Manning Jr - Arrested

[Walter34 3]

1) you love brees

2) the bears have/had a ton of cap space

3) the bears qbs blow

4) the bears should have signed brees, if, by your admission, brees is such a great qb.

 

the end

 

If they blow, how come Orton lit up your team's D in both meetings? Does this mean the Det D blows more than the Bears qbs?

 

---------------------

 

shall we just end the pointless banter or are you having fun? This is how last year degenerated. Do we want to go there again?

[swamp dog 0]

If they blow, how come Orton lit up your team's D in both meetings? Does this mean the Det D blows more than the Bears qbs?

 

---------------------

 

shall we just end the pointless banter or are you having fun? This is how last year degenerated. Do we want to go there again?

 

the qb position for the bears blows. you can live in denial all you want by pointing out the bears record last year.

 

so you'd have no problem going into this season if it were guaranteed the bears qbs would have a collective rating of 59 again?

 

yeah, i thought so.

[Walter34 3]

the qb position for the bears blows. you can live in denial all you want by pointing out the bears record last year.

 

so you'd have no problem going into this season if it were guaranteed the bears qbs would have a collective rating of 59 again?

 

yeah, i thought so.

 

Yet strangely, Orton's qb rating is over 100 in the two Det games. How did that happen against such a vaunted D?

[ShaneFalco 0]

Yet strangely, Orton's qb rating is over 100 in the two Det games. How did that happen against such a vaunted D?

 

Answer: The defense is going to be on the field a lot when your offense can't move the ball. It's even worse when we play a D like your Bears.

 

Our defense is not bad, just not as good as the Bears.

[swamp dog 0]

Yet strangely, Orton's qb rating is over 100 in the two Det games. How did that happen against such a vaunted D?

 

you're getting as bad with the red herrings as drj. this post has nothing to do with the question posed in the previous post.

 

feel free to answer the original question at your leisure.

[Walter34 3]

you're getting as bad with the red herrings as drj. this post has nothing to do with the question posed in the previous post.

 

feel free to answer the original question at your leisure.

 

lmao - you're the king of red herrings throughout bthis and every thread.

 

feel free to answer the original question at your leisure.

 

how can you justify that contract, walt?

 

Its incentive based.

 

NEXT QUESTION!

 

[DrJ 0]

1) you love brees

2) the bears have/had a ton of cap space

3) the bears qbs blow

4) the bears should have signed brees, if, by your admission, brees is such a great qb.

 

the end

 

And now he's gone full circle and is back to arguing things that he admittedly doesn't even believe.

 

The end.

[swamp dog 0]

walt:

 

1) the contract has a lot of guranteed money in it--especially in year 1.

2) you still haven't answered my question about the bears qbs. choicing, ironically enough, to use a red herring to...call attention to alledged red herring

[DrJ 0]

I think the million dollar question that is begging to be asked is which will happen first:

 

1) Welchdog wins a debate

2) The Lions win a Superbowl

 

I'm pretty sure this should be a unanimous NEITHER.

 

Cheers.

 

The end.

[swamp dog 0]

And now he's gone full circle and is back to arguing things that he admittedly doesn't even believe.

 

The end.

 

you're in love with brees. you tried to insist the lions should be in love with brees, too. in fact, you got really annoyed that the lions weren't interested in your lover, brees. therefore, if brees is so hot the bears should have also snapped him up. they did have the pile of money and only a drunk and a peg-leg as a qb.

 

the end.

[DrJ 0]

you're in love with brees. you tried to insist the lions should be in love with brees, too. in fact, you got really annoyed that the lions weren't interested in your lover, brees. therefore, if brees is so hot the bears should have also snapped him up. they did have the pile of money and only a drunk and a peg-leg as a qb.

 

the end.

 

If the Bears had no QB whatsoever, and 7 consecutive 1st rounders on the offensive side of the ball, it would have made great sense. But that isn't the case, they're not the bumbling Lions.

