To Trade or Not To Trade, Brian Urlacher

by WCG on May 16, 2008 10:22 AM CDT

While I know most are against the idea, I know a few have expressed some interest in the idea. Over at NBC Sports, there is at least one guy who thinks it is a good idea.

Angelo may not be able to pick quarterbacks, but he does know personnel. If he’s as smart as I think he is, he needs to be thinking about trading Urlacher.

He may be royalty in Chicago football lore, standing with the likes of Bill George, Dick Butkus and Mike Singletary among the Bears’ dominant middle linebackers, but the truth is that he is fourth in that group and he’s not getting any better. Trading Urlacher before the 2008 season would be the best move for a Bears team that slipped dramatically in 2007 and may be even worse this year.

He goes on to actually suggest a possible destination, that being the Denver Broncos.

If Shanahan was to send the Bears running back Travis Henry, wide receiver Brandon Stokley and linebacker Ian Gold along with two draft picks — including a first-rounder if the Broncos make the playoffs — it would be a trade that would work out well for both teams.

Henry may be busy off the field — he has fathered children with nine women — but he can run with the football. Stokley is a professional receiver who makes up in speed and toughness what he lacks in size. Gold is a thinking man’s linebacker who still moves well.

Moreover in a recent Sun Times poll 27% of fans say they would like to see him traded. So there are two questions I'd like to pose to you.

First, are you in favor of trading Urlacher if the price is right?

And next would the terms this journalist set up for the trade, enough for you to move Urlacher?

0 recs | Comment 54 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Yes, Trade Him

I have no problem with getting some draft picks or filling some needs on the field to trade Urlacher. We are deep at LB and we have leadership on defense. It would stink to see him on another team, but it may be the best way to see our team reach a higher level.

As far as his scenario:
I’m pretty excited about Forte, but a Henry/Forte backfield would be nice for a couple years. Could we include Benson in the trade. I would love to get Stokley, but I don’t see Denver weakening the WR group with a young QB they are trying to turn into a star. I could care less about Ian Gold. I’ve seen enough of Williams to be very happy seeing him play. The picks would be nice, but why wouldn’t you be looking for an offensive lineman. Hello that is our biggest ? currently on our team. And that is saying something with all the ?’s going into this season.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 11:12 AM CDT 0 recs

In response

I think Denver would manage without Stokley if they could get Urlacher. The addition of Ian Gold is so there is another vet presence I imagine. At this point we still don’t know if Williams or Okwo can do the job or how long Briggs will be with us.

As far as O line goes, I think Oline in Denver is always called good more because of the way they run things, not necessarily because the individual players are good. That said it is just one man’s gossip

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on May 16, 2008 11:16 AM CDT up 0 recs

Really???

You aren’t too confident in Williams being able to step up. I also had no idea that Briggs wouldn’t stay with us. Why would that be?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 1:53 PM CDT up 0 recs

I don't want to trade him but

If the price were right I’d be OK with it. Personally I think I like the picks more than any of those players. I thought we concluded that Benson gets one more shot to be a good change of pace guy with Forte so why do we need Henry (other than so maybe Briggs has someone to go skank shopping with at bars). Also Stokley gets injured, a lot, and I know nothing about Gold but I think we got some guys who could fill in.

by GallopingGhost on May 16, 2008 11:19 AM CDT 0 recs

Wow. People want to trade Urlacher?

I’m surprised. Honestly. Some level-headed thinking going on. Emotional detachment for the good of the team and what-not. Or maybe the emotion comes in feeling spurned by his latest demands. That’s my guess on the 27%. If the question were asked two weeks ago, the number might be 2% or something.

Anywhooo…. I’m on Urlacher’s side in his holding out, but I’ve also been proposing trading him since it became apparent last Fall that the team needed to rebuild (about Week 3). If they could get a productive RB (I don’t see them Trading Henry, though), a first- and a third-rounder in next year’s draft, I’d be all for it.

If they had a replacement at C, I’d be for replacing Kreutz as well. These guys are old enough that their play will be declining (if only slightly) every year, and the risk of serious injuries increase. I don’t think it will happen, but one wonders with his recent demands…........

