecting Monte Python coming from your link, not hip hop. Weird.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Pete, SC Dave and myself are two of Forte's biggest fans on the blog. We both want a fair deal for both sides. Releasing him makes no sense. I want a deal done because the Bears have been known in recent times to take care of their own. This seems to veer from that mantra. However, none of us know what's on the table from both sides. Looking at other recent contracts it looks like he should get between $17-$20 mil guaranteed (Marshwan Lynch, Foster, McCoy). If a deal doesn't get done, I can't feel too bad for Forte getting $7.74 mil this year. He would be crazy to give up $4-5 mil to sit out the first 10 games.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    Abso-frigging-lutely.
    I love Forte - I think he is a special running back. We -should- pay him.
    BUT that doesn't mean he should be getting a ridiculous contract, nor does it mean the Bears should cut ties.
    The truth is somewhere in the middle. He needs to understand that no one else is going to offer him CJ money. It's not going to happen. His greatest value on the market right now is to the Bears - and they should end up in the range that CB lays out above if he doesn't want to play under a franchise tag for the next two years.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CanadaBear:

    Not necessarily. The better (and more recent analogy) may be Vincent Jackson from two years ago. He sat out the first 10 games of the '10 season, which had no negative impact on his "free market" value when first available this past offseason.

    It is a game of poker, I suppose. The question is would the Bears franchise him again (at an increase to $9.24 million) the following season. Conventional wisdom says yes. However, pride and resentment flows pretty thick in Halas Hall.

    One cannot fault the Bears for playing their hand and using the franchise tag. It's agreed that this was a wise business decision, allowed by the CBA. Likewise, Forte should not be faulted for playing the cards that he has, sitting for 10 games, playing in 6, starting with first game against Minnesota, also allowed by the CBA.

    Who can complain, if we are all so concerned with preserving Forte's fragile knee(s)??

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    I don't think Forte cracks the lineup if he comes back after 10 weeks.

  • In reply to Big Mike:

    Only pride and arrogance of the organization would dictate that in my opinion. Not to say I disagree with you, but *my* take (of course, I'm not Halas Hall) is that having a Pro-Bowl caliber back with fresh legs and body coming in for the drive to and through the playoffs would be hard to refuse.

    Yeah, there might be a little resentment among some other guys on the team, but wins take care of that shit expeditiously.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    I don't think any of the players or coaches would blame him. Everyone knows it's a business. The only people that would have their noses out of joint would be mgmt.

  • In reply to Big Mike:

    No way in hell Forte sits out even 1 game. It's not in his makeup. He'll play under the franchise tag, and he'll play well. We'll probably let him walk in free agency after we win the superbowl next year. or will sign him long term.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Can't agree Pete. Forte has made about $2.6 mil in 4 years. If he sits for 10 games he gives up $4.84 mil (he would collect $2.9 mil for the six games). The whole point of trying for a long term contract is to maximize his guaranteed income. This drastically reduces it. Not to mention, if he has a terrible injury in the last 6 games he REALLY fucks himself. Just don't see him going that direction.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CanadaBear:

    What Forte wants more than anything is to test the waters as a truly unrestricted Free Agent. One thing is certain, if Forte stays with Bears, he will never see free agency. If he plays the full season for $7.7 million, he almost guarantees another franchise season the following year at $9.24 million.

    On the other hand, if he sits, he forces the Bears' hand with regards to the following year. The Bears can't prevent him from returning for last six games, short of outright releasing him. (This they will not do - see Detroit Lions drooling in the corner.) It doesn't really matter if the Bears bench him or not, he still makes $2.9 million for six games. Even if he plays, he reduces the risk of the season ending injury to 37.5 % of the likelihood if he played the full season. Given that Forte views his worth as higher than $7.7 mil per year, this would be foolhardy risk to play full season.

    In addition, in case anyone has actually watched a Bears' game recently, their offensive line can't pass block. They led the league in sacks per pass attempt over the last two years. The only offensive productivity seen was when they reverted to run-oriented gameplans behind Forte each season.

    A case in point, during the Bears' 5-game winning streak (against 4 non-winning teams), Cutler only averaged 220 yards per game and 7 passing TDs total for the five games. Not quite the "elite" QB that Chicago keeps boasting about. The line is the same, so what makes anyone believe that the pass blocking is any better?

    Forte may have been far more valuable than many have been willing to acknowledge, in truth. If Forte did sit out first 10 games, chances are the Bears are not competing for a playoff spot. Even with Forte, most oddsmakers in Vegas are projecting the Bears to be contending for #5 and #6 wild card spot, at best.

    So, the question is whether Forte has the cajones (sic?) :) to stand up for himself, in an attempt to achieve true free agency. As you said, I don't think any of the players or coaches would blame him. Everyone knows it's a business. Management (outside of Halas hall) wouldn't blame him either.

    The only question I still can not get answered anywhere, though, is does he have to come back for last 6 games in order to have salary bumped to $9.24 million. Never a capologist around when you need one.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Easy question on the O-line.
    Three factors:
    1) the return of several of our higher draft picks to the field. Both Carimi and Williams missed significant time due to freak injuries.
    2) Improved chemistry as a unit. Most of these guys are now settling in after the departure of some failed free agents...
    3) Tice is the OC, not Mad Martz and his 7-step drops.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Whether or not he signs at week 10 doesn't affect the next year's salary. Even if he doesn't play, if the Bears tag Forte again in 2013, they are on the hook for 120% of his 2012 salary (7.7 mil) = 9.24 million.

    If he holds out AGAIN (he wants a multi-year deal, by god!) then in 2014 the Bears have to pay 144% of 9.24 million = 13.3 million. That's a whole lotta chedda.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    Pete your logic is not sound, and it is my opinion that you, in fact, have shit for brains.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    If we're concerned with his knees then we should have traded him yesterday.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    I'd like to answer your "Is Bush an everydown running back?" with the following question: "If Forte an everydown running back?"

    3rd and short? Please take a seat. Goal to go? Please take a seat.

    Perhaps these were just byproducts of the Martzian system he was in. But, if that's the case, you have to say his success in the passing game was also a byproduct of the system.

