Urlacher, Bears, no agreement reached.

[PurpleJarl]

Not saying we should go after him just letting ya know.



http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... cago-bears

[dead_poet]

Brian Urlacher - LB - Free Agent

Free agent Brian Urlacher confirms the Bears made him a "take it or leave it" offer of one-year, $2 million.

"It was a ultimatum, not a negotiation,'' Urlacher said. "I wanted to be in Chicago. I wanted to finish here." The Bears were cold and calculating with one of the best players in franchise history, but based on Urlacher's 2012 performance, $2 million was generous. Urlacher looked ancient on the field, particularly when attempting to defend the pass. Unless an owner is interested in selling tickets, it's unlikely Urlacher finds a better deal on the open market. Retirement is a very real possibility.
Source: Vaughn McClure on Twitter

--
Brian Urlacher - LB - Free Agent

Free agent Brian Urlacher has no "immediate plans" to retire.

Urlacher says he'll look into joining "one of the teams he's spoken with." He's been connected to the Vikings and Cowboys since the start of free agency. Adding Urlacher would be more about leadership and intangibles than production, as his athleticism has all but vanished after 13 seasons of giving and taking hits.
Source: Vaughn McClure on Twitter

[The Breeze]

please, do not sign him.

[Lash Man]

I do that deal in a NY minute he has been a Viking killer for a long long time and him on one leg is better than any stiff we have had in recent years especially in pass coverage .

[Demi]

Exactly. Brinkley and EJ before him were both liabilities. We have a hole at middle linebacker just as big as any we had at receiver. And no one there to fill it. Considering the Bears stance, maybe he'd come relatively cheap just to get to play them twice a season, like Favre did. Since we're not in full on rebuild mode, it can't hurt.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... 7431.story

Urlacher said he was willing to play for $3.5 million or even $3 million had the Bears been willing to keep negotiations ongoing.

Heeey. Ooooh. Make it soooo.

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/ ... n-urlacher

Total QBR with him 39.5 Without him 60.1.

[viking_guy]

Not Interested...5 years ago maybe, but not now. He is old, slow, injury prone and will command a lot of $$.. No Thanks.

[Demi]

Not Interested...5 years ago maybe, but not now. He is old, slow, injury prone and will command a lot of $$.. No Thanks.

We already signed Jennings.

Oooh, keep getting the two confused. Sounds so similar.

[King James]

No thanks, please don't sign him. He is STILL good but he is injury prone. We should just draft a young guy and think long term.

[King James]

While it is true that the team focus is getting younger, you still need veteran presence on the team. Urlacher will be 35 this year. Personally I think if he would have a couple of more years left in the tank if he wasn't so injury prone. But he definitely makes a difference when he is on the field. The question is, is he healthy enough to play? I don't see two many teams taking a risk on him but the Vikings might just take that risk.

After all Brett Favre had one of his best seasons ever as a Viking at the age of 40! Urlacher may turn things around with whatever team he ends up with.

[saint33]

On one hand, I actually wouldn't mind Urlacher from a leadership perspective. I think he's the kind of guy who's presence alone makes the players around him better, kind of the heart of a defense. And I'm of the opinion that while the youth movement is important, some people get carried away with the idea and think that signing ANY veterans is a bad move, or against our philosophy. I don't agree and I don't think it's true about our FO either. Every team needs a certain number of veterans on the team, you can't have such a young team without the veteran leadership to keep the youth focused when things go wrong. I think for the right price a player like Urlacher would be welcomed.


On the other hand I have two major issues with this signing. First and foremost his play is not what it used to be and he's injury prone. He'd be nothing more than a 1 year rental. I would hate to see our FO pass on a good young MLB in the draft because they have Urlacher to hold the spot for a year. I'd much rather go with an Ogletree, Te'o, Brown or Minter in the draft and start them day one. However, if we do go with some combination of WR/DT/CB with their first 3 picks, I would think Urlacher is an option. So I timing of the signing would be important, I wouldn't rush it, lets see what the draft brings us and if he's still around, then look at him then.

The other thing that I don't like about him is his price tag. 3-3.5 mil is really borderline too much for me. If we're offer that to a veteran FA, I'd want to bring Winfield back for that price.

[jackal]

no thanks .. too old .. too slow .. and has been quite a whiner in the last year

[Vikefan68]

I would sign him to a 2yr 5mil incentive laden contract. excellent stop gap and tutor for a MLB drafted this year. Dont underestimate the "payback" mentality.

[ViciousBritishVike]

Agreed. He hardly fits our "youth movement".

Please resist the temptation Vikes.

Admittedly his experience could be an asset, especially his knowledge of the division but I don't believe the benefits reaped will be worth the paycheck.

As for his on field play, as far as I'm concerned, he's as good as done. Slow, out of position and injury prone, next..

[dead_poet]

RE: Brian Urlacher, I was told in Phoenix that #Vikings aren't interested. Only way that *maybe* changes is if price comes way, way down. I think they're serious about finding their next MLB in the draft and giving Audie Cole or some other younger player a shot to compete.

Tom Pelissero on Twitter

[PacificNorseWest]

That's good news. I didn't feel like the Vikings and Spielman would strongly pursue him anyway.