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 11:31 AM CDT 0 recs

Against

I am attached, sue me. I’m also all about team first success but I think he is a big part of that. As far as getting rid of our offensive and defensive leaders, not sure that is the greatest plan but hey everyone gets an opinion.

by Ando on May 16, 2008 12:02 PM CDT up 0 recs

The thing about "leaders" is that they don't play forever.

Urlacher can’t lead this team for too many more years. Can you really say there is no one else who can lead the defense?

The football aspect is definitely a concern. Plus, he’s not at the point where they should just take whatever they can get. Sometimes, though, the best idea is to maximize the value these guys still have. Who would have thought the Oakland A’s had any “leaders” on their team? Or any pitching after trading Haren. Hanging onto guys too long is always a bad thing.

Since the Bears won’t compete in 2008, and more than likely in 2009 (although that’s not as easy to say, of course), they’re basically asking themselves: “Would Brian Urlacher be better in 2010 and beyond than what we could get for him in a trade?” If the answer is “No”, the trade makes sense. Oftentimes, one step back can lead to three or four steps forward.

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 12:52 PM CDT up 0 recs

Totally agree with you, but...

like I said, I am attached. I think our major difference in opinion here is that I haven’t mailed it in for next year, and certainly not for the year after that. I see the Bears as in a rebuilding mode but at the same time a situation where we can win now as well. They definitely are not starting from scratch so there is no need for a fire sale.

by Ando on May 16, 2008 1:28 PM CDT up 0 recs

I agree... sort of.

First, no qualms in being “attached”, just need to recognize it for what it is in these discussions.

Second, a team shouldn’t be starting from scratch in the NFL too often. Too many draft picks can make an impact. Free agency and the cap make it too easy to get players.

Third, I’m not talking about mailing it in. I’m talking about the realistic shot at winning the Super Bowl. (and herein lies my fundamental discord with the Bears F.O. and most posters here.) I’m not content with a team that will consistently be between 6-10 and 10-6 w/ the occasional 13-3 season that gets them a first round loss or maybe a Super Bowl if the entire conference is shit that year.

I think this team is likely a 6-10 or 7-9 team for 2008. A few lucky breaks, and they might win 10 games. If that’s the case, which I think it is, then they’re better off preparing for 2009 and beyond.

Anyway, yes, I have a more dour outlook on this season than most here. We’ll see what the Vegas odds and various professional pickers prognosticate them at, but I doubt it will be all that great.

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 2:12 PM CDT up 0 recs

I understand why you think that but consider this.

Our offense was the worst it could be last year. We will be the same or better. Our defense had to be the most beat up it could be last year. Maybe it could get more injured, but I don’t see how. Think about how many draft picks didn’t make it to the season, then we got hit hard with injuries during the season.

With all of that we still competed to the very end of every game. We were within a score in every game except for Dallas and we did win 7.

I think we are a better team than last year. The D is better and deaper. I believe the line will be the same, RB’s better, QB’s are the same really just a year older, WR’s are very suspect. We did lose Berrian but the guy was very incosistent. Moose was no help.

I want to win Superbowls very much too. I think the way to do it is to be consistent good and then on some years you get the breaks. Look at NE and Indy, they don’t win it every year, but they stay consistenty good. I’m fine with a team that wins 10 every year and sometimes 13. If we do that we will get a shot. We have had 3 13 win season since 2000 and have made one Superbowl. Look at the Colts. Keep winning games and you will get a shot eventually to do win a Superbowl. The hardest part is getting there, Tyger. You have a 50/50 chance once you get there.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 2:34 PM CDT up 0 recs

Sure....

but consistently winning 10-13 is vastly different than consistently winning 7-10.

You’re also forgetting that Brian Griese brought a spark (and good performance) in the early-midseason that Orton and Grossman didn’t. Griese had the most pass attempts, the highest completion percentage, the most passing yards and best QB rating of all QB’s. Yeah, the QB situation is juuuuuust fine.

You’re also forgetting that Devin Hester single-handedly+ won a couple of games for the Bears. After Berrian, he was their best offensive talent last year. I would almost guarantee you that Hester’s punt returns will be cut in half next year. Oh, and did I mention they let go perhaps the best special teamer (non P, K, KR, PR) in the whole league?

