ESPN NFL

You've probably seen reports that Green Bay Packers defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove was in New York City on Wednesday to appeal his eight-game NFL suspension.

You might also have seen reports that appeal hearings have been scheduled for May 30 for Hargrove and three other players suspended as part of the league's bounty investigation.

To clear up any confusion, let's make clear that the NFL Players Association is pursuing two parallel agendas here. Wednesday's hearing, before independent arbitrator Shyam Das, was to discuss the NFLPA's contention that commissioner Roger Goodell can't discipline players for actions that occurred under the jurisdiction of the previous collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

The May 30 hearing, to be heard by independent arbitrator Stephen Burbank, will center on whether Goodell or an independent arbitrator should hear the eventual appeal.

Most of this is legal gobbedly-gook, but it's important because it could impact whether Hargrove gets back some or all of his suspension and thus be available to the Packers before midseason.

I thought ESPN.com's Ricky Reilly did an awesome job articulating in this column something I've tried to get at in recent posts. Namely: The impossible situation that Green Bay Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove found himself in during the NFL's investigation of the New Orleans Saints' bounty program.

As you know by now, Hargrove revealed in a signed declaration that then-Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams instructed Hargrove to deny the existence of a bounty program when asked by NFL investigators in 2010. Williams prefaced his instructions by showing Hargrove a depth chart that revealed he was under consideration for a starting job the following season.

Reilly writes that the NFL follows a military structure that made it impossible for players to refuse participation in a bounty or, more specifically, for Hargrove to reject Williams' instructions and maintain his career:

In the NFL, you stand up to your coach on something like this, and you're immediately a "locker room lawyer" and suddenly you're Super-Glued to the bench. There are no guaranteed contracts in the NFL. You have two choices: You do what your coaches say or you do what your coaches say. …You do what your staff sergeant orders you to do, or you're playing in Winnipeg.

Reilly doesn't view Hargrove or any of the other Saints' players as total innocents in the matter. But given the circumstances, he views the 1-year suspension of linebacker Jonathan Vilma and Hargrove's eight-game suspension as too harsh:

I'm not saying the players didn't take part. They did. It was wrong and dangerous and they deserved punishment. And I admire [Roger] Goodell for the steps he's taken to stop players from stupefying themselves with helmet-to-helmet collisions. But to slap these players as harshly as their bosses is like giving Bernie Madoff's secretary the same sentence as Madoff.

The entire column is worth your time.

There's always something these days. The week after the draft is typically deep-breath time for the NFL, but the events of this week had us running hither and thither on the NFC North blog. Through it all, I saw everything you've submitted via the mailbag, Twitter and Facebook and tried to respond when possible. Another attempt forthcoming:

Brian of Minneapolis has watched the NFL issue severe punishments following its investigation into the New Orleans Saints' bounty program and can't reconcile them with relatively light in-game punishment in issues of player safety: My frustration as a fan is seeing the referees on game day powerless to enforce penalties beyond the standard 15-yard penalty for repeat offenders. Fines may come later, but I don't see the behavior deterred on game day. What if the NFL adopted a rule mandating an ejection for two unnecessary roughness or unsportsmanlike conduct penalties in a game?

Kevin Seifert: As Brian pointed out later in his note, there is sports precedent for progressive in-game penalties, including the "persistent infringement" aspect of soccer. (Yes, I'm sure there are many of you who would protest using "football" and "soccer" in the same sentence, but that's for another day.)

Normally I would say there would be little chance for such a dramatic change to the NFL's in-game rules. Referees have the authority to eject a player on a first offense if it is egregious enough, but what Brian is referring to is deterring standard roughness or unsportsmanlike infractions by elevating the punishments within a game.

Given how focused NFL commissioner Roger Goodell appears to be on the player-safety issue, however, I couldn't rule out this type of change in coming years. In essence, if this kind of rule were enacted, a player could be ejected after hitting a player out of bounds and then roughing the punter.

Many of us would cry foul at another attempt to reduce the violence of an inherently violent game, but we've already seen Goodell act repeatedly with no concern for that argument. Who knows what's next?

