Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bears have $25 million in "upfront" money to spend

Dpantherman

By Dpantherman,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Dpantherman Newbie

Dpantherman

Posted
Posted

Posted by Mike Florio on March 2, 2010 7:57 AM ET

Last month, Bears president Ted Phillips declared that the Bears won't go "hog wild" in free agency.

Apparently, not going hog wild means having only $25 million in guaranteed money to spend on free agents.

Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times reports that G.M. Jerry Angelo has received permission to spend that amount in order to secure "impact" free agents. Frankly, that won't be enough to make a competitive bid for Panthers defensive end Julius Peppers -- especially if the Redskins are sitting in the crowd with one of those paddles with a number on it.

Jensen suggests that the allotted sum could go even higher based on a purging of veterans like Orlando Pace, whose departure frees up $3.75 million under whatever budget the team has applied to the 2010 season. Others who could be targeted for full or partial pay cuts are cornerback Nathan Vasher, defensive end Alex Brown, and tight end Rashied Davis.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/02/report-bears-have-25-million-in-up-front-money-to-spend/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...