I’m sorry, but you’re just wrong in saying that Berrian was very inconsistent (you should actually check the game logs).++ Only three times did he have less than three catches. I’m astounded by how underrated by the Bears’ fans Berrian is. People are willing to forgive Grossman and Orton for a shitty line, and sometimes even Benson, but not Berrian? Not only does he have to deal with a crappy line not blocking for his QB, he had to deal with perhaps the worst QB situation in all of the NFL. One of the worst anyway. You forget that Bears offered a “very competitive” deal to Berrian to which he eventually signed. Is Berrian one of the ten best WR’s in the leage? Obviously not. But he was far and away the best the Bears had, and I think there are going to be a lot of people who are going to be regretting not having him. Or at the very least, will come to appreciate him on another team.

And I can’t believe you just compared the Bears to the Colts of the past decade. Hah!

+I’m smart enough to realize that no player will win a game single-handedly, let alone three, but I think the point makes sense.

++I’m just going to add one more time how ridiculous it is that people say how inconsistent Berrian is without at all recognizing how shitty the o-line, running backs and friggin’ QB’s he plays with actually were.

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 7:42 PM CDT up 0 recs

Dude

he can catch the deep ball….that was it. we have that now in Hester…...save all the undeserved chesse the Vi-queens paid him. let him be affraid …verry afraid to go across the middle on us like usual and will on blocks when they run to the outside…....when he wiffed on that block that would had scored a TD for McKie, it made me want to throwup. We need players who will put it all on the line for his teammates…..Kinda like Davis. Makes BIG catches and tqakes the hit and blocks when needed to down field.

by SuperBowlXX on May 17, 2008 7:36 AM CDT up 0 recs

that block would have been a penalty

by mike b on May 19, 2008 11:28 AM CDT up 0 recs

your smoking crack

it was a face to face block against a LB on a swing pass to McKie and he wanted no parts….watch on NFL replay..the Philly game.

by SuperBowlXX on May 20, 2008 5:12 AM CDT up 0 recs

no, actually it would have been a penalty.

and that was said in the papers the week after. and it was commented on back then:

crack block while the ball is in the air
read monday that is an illegal block. if true, he couldn’t block him.

by mike b on May 20, 2008 10:24 AM CDT up 0 recs

You missed understood Berrian. I'm referring to

dropped passes with Berrian. When you make it to this level you are expected to catch every one of those passes. TO got the same crap that I’m giving Berrian. He was very inconsistent. I loved Berrian, I would of franchise tagged him this year, but I know he was inconsistent at catching passes. It doesn’t matter who is throwing you the ball or how bad your line is, when the ball hits you in the hands you have to catch it in the NFL every time. He did not.

Brendan Ayenbedjo is very good, but we is surrounded by other good STers as well. Our ST is not going to fall apart because of him. I would say AP was very good as well and he missed lots of time last year. We will be getting him back this year.

Griese was did a lot of things well last year but one thing he did poorly cost us games. He through a ridiculous amount of picks in the redzone. Not only did we turn the ball over but we didn’t get the minimum of 3 points on those drives. He did a lot to help us and he did a lot to hurt us. He also through several picks for TD’s. If Griese was so good, we wouldn’t of traded him. I think we would of let the picks for TD’s go if he didn’t turn it over in the redzone so many times. I think I called 3 of his picks on the play that he through them.

Whether Devin Hester gets us on the 35-40 yard line starting position the whole game or he returns one for a TD, he will still be helping our team just like last year. I expect and who wouldn’t to see him catch 4-5 long TD’s this year minimum if he plays with any regularity.

Comparing the Bears to wanting to be a team that consistently wins 10 games every year and saying they will eventually get there shot at Superbowls doesn’t mean I’m saying we are them. Give me a break. I’m just saying that strategy is a good one.

Argue with what I saying not what you want to turn things around to mean, please.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 17, 2008 12:45 PM CDT up 0 recs

Your last line is crap.

I did argue what against what you said; you even responded to those arguments. Don’t paint it like I twisted the whole thing.

Whatever strategy the Colts have starts with having a premier QB, so the comment is even more worthless.

You can bemoan Berrian all you want, it doesn’t change what he’s done.So he dropped a pass, he made up for it with a ridiculous catch here or there. He didn’t drop enough passes (can you even tell me how many) that he wasn’t a HUGE net positive for the team.