---

Serge of Windsor saw our post on the Detroit Lions' offense and writes: I think [rookie receiver] Ryan Broyles will have a significant impact on the Lions' offensive explosive capability. The Lions already have a couple deep threats in Calvin Johnson and Titus Young … however, their impact was negated through double teams in deep cover 2 schemes. What has been missing -- sorry, while Nate Burleson is a class act and a great influence in the locker room, he has been very average on the field -- and what the Lions see in Broyles, is a receiver that is able to punish a defense for playing such schemes by finding windows underneath and gaining yards after the catch. In theory, this will eventually force defenses out of such schemes and open up deep opportunities for Calvin Johnson and Titus Young to make explosive plays downfield.

Kevin Seifert: Interesting theory, Serge, especially if Broyles turns out to be the kind of open-field runner that draft evaluators believe he is. He does appear to have all the skills necessary to be a front-line slot receiver.

But I'm not convinced defenses will deprioritize deep coverage, especially against Johnson, if the Lions have stronger weapons underneath. Johnson is going to draw maximum attention as often as defenses can arrange for it. I don't think a slot receiver, no matter how talented he is, can draw coverage away from Johnson.

What Broyles will do is make more explosive plays when he gets his hands on the ball in the open field than, say, tight ends Brandon Pettigrew or Tony Scheffler. The Lions would be a more explosive offense with Broyles, but that doesn't necessarily mean defenses will make it any easier for Johnson, and to a lesser extent Young, make deep downfield plays against them. I'm pretty sure I would take my chances against anyone other than Calvin Johnson.

---

Ben of Denver thought that Mike Daniels, the Green Bay Packers' fourth-round draft choice, deserved to be in this week's discussion about the team's desire to get more "juice" in its defensive front: I think he at least deserved to be mentioned in the article, as he was brought in to do and has just as much of an opportunity to bring exactly the same thing that [Anthony] Hargrove was signed for, inside pass rush. I am very excited about the injection of explosiveness, talent, and depth to our front seven.

Kevin Seifert: Fair point. Daniels had seven sacks as an inside pass-rusher at Iowa and has a naturally athletic frame. According to Scouts Inc., Daniels put on 50 pounds in college to play defensive tackle at 291 pounds. In its pre-draft report, Scouts Inc. gave Daniels its highest grade for quickness (hands/feet) and toughness/motor. Here is an excerpt:

"Step late getting to the quarterback at times but disruptive nonetheless and excels at moving quarterback off the spot. Quickly reacts to snap and flashes the ability to shoot gaps. Above-average hand fighter that flashes effective swim, rip and push-pull moves. Can shake offensive linemen with spin move. Gets hands up when sees quarterback start throwing motion. Flashes the ability to get under centers and drive them back but average overall power as a bull rusher. … Active hands make it difficult for blockers to lock onto frame. Flashes the ability to counter when offensive linemen get their hands inside his initially. First-step quickness is a notch below elite. Rarely gets beat to the point of attack and ability to explode upfield in addition to leverage helps mask lack of ideal size. Shows good foot speed working down the line and fighting off cut blocks."

The point of the post was that the Packers have taken a very focused approach to their offseason, seeking out players with the skills to be disruptive on the line of scrimmage. Daniels certainly fits that description and should have received a mention in the post.

---

Chuck of Guilin, China, writes: I have seen videos and read numerous slams on the Chicago Bears' OL. I thought they had two starters coming off 2011 injured reserve, no more Mike Martz and, most important, Mike Tice likes his group of young linemen. If Tice is what everyone says he is, why all the media flack?

Kevin Seifert: That's definitely the counter-argument to the media criticism the Bears have received. From the big picture, I see where the criticism has come from. The Bears have had to patch together their line in each of the past two seasons, rolling through various combinations and schemes until they found something that worked. In the process, some of their linemen -- like left tackle J'Marcus Webb -- looked pretty bad.