    Forte is good. He has shown flashes of being great. But all too often, it's someone else's name being called when we need that tough yard or need to bull into the end zone.

  • What a shock that Halas Hall hasn't called NFL films:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-hbo-having-trouble-finding-hard-knocks-takers-20120526,0,6664398.story

  • Pete, in regards to how it may effect the Bears this year if Forte holds out, I think it's sooooo ironic that Todd Bell thought he was too valuable to the Bears D for them to not meet his demands either. The Bears D went on to arguably have the best Defensive performance in the history of the organization. Given the fact that the Bears have gone out and brought on 2 excellent WR's, it would not surprise me if they went on the have the best offensive performance in Bears history this year.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnec6SmjHP0

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Despite the devaluation of running backs in the modern NFL, some teams are not ready to fully rely on a passing game. Teams like the Bears. Remember that Brandon and Alshon have yet to catch a pass for the Bears.

    Perhaps had the brain trust addressed (cough) THE OLINE I'd feel the confidence that seems so rife around here.

    Michael Bush is a good back, but he is no Matt Forte.

  • We're going to have to resign Cutler, Urlacher and Melton really soon. Cutler and Lach aren't going anywhere, but they're gonna cost. If Melton gains another 7 + sacks, then you know he's going to demand top DT cash.

    That's not to mention all the possible FAs that will (theoretically) hit the market next year, FAs that can dramatically improve the Bears.

    But of course, Forte isn't worrying about all that. He's just looking to get his, and hey, that's capitalism.

    But Emery IS considering all those factors, and that's his job.

    Lynch's deal to me seems the most fair to all parties, but something tells me Forte wants at least DeAngelo Williams cash. But like someone else stated, we shouldn't overpay just because other horrible franchises did.

  • From John "The Prof" Clayton Mailbag as he ponders Urlacher's looming retirement.

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7978119/nfl-how-much-longer-brian-urlacher-beat-father-time

    Once again, the peanut gallery trying to claim Lach is not a HOF. I'm not sure what more (other than a ring) he can do. However, London Fletcher has also had comparable stats, so that angle could get interesting.

  • Didn't someone (MBHAP?) mention something about Forte receiving fines for everyday he doesn't show up?

    It seems that a few goofy deals were inked in the same few years that the landscape of NFL offense made a huge move towards the passing game. This causes significant delusions with both sides. RBs thinking they're worth more, and front offices thinking a running game is truly second fiddle.

    With our old WR corp of retreads, square-pegs-in-round-holes, undrafted FAs, drug dealers, and D3 speedsters who can't run routes or make a play on the ball... combined with an OLine that can't protect our QB long enough to get long routes ran and a "mastermind" OC who loves passing to the RB - yes, Forte was worth more.

    Rewind a few more years, when we had Griese. There's a reason he was 100% of our offense.

    Now we have a QB... Now we have a legitimate backup RB (sorry Garrett)... Now we don't have Martz..

    Most importantly - now we have WR options. Marshall to take the eyes off Hester. Jeffery to snatch up opportunities when Marshall is double teamed. Bennett to catch everything in sight (per usual). Kellen Davis to run around being 6'5" (and not Thor-soft).. and Marshall to just dominate regardless of the situation.

    We don't need Forte to be Faulk. Furthermore, with Bush we have a guy who is incredibly capable of shouldering a diminished load...

    I love the guy, but I don't think he's worth to us what he was worth to us. Do you pay a guy for being an incredible deal in his first years? Sadly, no.

    Can you trust a guy you ran into the dirt to maintain for 4 more years? I don't think so. Especially not when you have mediocre options behind him (as opposed to Wolfe).

    While he still has die-hard fans behind him, holding out kills that single piece of leverage. If he misses 10 games, I'm done with him.

    I still hope some sort of rational Bears-future-protected deal heavily weighed with incentives, I would lead the angry mob if he sat a single game.

    Oh, and by the way, the ultrasound came through - it's a girl. So, WNBA, um, get ready.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Congrats, Willie. I tried to make one of those, to no avail. Guess I'm short on sugar and spice.

  • Give it time, Doc - I'm sure one of the next four or five will be a girl.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Doc loves getting chicks pregnant

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    You bastard. If I could hit what I was aiming at, I'd haji you right to hell.

  • Forget the sugar and spice, next time blow the nuts off the little rascal!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Umm, Forte hasn't signed the franchise tender. Unsigned players are not and can not be fined. If he sits out regular season games prior to signing, his pay is reduced prorated to the number of games that he sits out.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Willie, Forte (or any franchised player who hasn't signed the tender yet) can't be fined until they sign and accept the franchise tag. Can't get fined if you're not under contract. He can hold out till something like week 10 without any reprucrussions (of course, there are always reprucussions).

    And unlike V-Jax, holding out will hurt Forte more. HB lifespans are a lot shorter, so one might say it'll save wear and tear, but WRs are expected to be hold-out divas. Franchise HBs are not. That perception will turn-off a lot of GOOD teams. The desperate ones (like the Lions) won't care though, but by that time Forte will be a year older, which in HB years, is like 3 years.

    I also believe if Forte does hold out till mid-season, the Bears will definitely slap the tag on him next year, thus making him an FA at 28ish, which for a HB is ancient.

    Worst case scenario is that Forte signs the franchise tag with an unspoken agreement that if he does, the Bears won't tag him next year. Forte wins the SB, then goes to some crappy team with a mediocre QB that is willing to pay what his ego demands in 2013 and beyond.

    We won't get anything back for him because we didn't trade him, but we'll get maybe a 3rd round compensatory pick for losing him in FA.

  • fb_avatar

    That's the key question to the holdout scenario, would the Bears be likely to franchise him again next year. Doing so would raise his cost to ~ $9.24 million. That isn't free money for the Bears, as it comes out of whatever money is available under the Bears' salary cap. This reduces their ability to re-sign other players or new free agents, whether Forte plays for them or not.