Bringing it all back to the point of this thread… unless they trade Urlacher and Briggs becomes the premiere LB, they would have been wiser to spend the money on Berrian.

Berrian isn’t as good as Briggs is at his position, nor will he have as consistent an impact. However, Briggs is at a position that has greater health in its starters and better depth in the backups. Unless they get super lucky w/ the rookies, that choice will be the one that haunts them.

by tyger1147 on May 17, 2008 7:47 PM CDT up 0 recs

Another thing about leaders

They don’t make have a temper tantrum about a contract that had 5 years remaining.

I used to be a big Urlacher fan, but if that’s the way he’s going to ‘lead’ this team, the Bears are better off without him.

by garsky on May 16, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up 0 recs

I agree all the way around.

Hey this is a good feeling for me. I think Kruetz may be falling apart, too. The guys production was way down last year and I think he is 75% of the reason Chicago QB’s have been fumbling since the late 90’s. I hope Kruetz either had a really bad year or played through an injury and will be fine, but I’m watching him this year hard core.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 2:02 PM CDT up 0 recs

Dumb...

You have to look at more then what you are getting back. You’re giving up the center of your franchise. What does that do to your locker room? How will that impact the defense? You could argue that over the span of his career Urlacher has not only been great himself but has made every player in the front seven better as well. Will Lance Briggs be the same type of player with Jamar Williams next to him? I’m not sure, but, I don’t think so. Trading Urlacher is an insane idea and the Bears would never do it…

by PVL on May 16, 2008 11:45 AM CDT 0 recs

Dude, he's going to retire sooner or later.

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 11:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

More sooner than later I'd guess.

Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!

by WCG on May 16, 2008 12:37 PM CDT up 0 recs

If he badly hurt:

1-2 years. If he is healthy 3-5 years. Big difference and all the more reason we need to see him play some games this year and evaluate.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 2:03 PM CDT up 0 recs

Of course, if he is permanently hurt, then the Bears get jack for him.

by tyger1147 on May 16, 2008 2:13 PM CDT up 0 recs

Couple of problems...

First, Ian Gold is no longer a Denver Bronco, so you can have him now.

Secondly, I really think the Broncos are out of the “we’ll trade you a bunch of draft picks for a damn-near-over-the-hill player with tons of name recognition. Don’t get me wrong, I love Urlacher, but his best days are behind him and I’d rather draft the next BU than take a flyer on a model that is a shell of it’s former-self.

-TSG

www.milehighreport.com

by TheSportsGuru on May 16, 2008 12:52 PM CDT 0 recs

I agree

I think the writer who proposed the deal is smoking crack. There’s no WAY the Broncos pay that much for Urlacher. A 1 and a 3 is about as good as the Bears can expect. Anything else is gravy.

by garsky on May 16, 2008 1:55 PM CDT up 0 recs

This is a very tough question but I think if the right deal comes along and the Bears don’t give him away for peanuts and could get good players/picks the I think that would be a good move.

I think a good analog here is Ray Lewis and the Ravens (once dominate MLB that is the face of a franchise and has suffered some injuries on a team that taken some steps back after a super bowl run). Would the Ravens have been better off if they shipped Lewis out for good players/picks that could address immediate needs a couple years ago or keeping Lewis around for his final years? I think they would’ve if a situation like this arose for them.

Does Urlacher have anything left to offer a team? Absolutely but I think we got the best years of his career. Yeah sure this might have some negative impacts in the locker room if you trade your team leader but I am not quite convinced that a protracted contract battle with you team leader is much better.

Urlacher could help a vetern playoff ready team like Junior Seau did with the Pats. I don’t think the Bears are in the same position especially with all the problems we have on O. If we can net some solid players and maybe a draft pick out of this I’d do it.

by SofaKingChicago on May 16, 2008 1:32 PM CDT 0 recs

Lewis not a good example

First of all, on his best day he’s better than Urlacher on his best day.

Also, if I recall correctly, Lewis never put himself before the needs of the team. He never demanded a new contract halfway through a record-setting one, much less doing so with deserving teammates whose contracts are coming up in line in front of him.

by garsky on May 16, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up 0 recs

I think you missed the point of the analog I made above.

to your point about Lewis not doing this to his team.