The Bears' decision not to add personnel means they have placed a lot of faith in Tice. In addition to his role as offensive coordinator, they want him to mold a functioning line group out of players who haven't always gotten the job done in the past two years. Success is usually a combination of player skill, good coaching and luck. The Bears have faith in some players whose skills have not always been obvious from the outside.

---

Facebook friend Jerry asks: Since the free agent and draftees by the Vikings all seem to be second-tier WR's, is there any chance the Vikings will add an impact player from free agency still? Say a Braylon Edwards, Terrell Owens, Plaxico Burress?

Kevin Seifert: While I agree the Vikings have some question marks at the receiver position, it should be pointed out that they've already taken a dip into the veteran free-agent market and come up with Jerome Simpson. I'm not sure they have any plans beyond that. For now, they'll go with Percy Harvin, Michael Jenkins, Simpson, their pair of pass-catching tight ends, and hope that perhaps Greg Childs or Jarius Wright develop into a contributor.

As you've probably heard by now, the NFL Players Association has taken its first steps toward appealing the bounty-related suspensions of Green Bay Packers defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove and three other current and former New Orleans Saints players. As ESPN's Andrew Brandt points out, the crux of the NFLPA's efforts are to circumvent NFL commissioner Roger Goodell as the point man of the appeal and put it in the hands of independent arbitrators.

Instead of Goodell, the NFLPA wants longtime arbitrator Stephen Burbank to adjudicate the appeal.

Be sure to check out the news story linked above or Brandt's "SportsCenter" appearance in the video if you're interested in the details of the proceedings. But the bottom line is that Hargrove's eight-game suspension won't be final until the appeal process is complete, and that could take some time.

The question of what happens in the meantime isn't yet relevant for Hargrove. The terms of his punishment state that he can continue to participate in the Packers' offseason program, organized team activities (OTAs), minicamp, training camp and even preseason games. His suspension wouldn't begin until Week 1 of the regular season. So he has four months of flexibility before the timing of the appeals process becomes an issue.

Earlier: Hargrove said in a declaration to the NFL that he was instructed to lie about the Saints' bounty program during a 2010 investigation. That lie is the primary reason Hargrove received the second-longest suspension among the four players who were punished.

In March, two Minnesota Vikings players -- punter Chris Kluwe and center John Sullivan -- called for the NFL to suspend New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma for his role in the Saints' bounty program prior to the 2009 NFC Championship Game. At the time, we noted a developing and awkward dynamic: NFL Players Association (NFLPA) members advocating against their union brethren.

Sullivan, in fact, went so far as to say: "As a union member, I'll be very upset if we come to the defense of these acts. They're indefensible. You can't defend them. It's despicable, has no place in the sport."

Vilma, whom the NFL said offered a $10,000 reward for any player who knocked then-Vikings quarterback Brett Favre out of the 2009 NFC Championship Game, received a one-year suspension. We haven't yet heard from Sullivan, but Kluwe said via Twitter that the suspension is "just."

Kluwe also provided an extended and nuanced analysis of the what he called a "tough spot" for the NFLPA, which has already pledged to "vigorously protect" Vilma and the three other suspended players and "pursue all options on their behalf."

Here's what Kluwe tweeted:

"Vilma and the others deserve the right to an appeal; while I agree with the commissioner's decision others may not, and that's fine, this is America. However, the union has to simultaneously balance defending four guys against the judgment, of [Roger] Goodell (which needs oversight, make no mistake) while at the same time recognizing those four guys were attempting to harm other union members, who also deserve that same protection. The union cannot be just about appeals when someone does something wrong. It also has to be a shield for those men who are a part of it that you never hear about, but pay the same dues and play the same game. I can only hope that the leadership of the NFLPA realizes this, and acts in *all* of its members' interests, however that takes place."

I find this a fascinating, if subtle, subplot of this story. The NFLPA argues the NFL hasn't provided evidence of its accusations, but obviously there are at least some players -- and union members -- who are convinced otherwise. By definition, players engaging in a bounty system are trying to harm other players. Why isn't the union jumping to the defense of the targeted players, which according to the league includes Favre, Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner and Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton?

