Fa Visit

[pbatrucker]

Reported by the Chicago Sun Times: Free Agent safety Brown to visit Kansas City today 06/03/09.

Would add needed depth to that group!

[Bike]

Injury prone and 31 years old, but had 100 tackles last year compared to Pages' 85. Sign him.

[Vanilla Garilla]

I don't care about the injuries because Brown is a beast!

[dbolan]

I can't recall anything about him. Link?

[dbolan]

Mike Brown - Chicago Bears - NFL - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5068)

[dbolan]

Injury prone and 31 years old, but had 100 tackles last year compared to Pages' 85. Sign him.


I see 74 tackles, solo and assisted combined. Maybe I have bad info.

[yashi]

Obviously a phenomenal upgrade over Page if he can stay healthy.

BIG if.

He did sign a contract with the Bears though that was heavily injury based. I'd love to sign him with the same type of stipulations.

[pbatrucker]

Another strong suit for Brown is he's considered a coach on the field and would be a trmendous mentor for our young DB's. Sign him.

[dbolan]

If we signed Ellis and Brown, we will be plentiful in the "mentor/player" category on defense.

Time to make some offensive moves.

[pbatrucker]

After further review, It wouldn't be a bad thing to sign both Brown and Ellis. I would also be willing to gamble on Traucher or Jones staying healthy and playing RT. Another WR would be nice but the cupboard is pretty bare for that position. ? would be, trade for Bouldin.

[dbolan]

After further review, It wouldn't be a bad thing to sign both Brown and Ellis. I would also be willing to gamble on Traucher or Jones staying healthy and playing RT. Another WR would be nice but the cupboard is pretty bare for that position. ? would be, trade for Bouldin.


Agreed and I don't see a problem with giving up a firts rounder for Boldin. How many times have 1rst rounders actually turned into a reciver as good as he is? Not too darned many.

We could easily seal up a pretty good roster with these defensive guys, a tackle and Boldin.

[N TX Dave]

Agreed and I don't see a problem with giving up a firts rounder for Boldin. How many times have 1rst rounders actually turned into a reciver as good as he is? Not too darned many.

We could easily seal up a pretty good roster with these defensive guys, a tackle and Boldin.

But how much of his stats are because of other teams rolling to Fitz's side? We have seen in the past that a good number two with a great number one receiver on the team does nothing when he no longer has the great number one opposite him. And Bo is no Fitz.

[dbolan]

But how much of his stats are because of other teams rolling to Fitz's side? We have seen in the past that a good number two with a great number one receiver on the team does nothing when he no longer has the great number one opposite him. And Bo is no Fitz.

If that is the case, then maybe Gonzo helped Bowe look better than what he actually is???

In his first year..2003, Fitz was not in AZ and the roster had "no name" WR's on it. Boldin had 1377 yards.

The only dips in his production were years in which he did not play the full 16 games.

Agreed that Bowe is no Fitz, but Bowe and our other WR's are no Boldin either.

[pbatrucker]

If Waters plays and we sign a Rt, our running game will be a heck of a lot better than the Cardnials, setting up the pass. Bowe isn't exactly chopped liver and Franklin and Engram would fill in nicely.

[yashi]

If Waters plays and we sign a Rt, our running game will be a heck of a lot better than the Cardnials, setting up the pass. Bowe isn't exactly chopped liver and Franklin and Engram would fill in nicely.
Franklin isn't on the team anymore, but I'm guessing you meant Bradley.

[OPLookn]

If Brown visiting is true and not a rumor out of Chicago it's nice to see the KC Star is on top of things and giving us good info.

[dbolan]

According to the stats, Brown had less tackles than Page. But of course, the Bears front 7 was better than ours last year which could make a difference in actual amount of tackles.

I guess a better stat to use on a Safety would be "missed tackles"! LOL!

[honda522]

Brown who? Brown is a common name.

[Vanilla Garilla]

Brown who? Brown is a common name.

Who? Mike Brown

[jmlamerson]

According to the stats, Brown had less tackles than Page. But of course, the Bears front 7 was better than ours last year which could make a difference in actual amount of tackles.

I guess a better stat to use on a Safety would be "missed tackles"! LOL!

Yeah, if a safety has 100+ tackles, that's more a sign that you have a terrible front seven than it is you have a great safety. Brown's a great safety if he can stay healthy. He tackles well, is good in coverage, and is a hard hitter. He's a (very) poor man's Rodney Harrison.

No matter what, Brown starting as FS with Page in reserve if Brown gets hurt is a whole lot better than trying to run the 3-4 with Page at FS.

[pbatrucker]

Soren had Pollard on today. Pollard predicted 40 turnovers and 25 to 30 sacks for the defense this year. Wow! If that comes true, this defense will rock again.
:bananen_smilies046: :yahoo:

[Big Daddy Tek]

Mike Brown is nothing short of amazing when healthy. Alot of people think he is the difference between no Super Bowl ring and "Super Bowl ring" a couple years back. Your talking about one of the biggest playmakers in all of football when he's on the field. Were talking about a guy who plays with sheer reckless abandonment. With all that said: This guy doesnt just get injured, HE GETS DESTROYED and put on INJURED RESERVE EVERY YEAR!

