In short, Lance Briggs should play out the deal he signed in 2008, that’s how contracts work; each side has to give a little to get a little. Briggs wanted a front loaded deal so he could get security knowing full well that if he continued playing the rest of the deal it included pay decreases. But some of his arguments I understand.
“If I play at X amount of money, then this year I’m asked to play for half of that, my play doesn’t decrease, So I have every right to go in and ask for a raise”
Right Lance, your play may not decrease, but you signed a contract and should be made to live up to that agreement which you signed.
What if your play had decreased? Would you be open to a decrease in salary? Doubtful.
“…Or in this case at least to flip the years. There is nothing wrong with that. From the business side, there is nothing wrong with that.”
Nope, nothing wrong with that; I could see this point flipping the years so you get your money this year as opposed to the end of the deal. But, what happens next year and then the year after that? Do you continue to ask for more?
The other issue is setting bad precedents with the other members of the team. Will this cause other players to expect Bears management to renegotiate all player contracts after they feel they deserve more money?
“Football players don’t retire when we are 65 years old.”
That’s understandable, the issue with that is regular people who do retire at 65 don’t make 36M over 6 years either.
Also it’s the reason you wanted and received the frontloaded deal. Therefore, you are receiving the money you wanted just in increments that don’t look like a raise, but you are still getting your money.
“What we are trying to do is creatively think of a way, any way, whether it be this year, next year, moving into the future. But there is no negotiating. I had to make a decision.”
The decision was made when you signed the contract, the negotiating was done in 2008. The most creative way to deal with this contract issue is to … ummm … play it out as you agreed to in 2008
“The main ingredient here, based off my decision, is to get something, To have management even be willing to talk. Whether it be, let’s deal with it at the end of the year, let’s deal with it after the season, then I have something to work with. But when the organization or management says we’re not talking now, we’re not talking ever, that puts me in a position where I know my days are numbered.”
Gotya, the reason that management may not be talking about your contract is the fact that when you sign a deal, you are expected to live up to it, simple as that. Again, what would happen if management wanted to talk about lowering your deal because your skills began to diminish?
The fact of the matter is, Briggs seems to be a pouty baby, in 2007 after he was the team put the franchise tag on him he said that he had played his last snap in Chicago, sort of a “I’m taking my ball and going home” tactic. When the Bears were willing to open up the checkbook and give Briggs the frontloaded contract he desired he went back to being Mr. happy linebacker
For More Great Chicago Sports Content
Follow us on Twitter at @chicitysports23 for more great content. We appreciate you taking time to read our articles. To interact more with our community and keep up to date on the latest in Chicago sports news, JOIN OUR FREE FACEBOOK GROUP by CLICKING HERE
Couldn’t agree more
Yeah, the saddest part is he thinks he 100% right. I love Briggs, hes been awesome for the Bears but … C’Mon