I realize this is a tough day in the NFL for a lot of reasons. I just think this issue merits some discussion along with everything else. The story has thus far centered around the aggressors. What about the victims?

Let's run through some of the basics on the NFL's eight-game suspension of Green Bay Packers defensive tackle Anthony Hargrove in a Q&A format:

Will Hargrove appeal?

Almost certainly, yes. He has three days to file it with the NFL.

Who will preside over the appeal?

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who finalized the original suspension as well.

Will Hargrove file a lawsuit?

Someone will, perhaps on his behalf. The NFL Players Association said in a statement that it will "vigorously protect and pursue all options" on behalf of the suspended players. This is a potentially career-altering suspension. A source told ESPN's Adam Schefter: "Get ready for a massive multiple legal battle over this on several fronts."

When would the suspension start?

At the start of the regular season. That means Hargrove can continue to participate in the Packers' offseason program, go to training camp with them and participate in the preseason. He would be eligible to resume practicing on Monday, Oct. 29.

What does this mean for the Packers?

General manager Ted Thompson rarely signs veteran free agents, so it was fair to assume the Packers had a significant -- if not starting -- role in mind for Hargrove when they signed him. Fortunately for them, they drafted two defensive linemen last weekend, Jerel Worthy and Mike Daniels.

Did the Packers know about the suspension before signing Hargrove?

No. It's reasonable to assume they thought one was a possibility, but it's doubtful they thought it would be for eight games.

Will the Packers keep him on their roster?

That's unknown at this point. They wouldn't have to pay him during the suspension and he wouldn't count against their roster. It's worth pointing out that defensive line coach Mike Trgovac said Hargrove's intensity was already having an impact on the team's defensive line in the early stages of the offseason program.

Why was Hargrove punished so severely?

The NFL is obviously sending a serious statement about the bounty issue. But of the four players who were suspended, the NFL singled out Hargrove because he "actively obstructed the league’s 2010 investigation into the program by being untruthful to investigators," according to the league's official statement.

The league said Hargrove certified that he was aware of the bounty program and that he actively participated in it. Does that jibe with a statement Hargrove sent us in March?

In the statement, Hargrove said he did not receive any money, nor was he expecting any, for a late hit on Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre in the 2009 NFC Championship Game. He admitted to celebrating Favre's ankle injury during the game but said it was a mistake and added: "[D]id I personally want Favre INJURED? Absolutely and categorically NO!"

What's your take, Mr. NFC North blogger?

I think this thing is going to get much, much uglier before it goes away. What the NFL alleged about Hargrove's role, as well as that of the three other players, is career-threatening and life-altering. I don't see anyone absorbing such a blow without a legal fight. Hargrove has overcome a number of obstacles just to make it this far in his NFL career, having turned his life around following a yearlong suspension for substance abuse in 2008. Remember, there are two sides to every story. Hargrove will be highly motivated to clear his name.

When the MVP talks, people listen.

Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers was the first prominent member of the NFL community to speak out in February about the diminished quality of the Pro Bowl. Speaking on his ESPN 540 radio show, Rodgers said some players on the NFC team "embarrassed themselves" and either "didn't want to play or when they were in there didn't put any effort into it."

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell agreed, and after several months of discussion it appears the league is having trouble finding a way to improve the game. So as ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported Thursday morning, the Pro Bowl is likely to be suspended and might never be played again.

We spent some time in February coming up with suggestions. My favorite was some kind of contemporary skills competition/reality show between the NFL's best players. I would tune in to watch Rodgers and, say, New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady compete to see who could eat more snails in 10 minutes, "Fear Factor" style. Wouldn't you?

But none of us really had any good ideas on improving the game itself. In an era of unprecedented safety concerns, it's unrealistic to expect players to play and hit each other harder, exposing themselves to injury, in a meaningless exhibition. My guess is Goodell is in the same spot. The Pro Bowl had been building to this point for years, and there's no turning back on its intensity level now.

By all accounts, Minnesota's political leaders received a clear message Friday morning in a meeting with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and Pittsburgh Steelers president/co-owner Art Rooney.

"This is it, folks," Gov. Mark Dayton said during a post-meeting news conference.

"They served us a reality check," state Sen. Julie Rosen said.

"Things will have to be moving a little bit more quickly," House Speaker Kurt Zellers said.

"The writing is on the wall," Dayton added.

Legislators from both houses and parties emerged with clear marching orders: Revive a stadium bill that died in a committee earlier this week or face the departure of the franchise. Goodell said he made "no implied threats or any threats at all," but in reality he didn't need to. As we discussed Thursday, the team and league are giving the state another 10 or so days of exclusivity before opening the door to relocation alternatives.

That in itself wouldn't lead to relocation, but it would put Minnesota in competition with other municipalities for the first time in the 10-plus year battle on this issue.

The legislative leaders offered different recollections of the extent to which the Los Angeles market was discussed, especially after reports that owner Zygi Wilf's plane was spotted in Southern California, where he often visits to maintain real estate investments. But Rosen, one of the bill authors, said Goodell answered a question about the subject by "clearly" labeling it "an open market" and pointing out that the Vikings "do have the right to move or be sold."

Focus now shifts to the Minnesota Senate, where the bill will be heard in a committee Friday afternoon while parallel efforts to revive it in the Minnesota House are under way. But the larger question is not whether state leaders agree on the issue. It's how effective they can be, or how willing they are, in strong-arming enough dissenters into pushing the bill to a vote of full membership.

From what I understand, the Vikings feel confident that enough legislators will vote for the bill if it makes it to that level. That makes the next seven-10 days the most important in the history of the franchise. Stay tuned.

We're Black and Blue All Over:

Long before he led a team of investors in purchasing the Minnesota Vikings in 2005, Zygi Wilf's family owned a real estate company that had significant investments in Southern California. His frequent visits have often provided convenient fodder for the rumor mill, mostly because his private plane has an unmistakable Vikings logo painted on its tail and the team has always been rumored to be a candidate to relocate there.

So when the Los Angeles Daily News reported Thursday that Wilf's plane was spotted at a Southern California airport, in the same week when his stadium bill in Minnesota was quashed, the news spread quickly.

As we've discussed, we are now in a phase of increased pressure and dramatic rhetoric as the franchise's future is sorted out. Whether the plane's arrival in Southern California was coincidental, an expensive message or an indication that Wilf is in negotiations to sell the team to a Los Angeles investor, the overlying point hasn't changed: The Vikings will eventually leave Minnesota if they don't secure a stadium deal.

Are they already angling to leave with 10 days remaining in the state's legislative session? I can't answer that. Just consider it another reminder of a potential future reality.

Continuing around the NFC North:

• Regardless of the plane's purpose in California, the NFL is sending commissioner Roger Goodell and other executives to Minnesota for meetings Friday on the stadium, notes the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
• The Vikings have met two league requirements for a relocation, notes Mark Craig of the Star Tribune.
• The Vikings' contingency plan at running back is incomplete, writes Tom Pelissero of 1500ESPN.com.
• It's safe to assume the Green Bay Packers will select an outside linebacker relatively high in the draft, writes Pete Dougherty of the Green Bay Press-Gazette.
• Offensive lineman Chad Clifton has been working out in the Packers' offseason program, a good sign that he will get a chance to return in 2012. More from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
• Packers general manager Ted Thompson said he is "fine with" having Graham Harrell and Nick Hill as the backups to starting quarterback Aaron Rodgers, notes Jason Wilde of ESPNMilwaukee.com.
• Detroit Lions running back Jahvid Best (concussion) has been working out in the team's offseason program, according to Anwar S. Richardson of Mlive.com.
• Lions general manager Martin Mayhew's draft philosophy can be boiled down to "the best player for us." More from the Detroit News.
• The Lions haven't changed how they evaluate prospects after having three of their 2011 draft class members have legal entanglements related to marijuana, according to Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press.
• Michael C. Wright of ESPNChicago.com takes a look at the Chicago Bears' prospects for drafting a receiver.
• Chicago Bears general manager Phil Emery's approach is rooted largely in the "Patriot Way," writes Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times.

In the four days since the apparent collapse of the Minnesota Vikings stadium bill, the NFL and team officials have done a fine job of ratcheting up the pressure, much as we suggested they should do.

League executive vice president Eric Grubman confirmed there are "plenty of willing buyers" who want to purchase and presumably relocate the team. Vikings vice president Lester Bagley made the media rounds Thursday, saying the team has done all it can and urging state legislators to reconsider before the team considers other options. And NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will be joined in Minnesota on Friday by Pittsburgh Steelers president/co-owner Art Rooney, the chairman of the league's stadium committee, to explain the league's increasingly impatient stance.

None of this should be surprising to you. Nor should it change your thoughts on the issue, as long as you realized from the start that the league would not sit idly if the stadium bill faltered this year. My suggestion is to take a deep breath and understand we have entered an important and more pressurized phase of the process, but certainly not (yet) the endgame of this franchise in Minnesota.

The best way to understand what's happening at the moment is that the state has 12 days remaining of exclusivity with the franchise. That's how long the Minnesota state legislature is scheduled to remain in session. For now, the team and the league are squarely focused on reviving the issue in Minnesota. Importantly, however, the state is not 12 days away from losing the franchise -- not when NFL teams are ineligible to apply for relocation until Feb. 15, 2013.

Already, it appears that some state legislators are responding to the increased pressure. According to WCCO political reporter Pat Kessler, a state Senate committee will hold hearings on the stadium bill Friday. There have also been new pledges to push the bill through other committees.

If there is no resolution when the legislature adjourns, the realistic consequence will be a loss of that exclusivity. It's reasonable to think that owner Zygi Wilf will at least explore a firesale that would eventually lead to relocation, putting the state in competition for the franchise, but not necessarily on a path to losing it. The league's relocation deadline in essence would create a nine-month bidding window.

As we know from NFL free agency, there are no guarantees once a player hits the open market. A team can only ensure a player's return by re-signing him before he's eligible to move on. But there are many cases when a player re-signs after testing his value on the open market. There would be nothing to stop the state of Minnesota from continuing to work on the stadium issue even while Wilf explores other options, and the guess here is that Wilf and the NFL would even then prefer a Minnesota stadium agreement over a sale and/or relocation.

You should be aware that NFL teams have acted swifly in the past, relocating without giving a deadline or even an explicit warning. There would be nothing stopping Wilf from throwing his hands up, selling the team to a Los Angeles investor next month and being done with it. So I'm not questioning the gravity of the situation.

All I'm saying is you should understand where this issue is -- and more importantly where it hasn't gone yet -- and know that this is now a higher-stakes game, but one that remains eminently winnable for Minnesota.

We're Black and Blue All Over:

It's safe to say the Chicago Bears are interested in upgrading their depth at linebacker after a whirlwind of veteran free-agent visits this week. According to ESPNChicago.com, the list includes Rocky McIntosh, Bryan Kehl and Zac Diles.

The Bears were thin at the position last year behind starters Brian Urlacher, Lance Briggs and Nick Roach. But anyone they sign at this point should be viewed as a backup who could potentially compete with Roach to start during training camp.

The bigger issue the Bears face is finding eventual replacements for Urlacher, who turns 34 next month and Briggs, who turns 32 in November. That work will have to be done during the draft.

Continuing around the NFC North:

• The Bears signed veteran guard Chilo Rachal, notes Brad Biggs of the Chicago Tribune.
• The Bears will "do just fine" with defensive tackle Henry Melton, writes Dan Pompei of the Tribune.
• The NFL has turned up the heat on the Minnesota Vikings' stadium situation, but at least one state legislator wasn't happy to hear the league trying to "drive policy" for state government, according to Doug Belden of the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
• Sid Hartman of the Star Tribune repeats a familiar message: Replacing a relocated team is always more expensive than giving the original team a new stadium.
• Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton has spoken with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, according to the Associated Press via 1500ESPN.com. Another conversation is expected Thursday morning, which will include Pittsburgh Steelers owner Art Rooney.
• Green Bay Packers linebacker Clay Matthews privately lamented the loss of defensive end Cullen Jenkins last season, writes Pete Dougherty of the Green Bay Press-Gazette.
• Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel begins his position-by-position draft evaluations with quarterbacks.
• Young Detroit Lions players will benefit from the team's offseason program, writes Justin Rogers of Mlive.com.
• Washington running back Chris Polk could be a target of the Lions, writes Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press.
• Lions season-ticket sales appear to be brisk this spring, according to Eric Lacy of the Detroit News.