    The value of Forte is in his offensive diversity. He is a true dual threat running back, able to gain yards both on the ground and through the air. Does anyone think that Belichick or McCarthy couldn't make use of Forte in their offenses? He's actually the perfect complement to the new offensive schemes of this decade. You could go right down the list, Falcons (if Turner leaves)? 49ers? Steelers? There are plenty of good teams that could use Forte, besides just the Lions.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    I agree with the whole dual threat thing big time, Pete. Forte has shown repeatedly he is a serious match-up problem for defenses in the passing game, and a legitimate threat to take it to the house on outside runs.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    I just don't see teams with a an elite qb paying Forte what he thinks he deserves.

    Forte would be perfect on the Pats-like team, but look how they value hb. They didn't even want to pay Ben Jarvis 9M over 3 years, 4M gauranteed.

    The Lions are actually putting off their cap hell, so I don't think they can afford him.

    Basically, everyone with an elite qb has alot of their money tied up into that position, and usu also a star wr.

    Packers, Saints, same boat. Basically, Forte will have to find a team with a mediocre qb (which usu means mediocre/bad team) that will have the willingness and cash.

    49ers are an exception in that Alex Smith is avg, but I'm not sure Forte fits their power running game. Ravens have Rice which is in the same boat, while Texans just signed Foster.

    The market for Forte might be smaller than he thinks in 2013 (they're will be a whole new batch of what should be a strong HB class too). But all it takes is one for his over the top contract.

  • Except the Bears don't have an elite QB. Maybe after this season, but they don't right now.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    which is yet another reason the Bears franchised Forte.

    IF Cutler doesn't prove to be a franchise QB ala Alex Smith, Flacco, then Forte will get his.

    IF Cutler becomes a elite (and every sign points to yes), then the Bears are going to have to dish out a lot of cash to resign him.

    The Bears, and most everyone, is betting on the latter, so what Emery and gang are doing is very prudent.

  • In reply to Pete Wilberscheid:

    If reports are to be believed, the Pats offered us a 4th and a 6th for Forte. They could use him, but only as long as his knees hold out, and they don't see him as a blue-chipper. The Bears know his medical history better than anyone, but they won't be dictated to by a guy who thinks he's worth as much to us than he used to be.

    Try this on for size when you're watching Michael Bush being the Bear back, Matt. He's a quadruple threat - ground and pound, run outside, through the air, and he's a solid blocker. He's more versatile than Forte in the blocking and running game. Matt's trussed up and ready for Christmas. I say two seasons of festive turkey, then cut him and his knees loose.

  • Funny, if Michael Bush was all that, and better than Forte, why is it that the Raiders let him go, where the Bears tendered a tag on Forte?

    Simple - Forte is better than Bush.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    Well, we are talking about the Raiders...but Forte is significantly better than Bush.
    And I like Bush (that's what she said).

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    why is it the raiders used the #1 pick on jamarcus russell?

    why is it the raiders used the #7 pick on heyward-bey?

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Nope, no fines - just not making any money until he is under contract...once he's under contract (under the franchise tender or otherwise), he won't hold out because the fines are f-cking ludicrous. I believe they are $30k a day. He has about a month and a half to either make a deal or play under the franchise tag. I don't believe the Bears can sign him to a long-term deal after mid-July until the end of the season.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    That's right, after July 15 they can only sign a one-year deal. If I were a betting man, I'd put money on a joint Forte-Emery press conference on July 15.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Congrats on the girl!
    It's the best - although if you are anything like me, you're going to get alot of gray hairs very quickly.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    congrats Willie

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Congrats on the good news Willie!

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    that's terrific
    your wife and your self must be ecstatic
    nothing like a daughter's love for dad
    you sir are a lucky man
    i am happy for you and your family

  • In reply to huntinbare:

    Good luck with her Willie ... they do get a daddy's heart all twitter-pated.

  • Oh, and congrats Willie! Here's a classic WNBA commercial...

    http://tosh.comedycentral.com/video-clips/the-never-miss-a-wnba-eastern-conference-finals-club

  • Looked up the stats (per ESPN)

    Ray Lewis (16 years; 222 GP)

    1993 tackles; 40.5 sacks; 18 FF; 18 FR; 31 INT

    London Fletcher (14 years; 224 GP)

    1782 tackles; 34.0 sacks; 18 FF; 12 FR; 2 INT

    Brian Urlacher (12 years; 170 GP)

    1285; 41.5 sacks; 10 FF; 14 FR; 21 INT

  • You left out the acquittal on a murder charge. That has to count for something..

    But Lewis is absolutely amazing.
    It's interesting (maybe just to me) that Lach extrapolates out to a much higher sack total and Lewis extrapolates to a higher interception total. Given the systems they play in, I would have thought it would be the opposite.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I was going to say the same thing about sacks and interceptions. Perhaps the threat of a Lewis sack (kinda like a Peppers sack) causes teams to overcompensate and get hurt elsewhere. Likewise the threat of Lach in coverage.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Yeah, I was very surprised with the sacks/int between Lach/Lewis.

    Lewis will get into the HOF for sure, Lach should be first ballad because he not only has the stats, but some hardware like DPOY, DROY, multiple PBs, and some play-off performances to boost his chances.

    Unfortunately for Fletcher, he's played for the Redskins his entire career, and while very durable and reliable, those horrible teams they fielded got little recognition. I don't think he will get in the HOF.

  • Fletcher started with the Rams and won a SB ring with them. I think he played for some other teams too.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    really? wow, just looked it up, you're right. don't know how I missed that.

    Fletcher was with the Rams in 1999 when they won the SB. The other team he was on was the Bills then the Skins.

    My mind can't remember him in anything but a Skins uni. Weird.

    So, he has a SB ring, but only appeared in 3 PBs, and was named a PB alternate 11 times.

    He's also played in 224 consecutive games.

    I wonder if all that will be enough to get Fletcher into the HOF...

    http://www.redskins.com/team/roster/London-Fletcher/60763fd2-a715-440c-91e6-3260a250ec2e

  • Three PBs does not a HOFer make IMHO. You were a really good, solid player, but HOFers have to have that little extra.

  • OK -- I'm not particularly good with numbers, but say Forte wants $20 million guaranteed and the Bears think he's got three good years left. Why not give him a 3-year $20 deal? That averages out to $6.67 mil. per year. If they franchise him this year and next year I believe that's going to total close to $18 mil. If he's still great in year 3 they can offer him an extension. Depending on incentives and how they load the deal wouldn't that be more cap-friendly than franchising him for 2 years? I guess the they could be thinking that: A) he's just not worth it; B) he won't last 3 more years or; C) with their added weapons and the league becoming more pass-oriented no RB is worth that much money.

  • In reply to jdawg:

    They're not going to guarantee $20 million for 3 years. They'd probably love a $20 million total deal for 3 years (with maybe half guaranteed), but that's going the other direction.

    If the Bears are willing to guarantee $20 million, they're going to want as long a contract as possible for their money. If they can get Forte to agree to a 7 year deal, they will, because each renewal brings with it the need for more guaranteed money.

  • http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=8837

    Apparently DOM DICICCICCIO is having a good camp. Is this a sick fucking joke? I mean do they have to rub it in our face that the backup MLB is a poor mans Hillenmeyer who is a poor man's white Joe Cain who is a poor man's Nick Roach/Barry Minter hybrid?

    This makes DOM the poorest whitest pussiest arms can't fill out a fucking jersey Middle Linebacker that gets blown the fuck up and trails every play motherfucker ever.

    Not happy right now. How is sanzenbacher still on the team? Devin Thomas has to be shaking his head right now.

  • There is no such thing as a poor man's Nick Roach. Nick Roach is a poor man's NFL linebacker.

    Barry Minter. +35 blog points for the Wanny era reference.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    that was a tough team to watch.

  • Remember Dante Jones? He had one awesome game against a young Bart Farve. The Packers won like 13 straight after that. The Tribune or Sun-Times headline was "Dante's Inferno". He never did shit before or after that.

  • Oh man, those were the dark years....

  • Hillenmeyer is the disgrace that actually lined up in the Mike spot for the Bears, a travesty that was lost in space. I never, ever want to see us with some ghoulash playing Mike ever again - it was brutal. Dom DeLuise is innocent until proven guilty

  • Damn Irish, you're pretty harsh on a guy that started for your team for several years. He was not a Mike, but he was what we had at the time. Blame Gerruh, not Huntuh.

    Dom has the same basic problem Hillenmeyer did at Mike - insufficient weight. But Dom is slotted at MLB, so presumably the org has some plan to beef him up.

  • I agree with Dave - Hillenmeyer was not terrible and he played his ass off for us. It wasn't his fault that he had to slide over to MLB when Lach had a freak injury.

  • Training camp is sacred? Sacred? What, are you sacrificing blondes to Kong? Come on Cowher. Just say you don't want cameras showing waht a hard ass you are.

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2012/05/bill-cowherhed-turn-down-hard-knocks-if-coaching/1#.T8Uq0NXPrnE

  • Just curious. Let's say the Bears decide to pull the franchise tender and let Forte test the FA market. Which teams exactly are going to pay him the deal he's looking for?

    Tampa Bay? Arizona? San Francisco? St Louis? Cincinnati? Indy? Miami? NYJ? SD?

    Which of them has the cap space? Am I forgetting about a young RB stud already on one of those rosters?

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Tampa Bay - just drafted Doug Martin, has Blount at #2
    Arizona - depends on cap situation; haven't checked
    San Fran - doubt it - Gore, Hunter, and Brandon Jacobs don't leave need
    St Louis - Steven Jackson and just spent a 2nd rd pick on Isaiah Pead; don't think they're in good sal cap situation
    Cincy - maybe but they just signed the Law Firm (BJGE) this offseason and let Benson walk
    Indy - possible; their RB chart sucks
    Miami - doubtful; this is one of the few positions they are somewhat deep at between Bush, Thomas, and Slaton
    NYJ - I think they're committed to Shonn Greene and Forte doesn't fit a power running scheme even if they did want to go that route. I was surprised they didn't get Jacobs. Not sure they have cap flexibility to make that kind of move anyway.
    SD - Matthews is their guy; I also think they have very limited cap space

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I really think the market is extremely limited for him. It is possible that a team with a starting RB coming off a serious injury, like the Vikings or Chiefs would be in play, as they have the space and a conceivable need, but doubtful.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Vikings are too invested in AP to afford Forte. You can't pay two #1 running backs in this league, the cap and the pro-passing rules just don't give the flexibility.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    Yeah, I'm speaking strictly in the case that AP's knee is done. That hit he took was ugly - I haven't been tracking reports on his recovery other than he's done some sprints with the team, but this is after reconstructive surgery on his ACL, MCL, and meniscus.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    AH, should've scrolled down before posting.

    Indy might be a prime candidate. Maybe the Skins since Shanny runs by committee.

    I agree. The demand for Forte and his contract will be very limited. Maybe an injury or two will make some teams more desperate between now and then though.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Arizona made a play for Peyton Manning, so they obviously have a plan in mind to free up cap space. And honestly, with Fitz, Floyd and Forte, they start to look legit on offense even with a mediocre QB. Kinda like Cincy a few years back, but in a much easier division.

    San Fran and St Louis both have #1s I forgot about, cross them off the list.

    I could see Cincy making the move, Forte makes BJGE turn into our Michael Bush - top tier backup. Plus, they need help in the passing game that Forte excels at.

    Indy, with their 2 tight end vision seems like a really likely landing spot. And they definitely have the cap space.

    So in order of liklihood, you've got three legitimate targets:
    1) Indy
    2) Arizona
    3) Cincy

    If you're Forte, with 2-3 years of prime time left, I'm thinking the Bears give you a much stronger chance of seeing the Superbowl than any of these teams (though Arizona theoretically has a better playoff shot).

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    I would agree with that - Indy would be my front runner in any scenario that involved a sign and trade (plus they're AFC South, and the Bears aren't supposed to play them again in the regular season until 2016 after the week 1 game this year).
    And if you're Chicago, I can't think of a team that I would expect to give better value to us in terms of draft position in 2013 and beyond.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Green Bay?

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Perish the thought.

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Scary, but I don't think there's any way they'd be in play.
    The last number I saw for them was only $3.4 million in cap space, and they really don't seem interested in playing the FA market any more.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    They would probably trade a player to make room capwise brownie. They'd love to have him on the roster, specially if they could stick it to us as well.

