Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;441918]1. We're talking about trading one pick this year for one of the game's most talented WRs

2. We are not throwing all our picks away

3. Why is it not even remotely considered that maybe, just maybe, Chad Johnson will help Jason Campbell get to that next level. That maybe, just maybe, a stud receiver like Chad Johnson would be the best thing to happen to Campbell?

4. Too many people have way too narrow an understanding of how to build a team[/QUOTE]

Thank you for bringing some sense to the board SS. Honestly this news about CJ threw the whole "knowledgeable fan" label out the window given some of the comments posted.

Honestly I laugh how the Bengals think they are going to solve their problems by keeping CJ. That team is a mess, and is funny how their fans despise one of the few guys that hasn't gotten arrested.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=The Goat;441919]I'm less and less excited about CJ or any other vet WR coming to town as part of a big trade. There are 5 1st round quality OTs in the draft with another 2 inside o-lineman and another 4 top tier DTs. Last year proved beyond any reasonable doubt we need young talent at these positions and it's very hard to believe all of the top guys will be gone by the 21st pick. CJ carries a huge risk factor because of his personality w/ the loss of picks we desperately need. For instance, when (not if) our current stock of lineman become injured during the season the downside is huge. Meanwhile, the upside to CJ is questionable and we know exactly what we're giving up: young talent where we need it.[/QUOTE]

Really? You think there's that much first-round OL talent in this year's draft?

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;441918]1. We're talking about trading one pick this year for one of the game's most talented WRs

2. We are not throwing all our picks away

3. Why is it not even remotely considered that maybe, just maybe, Chad Johnson will help Jason Campbell get to that next level. That maybe, just maybe, a stud receiver like Chad Johnson would be the best thing to happen to Campbell?

4. Too many people have way too narrow an understanding of how to build a team[/QUOTE]

To many people have watched this exact approach for way to long, and I have to ask where has it taken us?

People act as if Moss and El are average Wr's at best, they are 2 bonified game breakers who have been stuck in the mud with Gibbs conservative offensive approach.

You do understand that next year at this time we can very well be talking all about how many needs we have and no #1, when have I heard that before? Sorry I don't think WR is a big enough need comparatively to other needs to give up possibly 2 #1's, I believe some people believe you can build a team with 1 player, lets see what happens when we can't block so Chad can get the ball? Lets see what happens when we can't cover anybody and the offense doesn't see the field. This is a move to be made for a team ready to win now, that ain't us! Further more I watched old Chad drop ball after ball last season, but because of his mouth and his antics nobody has brought that up, all they see is the persona. Yes the guy is not a problem off the field [criminally], but he's a selfish idiot on the field.

Tell me how do you propose to blow up our cap space with his new contract, because we have so much cap space to throw around? You do understand that will be part of the deal don't you? More money for the legend Chad J? Right? I haven't heard him say he just wants to win, he may have said it I haven't heard all his quotes, but I did here quite a few of his rants complaining he wants more money. Just a very disrupting personality we don't need, and we sure don't need to start giving up #1's for that privilege.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=HOGTIMUS PRIME;441924]To many people have watched this exact approach for way to long, and I have to ask where has it taken us?

People act as if Moss and El are average Wr's at best, they are 2 bonified game breakers who have been stuck in the mud with Gibbs conservative offensive approach.

You do understand that next year at this time we can very well be talking all about how many needs we have and no #1, when have I heard that before? Sorry I don't think WR is a big enough need comparatively to other needs to give up possibly 2 #1's, I believe some people believe you can build a team with 1 player, lets see what happens when we can't block so Chad can get the ball? Lets see what happens when we can't cover anybody and the offense doesn't see the field. This is a move to be made for a team ready to win now, that ain't us! Further more I watched old Chad drop ball after ball last season, but because of his mouth and his antics nobody has brought that up, all they see is the persona. Yes the guy is not a problem off the field [criminally], but he's a selfish idiot on the field.

