Well, without being too broad, obviously, we did think it was in the best interest of our organization, not only the future, but right now, this season as well.

We've gained a pro bowl player.

We've gained a pro bowl player in an area that we had big concerns in on the inside of our defense.

Let me go beyond your question.

First of all, I want to tell you that I really like Micah.

I appreciate the years, four years that we've had him here,

and he's a great player.

And so we are very appreciative of the fact that he's a great player.

There's no question that I could have signed him in April.

And so we all know that to have agreements,

all parties have to agree.

But this was by design.

I did make Mike an offer.

It wasn't acceptable.

And I honored the fact that it wasn't done in the way that he wanted to do it through an agent. So he was made an offer. There's not an ounce of vindictiveness. There's

no bad feelings on my part about the fact that we didn't come together

on an agreement. The facts are, and we'll cover it, I'm sure, with many of your questions.

But the facts are, specifically, we need to stop the run and we haven't been able to stop the run at key

times for several years and when you have the kind of extraordinary pass rush that Michael had,

then the way to mitigate that pass rush is to run at you.

If the pass rush doesn't get you ahead pretty big time

and you're playing even or behind,

...