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    I guess what I'm saying is, as a front office, they don't like to go headhunting. They are a develop-your-own club all the way....that's not what they were in the Favre-Reggie White days, but they are now. I'm not sure who they have that we'd want, since they run a completely different D.

  • The cafe owner gets Zucked over. Now he knows how investors feel.

    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/zuckerberg-takes-his-new-wife-for-40-lunch--but-fails-to-tip-20120530-1zhx7.html

    If he didn't get a pre-nup with his fortune cookie, I guess Mark will be getting the final Zucking over.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I've worked a few jobs where tips were the only way you could make a decent living. If the story is true and the service was good, he deserves a good beating. Fucking cheap ass.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    it's called, "getting zuckerberged" Gp. Let's be correct, shall we?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Zuck you.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHvIcHbEHSU

  • What?? bringing it out of the mothballs/ DA 46...coming back....

    p.s. has the season started yet?...agree with blogfader about double deuce ...don't really give a rat's arse...either he's in our out...just wait till camp and we go from there?

  • In reply to lobotobear:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZk_HnE-cdU

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    nice trac,,,CLASSIC!!!!

  • i want forte
    to understand this one thing
    we are trying to build
    a team that has relevance
    over multiple seasons
    matt should try to figure out
    what it will take for him to get by on
    and do what is right for the team
    and it's future
    his agent knows the ins and outs
    of a teams cap space
    now and in the future
    get matt a decent figure
    then get off his agent-ass
    after the wins start piling up
    and get him some endorsements
    i want multiple super bowl wins
    not multiple highest paid players
    so get real matt
    and come in from the cold
    sit by the championship fire
    and be happy with your 6 mill

  • In reply to huntinbare:

    You make too much sense hunti, really.

  • it is with great sadness
    that i report the passing
    of legendary bluegrass comet
    Doc Watson
    has left the building
    and is now a fixture of the
    subtler realms
    doing a duet
    no doubt
    with levon helm

  • In reply to huntinbare:

    RIP, Doc.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    Good thing I wasn't reading from the bottom up...

  • *gasp* No shit :-)

  • In reply to huntinbare:

    Pretty heavy heart today. Saw him once and will always treasure the memory. What a sweet man.

  • Gabe Carimi ‏@GabeCarimi
    First day Back at practice went great. Just need to keep up the hard work to get back where I want to be.

  • Great Gabe. Thanks Maing.

    What we kinda need to know is how FAR you are from where you want to be. It's almost June and this information is kinda important.

  • Jeff, I take issue with this line of thought:

    "These gents can not be defeated in debate because they ignore the most simple fact about NFL athletes: they are worth more than the rest of us because they can do things the rest of can't do"

    Skipping over the notion that someone is "worth more" than someone else, I don't think your summary of this position is apt. I don't hear many (sane, sober) people saying that NFL (or any other pro athletes) should be paid nothing or even a pittance. The argument, is, instead, more along the lines of "[Athlete X] is spoiled, holding out for $10 million, when he could sign for $8 million and still make more in one year than most Americans will see in their entire lives."

    And herein lies the rub: Forte feels disrespected because the Bears--motivated by real, concrete financial limitations (i.e., the cap)--put a price tag on his "worth" somewhere around 10% less than Forte feels it should be. But, how does Forte put a price tag on his "worth?"

    The answer is that he looks at the "market" and decides that he's better than RBs X, Y, and Z, and therefore his salary should be higher than theirs. And/or he looks at fellow Bears and decides his worth based on his value to the team in comparison to their value to the team. And/or he looks at what proportion of the Bears' offense (and success) is due to him, and how much of the salary cap he should eat up.

    But why isn't he asking for $14 million a year? Why are he and the Bears so close--yet so far apart?

    There's a lot more I could rant about here--about how the Bears have a lot firmer idea of what Forte's value is, and how Forte's own perception is so much more subjective, as he's the one doing the work and it's harder for an individual to escape his own subject position, rather than an organization. Etc., etc. But the biggest point I want to land is this:

    This is about P-R-I-D-E. Forte wants the Bears to recognize his value to the team, and the only way to do that is with a dollar amount that makes it appear that the Bears spent more than they wanted to.

    As others brought up, Todd Bell and Al Harris thought the same way--much to their chagrin.

    It amazes me that in this day and age, when an NFL player--even after taxes, agents, managers, etc., all take their cut--can make more in a franchise-tag year than the "average" NFL player makes in a career, more than the average American couple will make in a lifetime of work, and then you can pile on an additional 7 figures of sponsorship dough, that a guy would value his pride at 6 or 7 figures.

    So, for me and many others, the deal isn't that the Bears & Forte can't agree on what he's worth--and it's not that I think that he should pay for peanuts--it's that the dispute is about whether he'll be slightly more rich than otherwise.

    And one more nugget. Legends of the game--guys like Walter, Red Grange, Butkus, etc.--despite the "big" contracts they got (in the context of when they played), they played for jack crap. How recent was it that NFL players didn't have to hold down a job in the off-season in order to make ends meet? How many guys play arena league, semi-pro, or even amateur ball today? Sure, the NFL guys today have skills and hone their bodies and minds to the point where they are the elite of the elite, and we revel in what they do on the gridiron. But let's not dismiss the argument--that people think pro athletes are overpaid by orders of magnitude. Without the $billions the NFL rakes in via TV contracts, licensing, advertising, etc., Forte would be lucky to make a million bucks a year. And in a few short years, he would still be more than the average American makes in a lifetime.

    So it's not unreasonable that people see the bottom line on the paycheck and resent the guy refusing the "low" offer--regardless of his talents.

    Bottom line: someone needs to remind Forte that he stands to lose a lot more than he'd gain. Chicago is the biggest, best single-team market in the NFL. He holds out, gets traded, sits & signs elsewhere, etc., he's throwing away potentially hundreds of thousands--if not millions--of bucks in future earnings from a city that lionizes its football heroes.

  • Good stuff BleedN+O, I would like to add something to that list. I think Forte might be trying to get "back-pay" for his last 4 years of making jack.