Tell me how do you propose to blow up our cap space with his new contract, because we have so much cap space to throw around? You do understand that will be part of the deal don't you? More money for the legend Chad J? Right? I haven't heard him say he just wants to win, he may have said it I haven't heard all his quotes, but I did here quite a few of his rants complaining he wants more money. Just a very disrupting personality we don't need, and we sure don't need to start giving up #1's for that privilege.[/QUOTE]

Well CJ did mention in the NFL Network that he wants the same opportunity that Randy Moss and T.O. have gotten. I mean these are both players that people considered to be case heads (but with lots of talents) and went to another team and got the opportunity to win. I mean let's be honest, the Bengals are not the best run organization and it is going to be a long time until they win in a very competitive AFC.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;441923]Really? You think there's that much first-round OL talent in this year's draft?[/QUOTE]

no there are 2 OT left for 1st round talent and a guard/tackle

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=HOGTIMUS PRIME;441924]To many people have watched this exact approach for way to long, and I have to ask where has it taken us?

People act as if Moss and El are average Wr's at best, they are 2 bonified game breakers who have been stuck in the mud with Gibbs conservative offensive approach.

You do understand that next year at this time we can very well be talking all about how many needs we have and no #1, when have I heard that before? Sorry I don't think WR is a big enough need comparatively to other needs to give up possibly 2 #1's, I believe some people believe you can build a team with 1 player, lets see what happens when we can't block so Chad can get the ball? Lets see what happens when we can't cover anybody and the offense doesn't see the field. This is a move to be made for a team ready to win now, that ain't us! Further more I watched old Chad drop ball after ball last season, but because of his mouth and his antics nobody has brought that up, all they see is the persona. Yes the guy is not a problem off the field [criminally], but he's a selfish idiot on the field.

Tell me how do you propose to blow up our cap space with his new contract, because we have so much cap space to throw around? You do understand that will be part of the deal don't you? More money for the legend Chad J? Right? I haven't heard him say he just wants to win, he may have said it I haven't heard all his quotes, but I did here quite a few of his rants complaining he wants more money. Just a very disrupting personality we don't need, and we sure don't need to start giving up #1's for that privilege.[/QUOTE]

I think El is very good, and seems like a genuinely good guy. But if you really think he's as good a WR as Chad Johnson then wow, just Wow!

I still have no idea why people think we can't address several of our needs while still sending a first rounder and a conditional third rounder next year for CJ

You don't think the Redskins restructured contracts and held back on signing free agents this offseason in anticipation of possibly making such a move?

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

Should we be successful attaining CJ, I believe our fan base will have forgotten this argument when he's catching bombs from Campbell. I would look forward to CJ/Portis press conferences...

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;441929]I think El is very good, and seems like a genuinely good guy. But if you really think he's as good a WR as Chad Johnson then wow, just Wow!

I still have no idea why people think we can't address several of our needs while still sending a first rounder and a conditional third rounder next year for CJ

You don't think the Redskins restructured contracts and held back on signing free agents this offseason in anticipation of possibly making such a move?[/QUOTE]

Smoot, you think ARE is a very good receiver? I'm not so sure anymore. Maybe it's because Campbell is still developing, maybe the offense has been "stuck in the mud" with more conservative approach, I don't know.

I'll be interested to see if a different, more innovative offense gives him a new spark. But his numbers are what they are, and last year as the #2 guy he produced like a seldom used #3. To me, he's never been as good as advertised.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SKINSnCANES;441467]Ive got one, Mike Westbrook...he just didnt have the love for it anymore after 30![/quote]

You're right, he was in love with other things instead. Just ask Stephen Davis. [IMG]http://www.thewarpath.net/images/icons/icon12.gif[/IMG]

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=HOGTIMUS PRIME;441924]To many people have watched this exact approach for way to long, and I have to ask where has it taken us?

People act as if Moss and El are average Wr's at best, they are 2 bonified game breakers who have been stuck in the mud with Gibbs conservative offensive approach.

You do understand that next year at this time we can very well be talking all about how many needs we have and no #1, when have I heard that before? Sorry I don't think WR is a big enough need comparatively to other needs to give up possibly 2 #1's, I believe some people believe you can build a team with 1 player, lets see what happens when we can't block so Chad can get the ball? Lets see what happens when we can't cover anybody and the offense doesn't see the field. This is a move to be made for a team ready to win now, that ain't us! Further more I watched old Chad drop ball after ball last season, but because of his mouth and his antics nobody has brought that up, all they see is the persona. Yes the guy is not a problem off the field [criminally], but he's a selfish idiot on the field.