 

Cheers.

 

The end.

[Walter34 3]

walt:

 

1) the contract has a lot of guranteed money in it--especially in year 1.

2) you still haven't answered my question about the bears qbs. choicing, ironically enough, to use a red herring to...call attention to alledged red herring

 

you said "original question". I answered it. What subsequent question would you like answered?

 

If I thought for a minute you were interested in a serious discussion, you might get logical responses. Instead you are more interested in the same games that caused you to run yourself off the board last year.

 

For youth, future potential and current ability, i would take the Bears 3 over any other group in the division. Grossman has been stifled by the injuries. He gets one more chance to stay healthy and succeed or he is done in my books. I think he can do it this year. If you watched the Bear games he was in, you saw the difference last year. The ball moved downfield and the O moved. When the D had the bad day against Steve Smith rex lead 3 TD drives and kept them in the game. We're hopeful that he can stay healthy.

 

Griese is a solid backup. Not many teams in the league have one as good at QB2. This is the type of fallback plan that we should have had last year.

 

Orton is not ready to be a starter, but did a great job for a 4th round pick in his rookie year. He wasnt asked to win games, just not lose them. He won 10 games as a rookie. In reality, the D won these games, but he limited his mistakes to allow them to. Impressive for a young player at the most important position. He may not amount to anything doen the road, but may also improve with experience.

 

Overall, we have 2 young qbs with good potential and a good vet as a backup plan.

 

You mention the qb rating and of course that would be unacceptable. I highly doubt it is that low this year, but if it is, then there would be a need for change in 2007.

[swamp dog 0]

If the Bears had no QB whatsoever, and 7 consecutive 1st rounders on the offensive side of the ball, it would have made great sense. But that isn't the case, they're not the bumbling Lions.

 

Cheers.

 

The end.

 

they had no qb, save a peg-leg and a drunk. now they have TWO drunks and peg-leg.

 

the end. again.

 

you said "original question". I answered it. What subsequent question would you like answered?

 

If I thought for a minute you were interested in a serious discussion, you might get logical responses. Instead you are more interested in the same games that caused you to run yourself off the board last year.

 

For youth, future potential and current ability, i would take the Bears 3 over any other group in the division. Grossman has been stifled by the injuries. He gets one more chance to stay healthy and succeed or he is done in my books. I think he can do it this year. If you watched the Bear games he was in, you saw the difference last year. The ball moved downfield and the O moved. When the D had the bad day against Steve Smith rex lead 3 TD drives and kept them in the game. We're hopeful that he can stay healthy.

 

Griese is a solid backup. Not many teams in the league have one as good at QB2. This is the type of fallback plan that we should have had last year.

 

Orton is not ready to be a starter, but did a great job for a 4th round pick in his rookie year. He wasnt asked to win games, just not lose them. He won 10 games as a rookie. In reality, the D won these games, but he limited his mistakes to allow them to. Impressive for a young player at the most important position. He may not amount to anything doen the road, but may also improve with experience.

 

Overall, we have 2 young qbs with good potential and a good vet as a backup plan.

 

You mention the qb rating and of course that would be unacceptable. I highly doubt it is that low this year, but if it is, then there would be a need for change in 2007.

 

was that so hard?

[DrJ 0]

was that so hard?

 

This is why I don't understand why you waste your time being civil to this joker, Walt. I could understand if you got a little courtesy in return...but...

[swamp dog 0]

This is why I don't understand why you waste your time being civil to this joker, Walt. I could understand if you got a little courtesy in return...but...

 

because he feels odd respect that i kicked his azz in hockey this year

 

he finally answered my question here, and stopped wasting time and energy trying not to answer it. would have been better for everyone had he done that two pages ago. hence, my post about it being not that hard

[MahSoonerz 0]

I have a theory. The bored functions best when it has one and only one whipping boy. Now that stevejohnson is gone, swampie I believe that you are It. But then, you might could stop making it so easy. When even I start picking on you, you know you're in trouble.

