Nick Collins' New Contract; Holdouts and Extensions; and Plaxico Burress

by Brandon on Jun 5, 2009 7:00 AM CDT in News Comment 4 comments

If S Nick Collins skips the mandatory June 22 practice because he wants a new deal, we now know how much he should get paid. Because Pro Bowl S Adrian Wilson just got a new five year contract, with $18.5 million guaranteed. Although Wilson is a different type of player; he plays strong safety, closer to the line of scrimmage, and blitzes more while Collins plays deep and is used almost exclusively in pass coverage, Collins' agent will use Wilson's deal as a template. But is Collins really worth it? He had a poor 2007 season and had to play better in 2008 just to hang onto his starting job. Instead he completely exceeded my expectations and had a Pro Bowl season. I expect he'll get a new contract this summer, but I would like to see one more quality season from him before he gets his big contract. Oh, and Andrew Brandt warned us all that Collins was going to raise a stink about his contract because when he was in Hawaii for the Pro Bowl, he was told by agents that he needs to get paid more.
Just a reminder, although I'm writing a lot about how unhappy Collins and WR Donald Driver and LB Aaron Kampman are with their contracts, I don't think it's a big deal. It's just part of football, and every team has to deal with it. For example, Minnesota's dealing with the same complaints from their players, and currently CB Antoine Winfield is skipping their organized team activities over his contract.
Speaking of contract extensions, 49ers LT Joe Staley received a six year extension, which added to the remaining three years left on his rookie contract, means he's under team control for the next nine seasons. Fooch thinks it's good to lock up your young talent long-term, which I generally agree with. But Mike Florio makes a good point that this contract is bad. The average salary per season is low, so low that either Staley will have to disappoint to play down to it or he'll be asking for a new deal in a couple seasons. The 49ers are just asking for either a future cap charge or off-season holdout.
Apparently Chicago's group of wide receivers is so weak that Bears players are publically supportive of signing troubled WR Plaxico Burress.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments | Share

Comments

I like the ballhawk ability that Collins brings

but that same agressiveness has burned him a lot too. I think if he turns in a more consistent 2009 season where he can still be a ballhawk but be a little more sound in coverage, he’ll make his money. Definitely wait a season though.

"You just don't know understand how frustrating this is"- Kevin Borseth

by TkGoUWGB on Jun 7, 2009 7:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Bears WR's being weak!

Read Kaiser’s comment on the link, it’s in green and easy to find.

In addition, why wouldn’t some of the Bears players publicly support the signing? If you actually read some of the players comments, they aren’t denouncing the receivers on the roster, they are just saying he is a play maker and that they wouldn’t mind including him.

All in all, I truly don’t believe the Bears will be in as bad of shape at that position as the talking heads are making them out to be. Whether or not he can prove to be a true #1 is still out, but Hester has come a long way. Bennett is in his 2nd full year and should be much improved this year with his old college buddy tossing him the rock. Plus, our rooks could step up and surprise, Eddie Royal had an outstanding year last year with Cutler throwing to him. If Plax is in the mix, even better – that’s all I’m saying.

- Smudgers

"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox

by smudgers on Jun 9, 2009 1:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

What the players are saying

I’m reading between the lines and thinking if current players are thinking that signing Burress is a good idea, then they have some doubts about their receiving teammates. Which it’s unusual to read players making comments suggesting that the team needs to find a better player at a particular position.

It’s not unusual for players on one team being supportive of signing a premier free agent, but he’s not that good and I can’t recall players going public in support of signing a player who’s trying to avoid jail time. Usually teams and players are trying to avoid players looking at jail time.

by Brandon on Jun 10, 2009 2:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

But that's just it...

I don’t think the players were going public outwardly expressing their desire to sign Plax. I agree with what Kaiser stated in his post below:

My sense..
Is that the players answered this question that was brought up by the journalist. So, I don’t think it is fair to say they brought it up. I don’t think Devin Hester ran over to David Haugh and was like, "David, I’d really like to talk to you about why I want to see Plaxico on this team, yadda, yadda."

The players answers were diplomatic and followed the media training they probably get as part of the off season packages offered up at Halas Hall.

I don’t personally think Hester was throwing his fellow receivers under the proverbial bus, I just think that he answered the question he was asked. He spoke about the possible move and how the organization had, so far, made dramatic moves to make the roster better. Maybe he believes Burress could be the bridge the Bears need to assist in the development of the rookies. Maybe he thinks that the rest of the receivers suck, I don’t know. I just didn’t get that from his quote.

As far as what Brown and Clark said, they spoke more of what they knew about Plaxico’s character than anything else. I see their comments as an integration of the Bears corporate stance on personal conduct intertwined with how one would publicly talk about a friend or acquaintance.

As far as Plax being “that good” or not, I think it boils down to personal preference. For me… I wouldn’t mind having a tall receiver with quicks on the roster. Would I rather have one that isn’t facing possible jail time? Absolutely, but that doesn’t diminish what he does when he is on the field. I know what you are thinking, but think about it on a personal level. If you are really good at what you do, but on weekends you like to go dress in drag, does that make what you do from 9-5 any less valuable to the company? IF, and it’s a big IF, he can avoid jail time and suspension, and IF he can prove to the Bears organization that he can be a high-character guy, and IF they sign him, I would 100% support the move.

Honestly, I am not overlooking the ‘baggage’ he carries and I am truly trying to judge this potential move from an outsiders perspective. Which is why I totally see your point, I just don’t think that the players that were quoted were being unfaithful to to their teammates by what they said. And as I previously stated, I don’t think our receivers will be our Achilles’s hill this year, whether we sign him or not.

Sorry for the book. :)

- Smudgers

"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox

by smudgers on Jun 10, 2009 7:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs