Urlacher makes it easy to criticize

It sure seems like Brian Urlacher's contract dispute is more with the NFL Players Association than with the Bears.

Yet Urlacher continues to threaten the team by saying stuff to Yahoo! Sports like, "I would bet I wouldn't be (at the upcoming minicamp)."

Urlacher has hit upon a recurring theme like a regurgitating parrot in search of more crackers.

The Bears' middle linebacker wants to renegotiate his contract. To his credit, he isn't saying it isn't about the money.

Urlacher's latest snipe of a gripe was posted Tuesday in a Michael Silver article on Yahoo! Sports.

Once again one of Urlacher's points was that he outperformed his contract, though he didn't mention that he didn't make the Pro Bowl last season and is coming off neck surgery.

Urlacher also whines that the NFL salary cap increased considerably since 2003, when he signed his current contract.

Finally comes Urlacher's primary pitch:

" … I understand it's a contract and I signed it. But this is the NFL, and if I signed it and I'd played like (expletive), they'd have cut me or tried to get me to take less."

So what's your point, big guy?

Seriously, that argument is silly bordering on stupid. The only thing sillier or stupider is when a team like the Bears caves in to a player like Urlacher and his demands.

All the players in Urlacher's situation have more of a problem with themselves -- specifically their own union -- than with whatever team is involved.

Urlacher said of the Bears' right to release a player in mid-contract, "If they can 'break' a contract, I have a right to ask for more (money) if I play well enough."

Except, the Bears wouldn't be breaking Urlacher's contract if they dumped him. They would be exercising a term granted them in the deal.

Yes, the Bears could cut Urlacher, but, no, they couldn't retrieve the $13 million signing bonus.

Urlacher lived up to his end of the contract, becoming the face of the franchise and for the most part playing at a high level.

The Bears lived up to theirs by paying him the upfront money to provide those services. Presumably they wouldn't put on a ski mask, wield a handgun and try to get it back if he played poorly or was injured.

The NFLPA agreed to these rules in the current collective-bargaining agreement. It accepted tradeoffs -- one being the guaranteed signing money -- in exchange for not insisting on guaranteed annual salaries.

Perhaps that's why periodically a group of unhappy players considers overthrowing union chief Gene Upshaw.

None have succeeded. The upfront money and high percentage of league revenues players receive prevail over a team's right to cut a player in the middle of a contract.

If Urlacher doesn't like it, he should lead his own revolution against Upshaw and try to change the terms of the next labor-management agreement.

As for now, Urlacher acknowledges that it's "easy for people to criticize me for wanting (a new deal)."

It certainly is. Criticizing him is this column's mission today. It's to suggest Urlacher quit whining, be in minicamp May 30-June 1 and enjoy the millions of dollars he already has.

"They're killing me in Chicago," the Yahoo! article quoted Urlacher as saying.

Then it added that he joked, "I think I should just go ahead and retire."

See ya!