  • In reply to EnderWiggin:

    There is no doubt some of that, Ender. Forte has been screwed.

    Although many of you no doubt have a different opinion, *I* would not risk permanent injury for $500,000 per year.

  • Very well said. And let me add, in Forte's eyes, he was way underpaid for a 4 year period in which he WAS the only weapon on the bears O. He played through pain in year two and sacrificed future health/earnings for his team. He played last year despite feeling that he had already way overplayed his rookie contract. I think some of the guarantees that Forte is looking for are retroactive payment for services rendered. And he certainly has a point.... In a FAIR world. So somebody needs to tell Forte that while he deserves more for services rendered, that's not the way the world works, and the sad reality is that the GM who was there through all of his good faith service on the cheap, is no longer his boss.. He'll make plenty of money, and he just plain won't get paid for services rendered. Chances at rings are slim. He needs to take the offer and win a ring or two. Get some endorsements or just be happy with the fact that he did make millions playing a kids game and has a real chance at a ring.

    In short, You're beef is legit, Forte, but
    IT.
    Doesn't.
    Matter!

    Take the millions and get a ring!!!!!!!!!

  • yep +1
    be like a cub fan matt
    forget the past
    and stay focused on the bright futuire

  • http://uncrate.com/stuff/salt-made-from-tears/

    Hey Shady....

    Ahhhh, the tears of unfathomable saddness... mmmmm, yummy... yummy guys!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owzhYNcd4OM

  • I fucking told you guys we should have picked up lofton when we had the chance... Dom fucking ciccico?!?!?!?

    You know what old Jack Burton says at times like these...

    who....

    Jack Burton.... me!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Until we see him play, it's a little early to disparage MB.

    But I still wanted Keuchly.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    We got Mclovin.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    chicken dinner

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    The highlander.

  • In reply to Shady:

    I've got your highlander right here.

    Come get some.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    And before you freak out let me just say I keed because I love xox

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Dood you suck. Seriously you're terrible you should just stop playing...

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Posting in reverse order yay

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    we did see him play last year Dave. Nice back up/specials guy... lach's replacement... uhhhhhhh.... no.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    +1 on the Pork Chop Express

  • In reply to evantonio:

    Boom evan, boom.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl-pr5iqKb4

  • In reply to evantonio:

    I used to watch that movie over and over and over when I was little. Then, as a teen, I recognized a serious coptright likeness of that electric chinese dude and Rayden in mortal combat.

  • I assume this was already posted: https://twitter.com/MattForte22/status/206563488741601281

    So running in a straight line is the same as cutting multiple times and getting hit in the legs?

    Ok, just checking.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I thought one of the posts below that tweet was pretty sorry referencing that "Cracker Urlacher". Nice.

  • I've been reading this blog for a good 4 years on and off and I think I'd like to give it a go. Canadian currently studying in Israel, just booked a trip to Chicago to see Lach and the gang ruin Luck's first day on the job... First Bears game, couldn't be more amped. Bear Down!

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    An Israeli Canadian. Fascinating.

    You must be conflicted on the subject of bacon.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Not Israeli! Just here for a semester... Don't get me started with bacon, I've been having major withdrawals.

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    uuuhhhh... they have bacon in israel dude.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    fucking canadians.

    (sorry canada)

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Brutal, just fucking brutal! Of course, I'm laughing while I type.

    How 'bout Ryder? Great win. I couldn't believe Scarponi and Basso wouldn't help Ryder on the Stelvio. I'm sure their directors thought De Gendt would blow up but at some point they should have woken up. Totally knocked themselves off the podium by being stubborn. Great race!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    welcome eastcoast
    if you find one of those round
    "israeli -bacon" slices in jay-rusalem
    write this on it
    roll it up and stick it in the wailing wall

    " Hunti was here"

  • In reply to huntinbare:

    I'll do my best!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    This is GP's way of welcoming you to the blog. But since you've been lurking all this time, you know that.

    Stick around, it's gonna be a fun season.

  • In reply to SC Dave:

    Looking forward to it.

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    My wife is an Israeli Canadian. Where in Israel are you studying ECC? Welcome aboard.

  • In reply to NewBearInTown:

    That's awesome, I'm studying in Herzliya, it's about 30 minutes away from Tel Aviv.

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    ECC I live in Western Canada. Welcome aboard. Glad you're posting. Lots of laughs to be had around here and a great Bear talk.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    I always get a kick out of reading the threads. As an Irish Canadian I had to be careful not to step on any toes of the regulars while picking a nickname.

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    Well, you certainly hit the trifecta...now, what's your take on Jay Cutler's toughness so we can finish your personality profile?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I haven't questioned his toughness since this game

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK2IcJ0tH30&feature=related

  • I have to admit, I think it's kinda funny there is no blog love for the Dom-inator. Watch now, the dude is going to come into camp 'roided up and simply Hulk smash his way into the starting lineup, giving Lack more weeks to rest the knee.

    He needs a better nick, though. How about Dominatrix? At least until he shows us he's not a weak arm pussy, like Waffle says.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    GP.......how about Dom...?
    http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTY4MTQwMzI5M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODYyMDU4Mg@@._V1._SX214_CR0,0,214,314_.jpg

  • In reply to lobotobear:

    or maybe be Captainchaos?????

    http://cache.jalopnik.com/assets/images/12/2009/05/captainchaos.jpg

  • In reply to lobotobear:

    Cannonball Run references are an automatic 20 blog points. 30 if you can work in a reference to Adrianne Barbeau's tits.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    50 points in my book.

    I seldom need more than this.... Aaaaaaaand this!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85PcMJ9D8X0

    fuck I love that movie.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    sorry, "ooooor"

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I vote we him, "Psycho".

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I kinda like Dom-Dom. We do need a good nick name for him them. Here's what Pompeii had to say about him.

    "I read that Dom DeCicco is filling Brian Urlacher's role at MLB with the starters during Urlacher's absence. Can we interpret this to mean that the Bears brass envisions DeCicco as the heir apparent when Urlacher decides to hang up his Bears cleats? They're the same height, but Urlacher has a good 30 pounds on him. Between Urlacher's final college game and going to the NFL draft combine in 2000, he was able to pack on an additional 20 pounds and has stayed at that weight essentially ever since. So, adding on that kind of bulk is not out of the question. Am I reaching here? Dave Bentley, Charlotte, N.C.