[swamp dog 0]

I have a theory. The bored functions best when it has one and only one whipping boy. Now that stevejohnson is gone, swampie I believe that you are It. But then, you might could stop making it so easy. When even I start picking on you, you know you're in trouble.

 

member 40512-ish...or whatever? who are you? today is the first i've heard of you.

 

shoo.

[DrJ 0]

member 40512-ish...or whatever? who are you? today is the first i've heard of you.

 

shoo.

 

Ah yes, the infallible "noob" insult. Welch is reaching deep into his bag of tricks today.

[MahSoonerz 0]

who are you? today is the first i've heard of you.

 

That is because I generally am only seen in places where the sun shines.

[Walter34 3]

because he feels odd respect that i kicked his azz in hockey this year

 

he finally answered my question here, and stopped wasting time and energy trying not to answer it. would have been better for everyone had he done that two pages ago. hence, my post about it being not that hard

 

Bullshiat. I answered on page three right after it was 1st brought up:

 

What data - its an educated opinion.

 

Lions - journeyman qb over 30 who's been on the bench for over 2 years and a young qb that couldnt beat out Kurt Warner last year

Pack - Favre retires? and a virtual rookie

Vikes - Old man Johnson - decent, but long in the tooth and a Lions qb reject

Bears - former 1st round pick that hasnt been healthy, sophomore that won 10 games as a starter and a 31 yr old vet backup that has been very productive in both Denver and TB.

 

You are the one that dragged this thing out asking for an answer to a question addressed a over a page ago. It would be best for everyone if you would actually read responses before opening the piehole. Another tip would be to know your role. When your team either beats the Bears or finishes ahead of them in the standings, then speak. Until that day, quietly sit in the corner and speak when spoken to.

 

TIA / HTH

[swamp dog 0]

Bullshiat. I answered on page three right after it was 1st brought up:

You are the one that dragged this thing out asking for an answer to a question addressed a over a page ago. It would be best for everyone if you would actually read responses before opening the piehole. Another tip would be to know your role. When your team either beats the Bears or finishes ahead of them in the standings, then speak. Until that day, quietly sit in the corner and speak when spoken to.

 

TIA / HTH

 

oh, the mighty i-threw-a-dart-a-found-a-team-to-root-for-and-bought-a-really-cool-payton-jersey-on-ebay-so-i-guess-i'll-root-for-the-bears fan is trying to dress me down.

 

relax, francis. and you didn't answer the question with any sincerity until this page. had you done that, this would have ended long ago. you did, finally. learn a lesson from it for future reference.

[Walter34 3]

oh, the mighty i-threw-a-dart-a-found-a-team-to-root-for-and-bought-a-really-cool-payton-jersey-on-ebay-so-i-guess-i'll-root-for-the-bears fan is trying to dress me down.

 

relax, francis. and you didn't answer the question with any sincerity until this page. had you done that, this would have ended long ago. you did, finally. learn a lesson from it for future reference.

 

That's rich coming from the "I happened to be born in a city so will be a sheep and blindly cheer for the home team" guy. Newsflash sparky - canada doesnt have an NFL team.

 

Also rich that you would want sincerity considering you take every move by the Bears and try and dig up a negative spin. We could trade for Peyton himself and you would point out the cap hit and call it a dumb move.

[b.j. booker 0]

I also wouldn't call Jon Kitna and Josh McCown "literally nothing" at QB. Kitna has proven to be a good veteran QB, evident by his last starting season, 2003, in which he threw over 3500 yards with 26 TDs and 15 INTs. I think he is underrated. McCown, although he hasn't too done much, has shown promise and may develop into a serviceable starter.

 

 

The problem is that you are forgetting that the Bears have superstars Grossman and Orton at qb. That is the true measure of qb greatness. Compared to them, Kitna and McCown are literally nothing.

