- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 68,290
- Reaction score
- 105,213
You are correct, my memory of the deal was off.
Yea it was for IMO reasonable dollars for a 3-down DT. He had a very good year for da Bears. IIRC the issue here was playing time and obviously the money was a little less. Hicks didn't want to be a rotational guy.
There's still nothing to support the claim made that I was replying too, but I was off on Hicks' deal.
Oh about how teams need to be wary of Pats FAs? Yea. Its not just the Pats. Free agency in general is a risky proposition as there are more busts than success stories.