Comments on: 49ers did get something for Bruce, but not really

By: JJ Nukes

JJ Nukes — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:51:58 +0000

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

By: David56

David56 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:01:35 +0000

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.

By: this class sucks

this class sucks — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:42:31 +0000

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.

By: Beezer

Beezer — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:15:30 +0000

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.

By: Sdivine

Sdivine — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:59:15 +0000

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

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:55:29 +0000

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.

By: Nebster21

Nebster21 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:53:32 +0000

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.

By: sic62

sic62 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:50:31 +0000

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

By: WhoDey_Man

WhoDey_Man — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:46:03 +0000

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.

By: stiller43

stiller43 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:42:37 +0000

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.

By: Nebster21

Nebster21 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:38:25 +0000

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.

By: Mr. Common Sense

Mr. Common Sense — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:27:57 +0000

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.

By: QJ1984

QJ1984 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:12:41 +0000

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.

By: BenRapistberger

BenRapistberger — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:48:29 +0000

I emailed you this yesterday, check your email bonehead.

By: Dewey Axewoond

Dewey Axewoond — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:47:59 +0000

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.

By: robert ethen

robert ethen — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:42:38 +0000

Wow, cheap price for a future HOFer.

By: Nebster21

Nebster21 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:41:22 +0000

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.

By: jaynovel

jaynovel — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:40:29 +0000

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