    It is way too early to determine if DeCicco can be the heir apparent to Urlacher. He isn't even the backup to Urlacher. If Urlacher were injured, the Bears middle linebacker would be Nick Roach. But DeCicco is taking the snaps at middle linebacker in OTAs while Urlacher is out. DeCicco is a developmental player who doesn't have anywhere near the kind of physical ability Urlacher has. But the Bears like him because he has good instincts, toughness and ball skills. He has put on some weight since the Bears signed him, and he has the ability to put on more. But he'll always look small next to Urlacher."

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-bears-askdan-120529,0,7772489.column?track=rss

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I vote we name him Baldar!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYabFqmuX8

    First time i head dudes name all I could think of was the Coneheads.

  • I posted this a few threads back for Dom.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=402xHwQGVsE

    Mr..... Desicko.

    Diccico... the name's diccico!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    what ever happened to lovitz btw?

  • if he loses his front teeth
    and grins like jack lambert
    i will start calling him
    dom de chicletts

  • more fat to chew on..or for MB...BBBAAACCOONNN!!!!!!

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/30/top-of-running-back-market-likely-unattainable-for-forte-rice-jones-drew/

    question...are all three running backs agent the same guy???

  • and Double Deuce thinks he got fucked over.... checkout Brain Banks and his football life...all I can say is "poor bastard"..second article after Double Deuce's...

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Is-Fortes-durability-a-concern.html

  • I suggest Banks walks onto a college program for a year and then enters the draft. If he's good enough to play in the NFL, that would probably be his best route.

    On that Forte article, I'll say it again. I call Uncle on the anonymous source that was originally quoted as saying the Bears have durability questions on Matt. It would not surprise me if Matts agent was the anonymous source. No way the Bears would let that kind of a information get out. I just don't buy it. Anyone else have a take on this?

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Esp under tight lip Emery. NO ONE called McBraveheart to the Bears in the 1st. If he could keep that under wraps, no way some "knee concern" leaked out, at least not accidently.

  • Thanks for the congrats fellas...

    I'd been hoping for a boy up until a week ago, when I became indifferent. The reasoning behind the philosophy change was that, with my massive ego, a first-born boy would have had a lot to handle...

    "You don't like Thundercats? What do you mean you like the 'Green and Yellow' football team!?!? No, you will listen to Jimi Hendirx and you will love it!" (SMACK)

    On the bright side -

    1. A daughter will like her daddy much more than her mommy.

    2. I don't have to be concerned about my daughter's musical choices (e.g., country, ABBA, boy bands...). Most girls listen to garbage.

    3. If she doesn't have a mean crossover, or a quick first step, it's not the end of the world.
     
     

    So, in the end, it's for the better (rationalization leads to good feelings). A first born son would have had to endure constant warping and possible criticism. (Hey, at least I know I have a problem...) All my daughter will get indoctrinated with is that boys are evil liars who will turn you into a zombie when they touch you.

    Here's to shotguns and shovels!

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    congrats maings.

    You've heard my story – I was the 5th gen of 2 boys on my dad’s side and never even considered a girl. I went as far as to question the sonogramist lady's credentials when she didn't find a penis.

    I can't tell you how immensely happy I am that I had a daughter now. She is my angle maing… I can’t picture life without her. You will be a very happy dad.

    Btw…. Most certainly stock up on death shovels and shotguns… and not for zombies.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    You think we could get a discount if we buy them in bulk?

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    I know I am way to young for kids but Willie, I was thinking about that ..

    What if my kid likes Rodgers...

    What if my kid likes the Cowboys..

    too many what if's ...I'll just stick to no kids.

  • It won't matter by then Artoo. The NFL will be a flag football league by then.

  • Artoo I had my first at 24... you're not so far off.

    And I have to say, nobody in my family likes the same football team (probably due to all the moving). My dad is a Rams and Raiders guy from the LA days. My grand-dad is a Seahawks guy from when he lived there. My sister is a Cowboys fan because they were unstoppable in the 90s. The list goes on.

    But in a lot of respects its more fun that way. There's always somebody to root for or against in the playoffs (usually not all your teams are bad). Plus, those who enjoy the smack talk have at it.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    WWG...having a daughter first was actually a blessing in disguise..trust me...roughest time is now a teenager...damn!! hormones flying everywhere!!! but on a good note..she's daddy's girl loves my music, bleeds navy blue and burnt orange and knows that if any boy gets near her ...well let's just say here in NM is a lot of open space where bodies could potentially disappear....tee hee hee

    CONGRATS!!!! brah!!

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    Congrats Willie. I have one of each. I wouldn't have it any other way. Daughters get a little tricky when they get to 12 or so, not so with my Son.

  • In reply to Who is Willie Gault:

    i was thinking of rocky
    when you mentioned a mean crossover
    and quick first step
    so on her 1st birthday
    get her a chiken
    and put her and the bird in the playpen
    and let her chase it around
    by five
    she will be crossing over
    and in between
    and runnin' circles around dad
    on her way to posterize the little tyke rim

  • NFL.com released jersey sales in 2012 to date.

    #1 by a hair is Peyton Manning Broncos jerseys.
    Right behind is Tebow Jets jerseys.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    GP..I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.....ugh

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I'm still trying to get over the fact that George W Bush ever got elected for anything, and you throw that one at me?

    Yes, I just went there.

  • Yes but look at the flipside, he couldn't have been any worse than Lurch and AlGore.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH71fDIhpRk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8Q-sRdV7SY

  • In response to the point that Forte is looking for "back pay" from the Bears for being underpaid the past 4 years.

    I don't doubt that at all, and from Forte's standpoint, I can certainly sympathize with him. But that argument only works if he's talking about re-signing with the Bears, and only works absent the "current market value" comparison.