From Feb 2006 (the post quotes an article from the Balt. Sun)
http://forums.extremeravens.com/index.php?showtopic=15324

From April 2008
http://www.carrollcounty.com/articles/2008/04/02/sports/esports4208.txt

by SofaKingChicago on May 16, 2008 2:08 PM CDT up 0 recs

Last I checked

we ran a cover 2 right? Which needs a quick, playmaking MLB to cover the deep middle and also provide pressure while blitzing. I’m not so confident Williams or Briggs would be ideal in that spot nor do i think we could possibly get enough value out of anybody for what Urlacher provides on the field with his leadership and off the field for the city of Chicago. We’re not in a rebuilding mode. We have the pieces on defense and a top 5 IMO when healthy. Offense is coming along but we have two vet. qb’s, two amazing te’s and potential at WR in Hester and our rookies. Our O line will come along as will the running game. Just my opinion, which we’re all entitled to, but I think there’s a couple of players in the league who’ve put their hearts on the line for certain teams and deserve to finish careers with those teams, Urlacher being one. I just hope this doesn’t pan out like Zach Thomas’ situation did.

"URLACHER IS GOD"....."PLAY-MAKERS STAND UP!!!!!"

by Acreman20 on May 16, 2008 2:18 PM CDT 0 recs

How quick did Urlacher look to you last year?

Man I thought he lost 3 or 4 steps personally. But I’m sure it is going to restrict you when you are playing with pain. I appreciate all Urlacher has done for us. I also think he got paid well to do it. I’m not sure he will be able to play at that level in the future and I don’t think he should get a raise if he can’t perform at a high level. Dudes making 5 mil. That is pretty good for a good player.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 4:08 PM CDT up 0 recs

Broncos unlikely

Oakland would be the only franchise I could think of that would grab Urlacher on his name alone. After the back and neck things, I doubt any smart front office would give up a ton of assets for Urlacher. He’s still capable of greatness, but his best days are behind him. His attitude is crap too. If anyone wants to make a fair deal for him, I wouldn’t shed a tear.

by MuleTrain on May 16, 2008 2:41 PM CDT 0 recs

If we can trade

for anything close to his value, we should definitely trade him. No doubt about it. He probably only has 2 or 3 years left at most.

OTOH, I doubt we’ll get anything close to his full value. If we got a first out of him, I would be ecstatic, but I don’t know if there’s a team out there that value’s him as much as we do. I myself am not as emotionally attached to him as other fans.

I don’t think he’s got much left, and his value won’t be higher than it is now and if we try to trade him next year, we won’t get anything better than a day 2 pick.

I am like your Dan Aykroyd and biglow would be Jane, the ignorant slut. -Chad

by thecoolest on May 16, 2008 4:23 PM CDT 0 recs

OK Everyone says his best years are behind him

But lets go to the stats, he led the team in INTs with 5 to go with 12 deflected passes and he had 5 sacks to go with 123 tackles, 92 of which were solo. Compare that to his 2005 DPOTY when he had 0 INTS, 5 pass deflections, 6 sacks and 121 tackles 97 of which were solo. So suddenly he had a terrible year is going downhill after 5 fewer solo tackles and 1 fewer sack? I don’t know. I think he gets a bad rap for last year just because the rest of the team sucked.

by GallopingGhost on May 16, 2008 4:59 PM CDT 0 recs

Ok, you're not watching games are you?

4 of those picks and 9 of those pass deflections came in the last 7 games. He would have had a lot less tackles if the Bears would of had some three and outs, and where was he the first half of the year?

He made 0 impact in the beginning of the year. He was regularly blocked, looked slow, missed tackles, and had no fire in him. Why? Because he stinks? No. Because he was hurt. And if he is still hurt this year look for him to get much worse. The signs are there Ghost if you were watching games last year. Everyone else saw it.

He blew it up down the stretch. I think he felt better during those games.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 5:13 PM CDT up 0 recs

You have me there

You’re right, but I guess that still feeds into my point, he was there down the stretch, so if he was feeling better then maybe thats a sign that if the surgery was a success then that should carry over into this season.

