Bears want McIntosh, Golston or Marshall

Wizards2Lottery · Post #1 » by **Wizards2Lottery** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 1:45 pm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01038.html

Sources say the Bears could ask for middle linebacker Lemar Marshall, who started the last two seasons but will be a backup with the arrival of London Fletcher. The Bears also might ask the Redskins to part with either linebacker Rocky McIntosh, for whom the Redskins gave up two draft picks to select in the second round of last year's draft, or defensive tackle Kedric Golston, the fifth-round pick who played his way into the starting lineup last year, replacing Joe Salave'a.

The Bears are out of there **** minds and so is our front office for even discussing this trade.

Cliff Levingston · Post #2 » by **Cliff Levingston** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 2:51 pm

Gilbert0Arenas wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/01/AR2007040101038.html

Sources say the Bears could ask for middle linebacker Lemar Marshall, who started the last two seasons but will be a backup with the arrival of London Fletcher. The Bears also might ask the Redskins to part with either linebacker Rocky McIntosh, for whom the Redskins gave up two draft picks to select in the second round of last year's draft, or defensive tackle Kedric Golston, the fifth-round pick who played his way into the starting lineup last year, replacing Joe Salave'a.

The Bears are out of there **** minds and so is our front office for even discussing this trade.

Washington made an offer and now Chicago counter offers; it's routine negotiation.

No one should expect the trade of a pro bowl calibur player to get done quickly. This will get drawn out damn near up until the draft.

Higga · Post #3 » by **Higga** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 4:39 pm

I hope we don't make the trade but if we absolutely had to give up one of those guys, I'd probably give up Marshall.

Post #4 » by **Rafael122** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 4:39 pm

If that's the case, I'll give them Marshall. He's in his 30's and I believe in the last year of his contract. That way McIntosh becomes the prime backup.

likwitdesi · Post #5 » by **likwitdesi** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 11:14 pm

That article had so many facts wrong. Wasn't Golston a 6th round pick? Anyways, I would give up Marshall.

Dat2U · Post #6 » by **Dat2U** » Mon Apr 2, 2007 11:46 pm

I would keep McIntosh, forget Briggs and let Marshall & McIntosh battle it out for the WLB spot.

With the pick, I'd trade down maybe two or three slots and draft Laron Landry. He'd give us the ballhawking safety that frees up Sean Taylor to wreck havoc closer to the line of scrimmage.

Post #7 » by **LyricalRico** » Tue Apr 3, 2007 1:53 am

Dat2U wrote:I would keep McIntosh, forget Briggs and let Marshall & McIntosh battle it out for the WLB spot.

With the pick, I'd trade down maybe two or three slots and draft Laron Landry. He'd give us the ballhawking safety that frees up Sean Taylor to wreck havoc closer to the line of scrimmage.

Scabs304 · Post #8 » by **Scabs304** » Wed Apr 4, 2007 12:00 am

Redskins said the first offer was take it or leave it so I just have a feeling that this is just the Bears being pissy on how the trade offer got leaked before they were even offered the trade. I don't believe it will go down just because of the way the trade was handled.

Post #9 » by **Rafael122** » Wed Apr 4, 2007 1:12 am

My thing is, if the Redskins said no to trading Rocky, KEEP THE PICK and let Rocky fight for the starting job!

WashWiz54 · Post #10 » by **WashWiz54** » Wed Apr 4, 2007 2:25 pm

Bears got greedy and they paid the price. Thankfully the Redskins realized that Chicago's demands were out of hand and hung up the phone while they still could.

Wizards2Lottery · Post #11 » by **Wizards2Lottery** » Wed Apr 4, 2007 4:55 pm

Another thing to consider is that the Bears will likely have to pay the sixth overall pick almost the same money as Briggs wants.

Seems like a case of the Bears ownership being really cheap. They probably don't see a need for anyone at the sixth overall spot (even though they need to replace Rex Grossman).

Triple_6_Mafia · Post #12 » by **Triple_6_Mafia** » Fri Apr 6, 2007 10:23 pm

Gilbert0Arenas wrote:Another thing to consider is that the Bears will likely have to pay the sixth overall pick almost the same money as Briggs wants.

Seems like a case of the Bears ownership being really cheap. They probably don't see a need for anyone at the sixth overall spot (even though they need to replace Rex Grossman).

Replace Grossman with who?

Brady Quinn? yeah sure and wait another 3 years for him too devlope and watch are window slam shut.

Yeah we should get right on Quinn.

Were in a win-now mode, we can't take 3 years to bring along another QB at this point, it's just not fiesable.

The bear will either stand pat at QB, or go for a CLEARLY Better Vetran QB like McNabb.

Fatty · Post #13 » by **Fatty** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:00 am

win-now mode yet are possiblytrading a pro bowler LB for a 6th overall draft choice....

Triple_6_Mafia · Post #14 » by **Triple_6_Mafia** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:23 pm

Fatty wrote:win-now mode yet are possiblytrading a pro bowler LB for a 6th overall draft choice....

Wow man look at the situation before saying something as off-hand as that.

The dude is asking for insanes amounts of money, and threating to sit out the whole year if he doesn't get a new contract.

It's called controling the cap/the owners being cheap which ever you perfer.

Briggs is not worth that kind of money, so yes we are trying too move him for something of value, yeah we should just rebuild everything trade Urlacher, Tank, Mike Brown, Benson, Mosse, etc just cuase Briggs wants out.

I rember a couple years ago the Pats just flat out cut Lawyer Milloy and they were still in win-now mode and won the super bowl the next year.

And I still stand by what I said we have too keep Grosman unless we can get a clear up-grade.