We're Black and Blue All Over:

PALM BEACH, Fla. -- While I was scurrying this way and that Monday at the NFL owners meetings, Chicago Bears president Ted Phillips was addressing the future of tailback Matt Forte with Chicago-area reporters. As you know, Forte did not react well to the signing of backup Michael Bush and apparently there have been low-level trade rumors as a result because he has not yet signed his franchise tender.

Coach Lovie Smith threw water on the fire Sunday in a conversation with ESPN's Rachel Nichols, and via Dan Pompei of the Chicago Tribune, Phillips said: "Matt is going to be a Bear." Phillips added: "Our goal with Matt is to keep him a Bear as long as possible. We have made offers on long-term deals that we think reward him at a high level, the level he deserves. We haven't been able to reach common ground. The door is open to keep talking. If we get a deal done, we'll be happy. If we don't, then the deal we have is the franchise tag and we'll see what happens after this year."

The remaining piece of this puzzle is the value of the long-term deal Forte has turned down. As a result, we don't know if the dispute is based on a lowball offer from the Bears or an inflated value Forte has established for himself. But obviously the sides are nowhere close at the moment, and the question shifts to whether Forte will play under the terms of the $7.74 million franchise tag or if he will stay away from training camp when it opens in July.

Continuing around the NFC North:

• Bears defensive lineman Amobi Okoye is scheduled to visit with the Cincinnati Bengals, reports Jeff Dickerson of ESPNChicago.com.
• The Detroit Lions are confident in their nucleus of players, writes Chris McCosky of the Detroit News.
• NFL commissioner Roger Goodell doesn't know if there was a bounty placed on any Lions players before their wild-card playoff game against the New Orleans Saints. Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press explains.
• It seems unlikely that the Lions will sign defensive end Cliff Avril to a long-term contract anytime soon, writes Anwar S. Richardson of Mlive.com.
• Don't underestimate the Green Bay Packers in free agency, writes Jason Wilde of ESPNMilwaukee.com.
• Packers general manager Ted Thompson on receiving four compensatory draft picks, via Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: "More is better."
• The Packers might do away with night practices in training camp, writes Rob Demovsky of the Green Bay Press-Gazette.
• The Minnesota Vikings made a strong push to sign free-agent receiver Pierre Garcon, writes Jeremy Fowler of the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
• The Star Tribune examines the majority support of a Vikings stadium from the Minneapolis City Council.
• Vikings owner/president Mark Wilf on the team's offseason approach, via Tom Pelissero of 1500ESPN.com: "We want to win right away, too. But the main thing is we want to be first-rate and first-class on a consistent basis."

Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe has never been afraid to speak his mind, and on Thursday he went on ESPN 1500 radio in the Twin Cities and called for a lifetime ban of New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma.

According to the NFL, Vilma offered $10,000 to any player who knocked Vikings quarterback Brett Favre out of the 2009 NFC Championship Game. Commissioner Roger Goodell has punished the Saints, general manager Mickey Loomis and coach Sean Payton, but he hasn't announced specific discipline for players involved in the Saints' bounty program and is awaiting a recommendation from the NFL Players Association.

"I think this is a spot," Kluwe said, "where the [NFLPA] definitely has to take a stand and say, 'Look, you put other guys' livelihoods in danger. You're jeopardizing other guys' chances to play.' Football is violent enough as it is. It's hard enough to stay healthy in the league and so by maliciously trying to hurt people they need to show, we need to show, that there's no place in the game for that kind of behavior."