2004 - ACL injury - missed 14 games - Injured Reserve
2005 -Calf injury - missed last 4 games and playoffs - IR
2006 - Lisfranc fracture - missed last 10 games - IR
2007 - Blew knee out in opener after interception - missed entire season - IR
2008 - Injured other calf in week 15 - IR

They say that Mike was the leader of the Bears defense, even over Brian Urlacher. So heres my theory on Brown: The only way we sign him, is to a 1 year contract. He is used a situational player and he pushes our safeties to get better. Even if he takes Pages job, he'll end up injured and Page will re-enter with a new attitude and more knowledge. In the end we get a coach who can make plays and provide leadership to the youngest secondary in the league.

[Big Daddy Tek]

Yeah, if a safety has 100+ tackles, that's more a sign that you have a terrible front seven than it is you have a great safety. Brown's a great safety if he can stay healthy. He tackles well, is good in coverage, and is a hard hitter. He's a (very) poor man's Rodney Harrison.

No matter what, Brown starting as FS with Page in reserve if Brown gets hurt is a whole lot better than trying to run the 3-4 with Page at FS.

Dont agree at all with the poor man thing. No injuries and Mike Brown is considered top 5 safety of his generation. I agree with the rest though

[chief31]

Mike Brown is nothing short of amazing when healthy. Alot of people think he is the difference between no Super Bowl ring and "Super Bowl ring" a couple years back. Your talking about one of the biggest playmakers in all of football when he's on the field. Were talking about a guy who plays with sheer reckless abandonment. With all that said: This guy doesnt just get injured, HE GETS DESTROYED and put on INJURED RESERVE EVERY YEAR!

2004 - ACL injury - missed 14 games - Injured Reserve
2005 -Calf injury - missed last 4 games and playoffs - IR
2006 - Lisfranc fracture - missed last 10 games - IR
2007 - Blew knee out in opener after interception - missed entire season - IR
2008 - Injured other calf in week 15 - IR

They say that Mike was the leader of the Bears defense, even over Brian Urlacher. So heres my theory on Brown: The only way we sign him, is to a 1 year contract. He is used a situational player and he pushes our safeties to get better. Even if he takes Pages job, he'll end up injured and Page will re-enter with a new attitude and more knowledge. In the end we get a coach who can make plays and provide leadership to the youngest secondary in the league.


Dont agree at all with the poor man thing. No injuries and Mike Brown is considered top 5 safety of his generation. I agree with the rest though

Agreed on both ends. When he is in the game, he does make big plays, as well as the little ones.

But he "poor man's" comment could have been based on his severe lack of availability.

Because, if I am guaranteed that both players will be completely healthy, I take Brown over Harrison at any stage of Harrison's career. And I like Rodney Harrison alot.

Or, given the limited action that Brown has seen in recent years, maybe Lamerson just hasn't seen much in him.

[jmlamerson]

Dont agree at all with the poor man thing. No injuries and Mike Brown is considered top 5 safety of his generation. I agree with the rest though

I agree, that if Mike Brown had been healthy his whole career he might have been a top-10 guy. But come on, no way top-5. Dawkins, Lynch, Polamalu, Ed Reed, Rodney Harrison, Bob Sanders (and with time I could come up with others) - all better. I like Brown a lot though, and would be more than happy if the Chiefs signed him to a 2 year/$6M deal or something near to it. He's a smart player, hard hitter, and locker room leader.

[jmlamerson]

Agreed on both ends. When he is in the game, he does make big plays, as well as the little ones.

But he "poor man's" comment could have been based on his severe lack of availability.

Because, if I am guaranteed that both players will be completely healthy, I take Brown over Harrison at any stage of Harrison's career. And I like Rodney Harrison alot.

Or, given the limited action that Brown has seen in recent years, maybe Lamerson just hasn't seen much in him.

Availability was a major reason, but on-field I think Harrison was better. Harrison played at an extremely high level in SD, was considered over-the-hill, and then played another 6 years at a very high level with the Pats. He, more than any other reason, is the reason the depleted Pats secondary didn't wilt in 2003 and 2004.

It could be the fact that I think Harrison is one of the most underrated players of the last decade (along with Troy Brown, Eddie Kennison, and Aaron Smith).

Describing Mike Brown as a very poor man's Rodney Harrison was probably pushing it a little bit, though. Mike Brown is a great FS when healthy. He'd be a massive improvement over Page in the FS spot in 2009.

[KristofLaw]

Wow... Mike Brown, best news I heard all day. 31, no problem with that... injuries in the past, solidifies depth at a weak position at least... length of the deal and dollar$, we got enough and can afford a cut if something goes wrong...

I hope this goes through...

[Big Daddy Tek]

I agree, that if Mike Brown had been healthy his whole career he might have been a top-10 guy. But come on, no way top-5. Dawkins, Lynch, Polamalu, Ed Reed, Rodney Harrison, Bob Sanders (and with time I could come up with others) - all better. I like Brown a lot though, and would be more than happy if the Chiefs signed him to a 2 year/$6M deal or something near to it. He's a smart player, hard hitter, and locker room leader.

Yeah, top 5 might be a push.