Skip to content

49ers did get something for Bruce, but not really

Tuesday’s ceremonial trade of wide receiver Isaac Bruce to the St. Louis Rams did net the 49ers compensation, after all.

But not really.
According to ESPN’s Adam Schefter, the Niners “acquired” a conditional draft pick in 2012.  The condition involves Bruce playing in 2010, however, which he will not do.  Bruce will announce his retirement on Wednesday.
So why were the teams compelled to trade in the first place?
For one, Bruce was still under contract with San Francisco.  More interesting, though, is Howard Balzer of the St. Louis Globe Democrat‘s suggestion that Bruce might have signed with old pals Lovie Smith and Mike Martz in Chicago had San Francisco released him outright.
As for Bruce’s Hall of Fame prospects, we already know he’s got one vote.  Bernie Miklasz of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has confirmed that he’ll be voting for Bruce, perhaps as soon as 2015.  
Yes, I believe Isaac Bruce is a Hall of Famer,” Miklasz tweeted Monday evening.  “So many big catches in big games and has the bulk stats.  Also: great leader.”
Permalink 18 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, San Francisco 49ers, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
18 Responses to “49ers did get something for Bruce, but not really”
  1. jaynovel says: Jun 8, 2010 12:40 PM

    Much respect for Bruce, always a respectable man and incredible competitor!

  2. Nebster21 says: Jun 8, 2010 12:41 PM

    Bruce is going to have the same problems that Art Monk had getting in. Now if he gets busted with some coke he might ride the Michael Jerome Irvin train right into the HOF.

  3. robert ethen says: Jun 8, 2010 12:42 PM

    Wow, cheap price for a future HOFer.

  4. Dewey Axewoond says: Jun 8, 2010 12:47 PM

    Balzer’s suggestion that Bruce “might have” signed with the Bears is just flat wrong.
    The Bears are interested in developing their own young talent at the position, NOT in stifling that growth by bringing in some largely washed-up one year stop-gap veterans, like they have before:
    Marty Booker
    Moose Muhammad
    Brandon Lloyd, etc.
    Regardless of what “interesting” names might be out there–Owens, Bruce, Holt, Bennett, Hackett, the Bears see more upside in the youth and potential of Knox & Aromashodu & Bennett, the increasing development & experience of Hester, and so on.
    Despite the (undeniable) past talent of some of those guys, I don’t see any of them as being a worthwhile improvement over what they already have, and I don’t think the Bears do, either.
    This is NOT a move the Bears should make.
    Happy Bruce gets to go “home”, though.

  5. BenRapistberger says: Jun 8, 2010 12:48 PM

    I emailed you this yesterday, check your email bonehead.

  6. QJ1984 says: Jun 8, 2010 1:12 PM

    The 49ers havent gotten enough credit for this. They didnt have to do anything but they traded him to a division, so he can retire where he started. Do you think the Ravens would have traded Rod Woodson to the Steelers so he could retire where he started? Do you think the Vikings would trade Favre back to Greenbay so he can retire where he started? No to both. This was a very classy move by the 49ers.

  7. Mr. Common Sense says: Jun 8, 2010 1:27 PM

    IB was way over-rated in my book. He was the master of the gator arms and looking for a nice cozy strip of astroturf to dive on to avoid contact instead of trying for some RAC yards. Not HOF material to me.

  8. Nebster21 says: Jun 8, 2010 1:38 PM

    They are classy to trade him in the division to retire. You must be smoking something good. He is not goign to play next year. The only possible thing they could have been is not classy by trading him to some other team. All the 9ers have basically done is released him and basically said there is no chance for another team to pick him up. So basically the 9ers sat there and said we are basically making you retire. I see no class in that.

  9. stiller43 says: Jun 8, 2010 1:42 PM

    QJ1984,
    A few things…
    1) The 49ers traded Bruce because he has no value, not to be nice. If he was still capable of great (or even good things) on the field, they wouldn’t have let him go.
    2) Rod Woodson didn’t retire as a Raven. He later played for Oakland. Again, he had value because he could still play, hence why they didn’t trade him (and, you know, the fact he wasn’t going to retire).
    3) Favre (reportedly) wouldn’t want to retire as a Packer with the current administration.
    Your examples suck. Not saying it wasn’t a nice move, but you don’t have to go all out trying to prove it was.

  10. WhoDey_Man says: Jun 8, 2010 1:46 PM

    basically you’re retarded basically. that argument is ridiculous. if t.o. and some of the other free agents are STILL available, there’s nobody that would pay for bruce. it actually was a pretty classy thing to do. if you trade him and he pulls a junior seau, graduates, then promptly enrolls in grad school, you get compensation. if he doesn’t, it’s the same outcome as releasing. like insurance. except you don’t get effed in the a.

  11. sic62 says: Jun 8, 2010 1:50 PM

    They didn’t want his name associated with being released. Nothing to do with the Bears.

  12. Nebster21 says: Jun 8, 2010 1:53 PM

    what is RAC? Yeah your right Mr. Common Sense what is being number 2(15,208 yards) on the all-time Recieving Yards list to do. But like I said before he was not in the news enough for doing what players are not suppose to do to be a first ballot inductee.

  13. Bob says: Jun 8, 2010 1:55 PM

    Perhaps the Niners and Rams in their mutual dislike for Mike Martz cooked up this scheme to keep him from going to Chicago. Maybe Martz was interested in signing him.

  14. Sdivine says: Jun 8, 2010 1:59 PM

    You think the Jets will trade Jason Taylor to the fins so he can retire?

  15. Beezer says: Jun 8, 2010 2:15 PM

    Isaac Bruce was a top 5 wide receiver in his prime and was a star before Holt arrived. He was one half of one of the best wide receiver combo’s of all time. He deserves to be in the hall of fame.

  16. this class sucks says: Jun 8, 2010 2:42 PM

    H e should get into the HOF on the first ballot. He does have one of the best catches and runs in Super Bowl history to his credit as well as (like someone earlier posted) being number 2 in receptions.
    The 49ers did a nice thing by not releasing him, but it is only nice because it wouldn’t have any effect on them.

  17. David56 says: Jun 8, 2010 3:01 PM

    I am old enough to recall all of Bruce’s career. He played far longer than a lot of WR’s and played very, very well. Face it, in the NFL if you can’t do the job on the field it isn’t long before you’re history. Bruce did the job and if he hadn’t he’d have been gone long ago. I’ll leave it to others as to whether-or-not he ends up in Canton, but if I could vote he’d have it.

  18. JJ Nukes says: Jun 8, 2010 3:51 PM

    I have taken poops that have better storylines……..
    Slow new day, just saying.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!