Based on the Saints' abuse of Favre, Kluwe said he spoke with Vikings place-kicker Ryan Longwell during the game about the possibility of a bounty.

"But you don't want to believe that something like that is happening because you think better of the other players."

Kluwe's point is well taken, and Goodell has already surprised most observers with the harshness of his initial penalties. A lifetime ban might be unrealistic, but we've already learned our lesson about projecting Goodell's plans in this instance.

By now, we all know that the 2009 NFC Championship Game is one of the most visible examples of the New Orleans Saints' three-year bounty program. But there has been a secondary connection between the bounty story and the Minnesota Vikings: One of the Saints' defensive starters in that game signed a free agent contract with the Vikings last season.

Nose tackle Remi Ayodele, in fact, was the second player involved in a high-low hit that caused Vikings quarterback Brett Favre to suffer an ankle injury and throw an interception. Ayodele hit Favre high, while defensive end Bobby McCray grabbed Favre's ankle. The NFL later fined McCray and said a penalty should have been called.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell is still mulling player discipline related to the bounty system, so we don't know if Ayodele is in line to be suspended. For now we'll just consider it a coincidence that the Vikings released Ayodele hours after the league announced unprecedented punishment against the Saints' organization and leadership staff.

What we do know: Ayodele made almost no impact after signing a three-year, $9 million deal a year ago. He started 13 games but played sparingly (23.6 percent of the Vikings' snaps) and managed only four official solo tackles.

And in recent days, the Vikings had re-signed veterans Fred Evans and Letroy Guion, both of whom can play nose tackle. Evans' deal was official Wednesday.

The Vikings would be justified in releasing Ayodele for either reason: The fear of a looming suspension or ineffectiveness. Take your pick, as far as I'm concerned.

(The Bears are) Black and Blue All Over:

Many of us were scratching our heads Tuesday upon learning the terms of the Chicago Bears' trade/heist with the Miami Dolphins for Brandon Marshall, one of the NFL's best receivers. Why was Marshall available for a third-round draft pick in 2012 and another in 2013?

A possible explanation emerged overnight, and it's big enough to devote a separate version of BBAO to the Bears. According to the New York Post, Marshall -- who has a history of off-field incidents -- allegedly was involved in a fight outside a New York City nightclub Sunday night. The Post said Marshall hit a woman in the face, causing a black eye, but it wasn't clear if he was intending to punch her or missed another antagonist.

Marshall's attorney released a statement saying Marshall was not involved but that his wife had been hit and was injured seriously enough to require hospitalization.

It's not clear if the Dolphins knew about the incident before Tuesday's trade, or if the Bears did, and whether that will matter going forward. Like all players, Marshall will be subject to an NFL review and could face discipline from commissioner Roger Goodell.

There are two sides to every story, and normally we don't get all worked up about a nightclub fight. But Marshall has a history of fighting and domestic incidents, including with his current wife, and it doesn't bode well for his progress to hear another incident might have occurred just three days ago. It could impact his standing with the NFL, in terms of the personal conduct policy, among other things. Stay tuned.

Let's hit some local coverage of the Bears. I'll have a separate BBAO on the rest of the NFC North in a bit.

• The Bears had been "inarguably shortsighted" in surrounding quarterback Jay Cutler with weapons in his first three seasons in Chicago, writes Jon Greenberg of ESPNChicago.com.
• Marshall posted a "photo" of him in a Bears uniform on Twitter late Tuesday night.
• Cutler re-tweeted the photo and wrote: "Told you we could get that #15 out of storage. Getting the band back together! Good to have #15 back."
• Dan Pompei of the Chicago Tribune writes on the pros and cons of Marshall's arrival.
• David Haugh of the Tribune on new Bears general manager Phil Emery: "This is when it truly hits Bears fans that there is a new guy calling the shots at Halas Hall."
• The Bears are still seeking help at defensive end, writes Pompei, after failing to lure Jacksonville Jaguars defensive end Jeremy Mincey.
• Cornerback Kelvin Hayden will visit with the Bears on Wednesday, reports ESPN's Josina Anderson.