Wouldn’t you think the team could be kicking themselves if he comes out of the gate this year like a man on fire and wins like Comeback POTY but plays for another team because we didn’t believe that the end of the season was going to carry over and the front office didn’t think it was worth giving him a few more million now?

by GallopingGhost on May 16, 2008 6:41 PM CDT up 0 recs

That would be awesome.

It is possible, but I’m trying to be realistic. I think the other is more likely.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 16, 2008 7:35 PM CDT up 0 recs

I don't want Urlacher traded this year

I think the playoffs are a possibility this year and if they put it all together there is a small, small chance for the SuperBowl. Now, after this year we find out Grossman and Orton are terrible and we have to draft a QB who wont be ready for 2-3years, then I would trade Urlacher/Kruetz for as many draftpicks as I could get; and start full-on rebuilding.

by gillrowdy on May 16, 2008 9:45 PM CDT 0 recs

All this Urlacher Trade Talk

makes me want to Puke.

by SuperBowlXX on May 17, 2008 7:38 AM CDT 0 recs

this team wont need to rebuild

urlacher is healthy, this is just the offseason. they wont trade him now or ever.

i think the news that isnt getting spoken about is lovie confirming his belief in mike brown.

a healthy d with mike brown could win us the two or three games we needed in 07. if he stays active throughout the year, he could also help guys like payne and steltz become extremely productive....... i think everyone will be loving our offense when our d is leading in takeaways.

by rahulsriram on May 17, 2008 8:04 AM CDT 0 recs

Yeah, I read that too.

That was very interesting. Why would he feel so much better about Mike this year than any of the others. Wasn’t he just as healthy starting those years? Were we playing him when he wasn’t 100%. Why does Lovie feel so optimistic about Mike now?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 17, 2008 12:47 PM CDT up 0 recs

because hes a bad ass

mike brown is awesome. you’d rather have mike brown on your team than not.. he is a game changing saftey, which is perfect for lovies system.

i mentioned the point because i was happy to hear the news. But i can see the other argument about his health etc.

last year with a healthy mike brown, i believe they make the playoffs. lovies d can be exposed by better teams but the idea is to get takeaways at some point which mike brown is built for

by rahulsriram on May 17, 2008 7:46 PM CDT 0 recs

Does one player really make that big of a difference?

Is Mike Brown that good? Two games?

by tyger1147 on May 17, 2008 7:50 PM CDT up 0 recs

He is the Bears all-time leading defensive scorer

The proof lies in the fact that the Bears record with him in the line-up is well over .500 over the last three or four seasons. Arguably Brown and Urlacher are the two most important pieces to our D.

Doesn’t really matter though I still think you will disagree.

by GallopingGhost on May 18, 2008 12:36 AM CDT up 0 recs

Bob Sanders?

helped them win a superbowl.

by SuperBowlXX on May 18, 2008 5:18 AM CDT up 0 recs

yeah

yeah he does. arizona monday night game 06’ comes to mind. he can impact a game kind of like bob sanders but can score more.

by rahulsriram on May 17, 2008 9:05 PM CDT 0 recs

Yes, trade him!

Look, he wants too much money and is in decline. No one can play football forever. Personally, I’d rather see another 2nd rounder instead of Henry, because I’d like to see Forte get a chance. So, maybe 3 draft picks and two players and let someone else pay Urlacher what he feels he is worth…

by modai on May 18, 2008 2:55 AM CDT 0 recs

id rather have.....

selvin young then henry but….im just wishing.

by SuperBowlXX on May 18, 2008 5:20 AM CDT up 0 recs

Young's nothing special

he’s just a product of Denver’s blocking scheme. I mean, he was an undrafted free agent.

I am like your Dan Aykroyd and biglow would be Jane, the ignorant slut. -Chad

by thecoolest on May 18, 2008 11:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

to trade or not to trade,Brian Urlacher

You guys have got to be KIDDING me why would you trade this guy when he has been the best player for the bears for a long time. Man we fans sure do forget fast around here

by bear4life on May 18, 2008 11:09 AM CDT 0 recs

Who replaces him?

Would Briggs slide over to MLB? I do not think he should be traded unless someone comes asking with a lucrative deal….(Tom Brady for Urlacher and a 1st round pick!)

2008 Cubs: Why Beat A Team in Regulation, when you can beat them in extras?

by Chanman25 on May 19, 2008 5:19 PM CDT 0 recs