Tell me how do you propose to blow up our cap space with his new contract, because we have so much cap space to throw around? You do understand that will be part of the deal don't you? More money for the legend Chad J? Right? I haven't heard him say he just wants to win, he may have said it I haven't heard all his quotes, but I did here quite a few of his rants complaining he wants more money. Just a very disrupting personality we don't need, and we sure don't need to start giving up #1's for that privilege.[/QUOTE]

I agree, this build from without approach has been going on in Redskin land for quite some time now and it hasnt worked. The Skins need to build a solid foundation through the draft and then when they need a player or 2 to fill a hole then get him via free agency (likw NE did with Moss) but the Skins arent there yet.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

Here's something no one has considered. If we want to give up two draft picks so badly for an established player, why aren't we going after Kansas City DE Jared Allen? He just turned 26, led the league in sacks with 15.5 last season and would fill a bigger need immediately on the Redskins. Oh, that's right. Chad Johnson jerseys probably would sell much better than Jared Allen ones.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441945]Here's something no one has considered. If we want to give up two draft picks so badly for an established player, why aren't we going after Kansas City DE Jared Allen? He just turned 26, led the league in sacks with 15.5 last season and would fill a bigger need immediately on the Redskins. Oh, that's right. Chad Johnson jerseys probably would sell much better than Jared Allen ones.[/quote]

Because this isn't a college spring game. This is the NFL, you beat your opponents by scoring more points than them. Sacks do not equal points, (safety excluded) touchdowns do.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=Angry;441949]Because this isn't a college spring game. This is the NFL, you beat your opponents by scoring more points than them. Sacks do not equal points, (safety excluded) touchdowns do.[/quote]
But a dominant D-Line can shut down an opponent's offense so you don't have to score as many points to win. (See NYG Superbowl win)

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;441950]But a dominant D-Line can shut down an opponent's offense so you don't have to score as many points to win. (See NYG Superbowl win)[/quote]


I understand your argument, however we already have a solid Defense that has been limiting other team's offense. We need to generate more points ourselves. If we would have scored 3-7 more points a game, we may have only lost one game last season.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Angry;441953]I understand your argument, however we already have a solid Defense that has been limiting other team's offense. We need to generate more points ourselves. If we would have scored 3-7 more points a game, we may have only lost one game last season.[/QUOTE]

Do you mean that same solid defense that has only one bonafide pass-rusher, question marks in the secondary due to age (Springs) and injury (Rogers), and lost winnable games against Dallas, the Giants, Philly and Buffalo because it couldn't make stops?

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441945]Here's something no one has considered. If we want to give up two draft picks so badly for an established player, why aren't we going after Kansas City DE Jared Allen? He just turned 26, led the league in sacks with 15.5 last season and would fill a bigger need immediately on the Redskins. Oh, that's right. Chad Johnson jerseys probably would sell much better than Jared Allen ones.[/quote]

Your jersey 'logic' is getting a little tired. Jared Allen is a very good player, but the Vikings are also willing to give up a 1st for him and they pick four spots ahead of us. Also, despite how much you clearly dislike Chad Johnson, he has never been suspended for multiple DUI's ... if you're so concerned with character why would you advocate picking up a guy who has no problem putting other people's lives at risk or (if you want to take a crass strictly football perspective) is one strike away from getting the Goddell smackdown?

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441954]Do you mean that same solid defense that has only one bonafide pass-rusher and lost winnable games against Dallas, the Giants, Philly and Buffalo because it couldn't make stops?[/quote]
On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=SC Skins Fan;441956]Your jersey 'logic' is getting a little tired. Jared Allen is a very good player, but the Vikings are also willing to give up a 1st for him and they pick four spots ahead of us. Also, despite how much you clearly dislike Chad Johnson, he has never been suspended for multiple DUI's ... if you're so concerned with character why would you advocate picking up a guy who has no problem putting other people's lives at risk or (if you want to take a crass strictly football perspective) is one strike away from getting the Goddell smackdown?[/QUOTE]

The Vikings made it a point to do their homework and Allen has been very contrite about how he's made mistakes and is owning up to them. Chad is constantly talking about me, me, me, I want to get paid. At least Allen will fill a bigger need immediately. We're not a player away from a Super Bowl and Chad Johnson by himself isn't going to get us there.