 

Bears fans can't say shiiiat about the Lions qbs this year

 

If they blow, how come Orton lit up your team's D in both meetings? Does this mean the Det D blows more than the Bears qbs?

 

 

yes

[DrJ 0]

yes

 

[Sweetness_34 0]

DrJ & Walter

 

Here is the break down of Manning's salary.

 

Bears | Contract update: R. Manning Jr.

Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:52:01 -0700

 

Chicago Bears CB Ricky Manning Jr.'s five-year contract included base salaries of $1.585 million (2006), $1.065 million (2007), $1.85 million (2008), $4.75 million (2009) and $4.55 million (2010).

 

================

 

Clearly, unless he wins the starting CB job and performs like a starter, he will be cut or asked to restructure after the 3rd year. Basically it is a 3 year deal and after adding his guaranteed money, it is a very good deal (~3M a year average) for an experienced nickel CB. And if he is really good enough, and he does become a starter, then his salary of 4.75 and 4.55M are pretty good too for a starting CB.

 

Compare this to how much Charles Woodson got (7 yr 52 M), and how many games Charles has played last 2 years vs Manning.

[Walter34 3]

DrJ & Walter

 

Here is the break down of Manning's salary.

 

Bears | Contract update: R. Manning Jr.

Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:52:01 -0700

 

Chicago Bears CB Ricky Manning Jr.'s five-year contract included base salaries of $1.585 million (2006), $1.065 million (2007), $1.85 million (2008), $4.75 million (2009) and $4.55 million (2010).

 

================

 

Clearly, unless he wins the starting CB job and performs like a starter, he will be cut or asked to restructure after the 3rd year. Basically it is a 3 year deal and after adding his guaranteed money, it is a very good deal (~3M a year average) for an experienced nickel CB. And if he is really good enough, and he does become a starter, then his salary of 4.75 and 4.55M are pretty good too for a starting CB.

 

Compare this to how much Charles Woodson got (7 yr 52 M), and how many games Charles has played last 2 years vs Manning.

 

3 yr / 10.5 million.

 

If he starts, he gets more and the Bears have the option to not take on the last 2 yrs at 9 million.

 

Very good deal assuming he stays out of jail.

 

Now that we have the full picture, thoughts swamp?

[swamp dog 0]

3 yr / 10.5 million.

 

If he starts, he gets more and the Bears have the option to not take on the last 2 yrs at 9 million.

 

Very good deal assuming he stays out of jail.

 

Now that we have the full picture, thoughts swamp?

 

walt, i was going off the yahoo story and the numbers they've posted. i've now seen about three different versions of his contract. if the above are the accurate numbers, it doesn't look as bad as the early story (yahoo) had it. but i don't have a clue which numbers are correct.

 

btw: congrats on your impending fatherhood! (didn't know if you saw my post at the draft thread about that).

[Walter34 3]

walt, i was going off the yahoo story and the numbers they've posted. i've now seen about three different versions of his contract. if the above are the accurate numbers, it doesn't look as bad as the early story (yahoo) had it. but i don't have a clue which numbers are correct.

 

btw: congrats on your impending fatherhood! (didn't know if you saw my post at the draft thread about that).

 

Thanks!

[DrJ 0]

The contract structure that Walt is giving can be confirmed on nflpa.org

 

http://www.nflpa.org/Members/playerProfile.asp?ID=34654

 

3 years 10.5 is correct. Not terrible. And if he's a quality starter, that 4.75 and 4.55 should be a song by 09 and 10 since the cap should be about 10-15 million more by then. If not, cya.... and there will be no cap hit to get rid of him since they made almost all of the money in front a roster bonus.

 

Plus, he only counts about 1 million and 1.8 in the next 2 years, a total bargain against the cap in those years. Which will allow the Bears to continue to have all the cap space they need to sign Briggs, hit the FA market if they choose, etc, etc.

 

Definitely a nice structure on the deal. I still hate giving up the 3rd, but there's no issue at all with that contract....