    In other words, Forte's looking for a bigger paycheck from the Bears. But if he's comparing his value to other players on the market, he can't use "back pay" to add to his value there, and he can't say that Team X would pay him the same (or more) than the Bears are offering, because Team X doesn't have to pay him the "back pay" he feels he needs from the Bears.

    In short, the "back pay" argument won't work for him, because it gives him no leverage--even though it's a morally-defensible argument.

    Not to mention the whole bit about him agreeing to play for the pay that was in his contract--because he signed the damned thing in the first place.

    I, personally, am sick of pro athletes becoming dissatisfied with the contracts they themselves signed, simply because the market value has gone up in excess of what their contract escalators predicted.

    Would I risk permanent injury for $500K? Absolutely. I did it for free, and sustained permanent injury. $500K will buy a nice house with wide doorways and ramps.

    My great-grandfather risked (and sustained) permanent injury on his job--which in today's dollars was making him about $18/hour. Back then, that sort of risk was called "typical." Not saying that justified it then, but that there are two reasons why pro athletes are paid ungodly sums of money: their skill sets are exceedingly rare, and their careers are exceedingly risky and short. Both of those are applicable to plenty of careers that make less than $6 million a year. And that's why so many people cannot abide by pro athletes holding out over the difference between $6.5 million and $7 million a year (or whatever the exact numbers are in Forte's dispute).

  • I agree that Forte has no grounds to stand on for back pay. Although, he has been told for the last four years that the Bears always take care of their own picks. If that were the case, shouldn't we have given him an extension after his second season(led the offense while playing on a bum knee, when he should have had surgery after week two)?

  • In reply to EnderWiggin:

    I guess it's really between Matt and the Bears. I hope they work it out. To expand on these comments requires way too much energy, "it's not worth it". Did Ya See how I did that? You Betcha!

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    I hope they do too, Trac.

  • secret relationship, yes... with a girl... mmmmm... probably not.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/tim-tebow-girlfriend-lolo-jones-twitter-nick-mangold_n_1555314.html?ref=sports&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl14%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D165321

    Not that there's anything wrong with that... right Trac?!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Ha, "inquiring" minds? I have a hard time keeping up with my life. I know that when I was his age, I was spreading around some South African seed if you know what I mean. Gotta give the guy props for being true to his faith though. I wish I had of waited. Once you get my age, all the old memories become not so wonderful because you realize what's really important.

  • Gotta love this story.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/66660/carroll-giving-exonerated-rb-another-look

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Yeah... it's good that the man gets a chance after having a good chunk of his life stolen from him.

  • Food for thought. Every time a new GM takes over a team, there seems to be an emphasis to move away from the previous GM's players. I will be very interested to see what happens at the Safety position. Hardin vs Conte and Wright. I "betcha" Hardin starts over Wright this year.

  • In reply to TracDaddy:

    Wright is more vulnerable than Conte, IMO. Because he is the lesser player.

  • Hatfields v. McCoys going down TONIGHT, who ya got?

  • In reply to Shady:

    Ah I forgot all about that. Thanks for the heads up!

  • In reply to Shady:

    I've got some Hatfields v. McCoys for you punk. You can pick whichever side you want.. then I'll rain down some OIC love.

    biatch

  • I'm not one to laugh at another man's missfortunate, but...

    BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

    http://www.rantsports.com/clubhouse/2012/05/30/nfl-shop-misspell-aaron-rodgers-name-incorrectly-on-nike-jersey-ad/

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Are you using your phone to post, doood? Because your autocorrect just bit you in the ass again.

    Bringing the hajji tonight.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    misfortune

    typo... whatever. I'll have a special SMAW'n tha FACE!!! for a wannabe Anglish teacher.

  • Speaking of fucked up jerseys by Nike...

    What the sam hill is this:

    http://www.nflshop.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4350123

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    wow. looks like what billybob wears when he goes turkey hun'in'

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Damn.

  • MB, Carimi thinks he's fine...don't sweat it.
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0531-bears-carimi-chicago--20120531,0,2362494.story

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    sweet! I'm good then! I'll stop mentioning it.

    fuuuuuuck.

  • From the bottom of that article, " Tight end Kyle Adams banged up his shoulder during a collision with safety Craig Steltz. The injury appeared to be a lot worse at first glance."

    The Friendly Fire Steltz missile strikes again.

  • The Biscayne Scud missile strikes again!

    Jesus steltz, why don't you ever hit other team's fucking players like you hit your own.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    The man is a danger to the organization.

  • Re Steltz, see below.

    Just listening to Bur Boy Roy's latest podcast on http://www.chicagofootballtalk.com/. He's talking about Urlacher's ESPN interview. Main points being.

    1. It's the best team he's ever been on. Emphatically.
    2. The O-line are huge men.
    3. Brandon Hardin is built.
    4. Steltz always knows where he has to be and what he has to do.

  • Steltz is a classic over achiever. Every team needs a few of those guys. If he had Conte's speed he would be terrific. Other than crushing Peanut's ribs, I've always been a fan of his.

  • In reply to CanadaBear:

    I doubt we will see much of Stelzt on D this year.

  • Dang Roy flaps his gums a lot.

  • Any volunteers?
    I bet it tastes great, but it looks like what my Bulldog throws up on the dining room floor when he eats too much.

    http://wine.woot.com/offers/skillet-street-food-bacon-spread-1

  • With things slowing down to a crawl in the NFL, this may help to pass a few minutes of football boredom. This is slightly better than Uncle Larry's answers, but not much.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-bears-askdan-120529,0,7772489.column

  • Anyone know much about Chris Summers? If he can play ST at all I'd love to see him snag Sanzendropper's spot

  • In reply to EastCoastCanuck:

    Sanzenbacher is already gone, just not officially:

    MARSHALL
    JEFFREY
    BENNETT
    HESTER
    THOMAS
    WEEMS

    THOMAS

  • Discuss amongst yourselves:

    http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/daily-show-nfl-socialism/

  • In reply to Shady:

    Caught that yesterday on the DVR...great stuff.

  • fb_avatar

    Are you all forgetting Forte is injury prone. Also not the best at getting the hard yards. As for the athletes deserve the money cause they do what others can't ; I guess surgeons should get a billion dollars per surgery.

Leave a comment