Bottom line. With a new head coach on board, we need to build a corps of "young players" instead of trading away picks for players in their '30s who may or may not help us.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Angry;441957]On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.[/QUOTE]

Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=Angry;441957]On the flip side of that coin we only needed 3 to 7 more points to beat each of those teams.

Our offense averaged only 20.9 PPG our D only allowed 19.4 PPG and alot of those points you cannot blame on the Defense. Our offense was not staying on the field long enough and often turned the ball over. That gave opponents favorable field position.

If we are still losing close games in a year and our Offense is putting up 24 PPG or more, then I will say that we need to upgrade the D.[/quote]
I understand the stats you are quoting. But Campbell's development and Zorn's offense will be the determining factor in improved offensive production. CJ will not lift the average scoring output by himself. If Campbell doesn't develop, or we have injury issues on an aging OL this deal is basically worthless.

Our defense, while playing well in the latter part of the year after they abandoned the Cover 2, has some glaring issues; a young strong-side DE is needed, DT who can collapse the pocket, LB depth, young shut-down corner, Safety depth.

CJ is a talented WR, one of the better ones in the NFL, but we have so many issues to address and the offensive development doesn't hinge on a star WR right now. It hinges on Zorn, Campbell, a healthy OL and healthy Portis. If one of those components has a problem it basically negates any benefit CJ would bring. Then we've given up a 1st this year and 3rd in 2009 for a 31 yr. old WR whose production could be in decline and whose attitude may have created problems with team chemistry. Risk & price too high, reward too low.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=SouperMeister;441590]If we're going to offer a 1st and a 3rd, I would prefer that the offer be made to KC first for franchised Jared Allen, then use our 2nd rounder to address WR. Chad's good, but is he Randy Moss or TO (when their heads are on straight)? I don't think so.[/quote]

That depends on how you look at it.

Moss had 98 receptions to CJ 93. Moss had 1,493 yrds to CJ's 1,440 yrds, Moss had 15.2 average yrds to CJ's 15.5 average yrds, Moss had 23 TD's to CJ's 8. Depending on how you spin it you could be right or one could say Moss was the only go to guy in clutch situations on that team and CJ had to split his time with Houshamizoli (sp-LOL).

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

I have not read all 11 pages...but how does CJ fit with the team. What will be the reaction from Santana, El, and the others? The guy obviously has talent. But we have been down this road with...."talents" that don't work out in reality....several times.
As SS stated in another thread, you have to examine a player that DEMANDS to be traded. I am not an advocate of the T.O. mentality, and I have no desire to remake (or risk) a good nucleus that we already have.
To pricey...to much me, me, me

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441960]Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.[/quote]

Dude, I am so tired of arguing that I don't want to anymore. To continue this fight with you I would have to repeat every post that I have made regarding the team over the past offseason. I do not have the time or the energy to keep revisiting the same discussions. I will just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.

Enjoy the Draft.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;441938]Smoot, you think ARE is a very good receiver? I'm not so sure anymore. Maybe it's because Campbell is still developing, maybe the offense has been "stuck in the mud" with more conservative approach, I don't know.

I'll be interested to see if a different, more innovative offense gives him a new spark. But his numbers are what they are, and last year as the #2 guy he produced like a seldom used #3. To me, he's never been as good as advertised.[/QUOTE]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find 1 #3 wideout who posted ARE's numbers last year.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=SkinsFanSince91;441622]We have 9 picks!

SKINS! If you are listening....DONT DO IT!!![/quote]

Last yr we had 7 picks.....I think and 3 are gone. How did the draft help us other then Landry and Blades? I think the rest were on the practice squad. Statistically 9 picks would generate what 1-2 more players to stay on the team?

Everyone fails to realize that we won't get the best player in all the positions. As far as O-lineman go...we have a line coach that seems to work his magic with "no-names." He finds the diamonds in the rough or builds them. So as far as O-lineman I can see us waiting untill the 3rd round or later to get a O-lineman.

Defense is a different issue, but the good news is the DE/DL's are deep in this yrs draft and we can get one of those in the 2nd round. CB/S's are kinda deep also if I'm correct. We can pick one of those up in the 3rd round.

The 7th is a major crap shoot. It's funny how 7th round is a crap shoot when we get are best out of undrafted free agents. So I'm really looking forward to all the undrafted free agents to root for again this yr.

I couldn't remember his name when I posted yesterday but I was thinking of Hayer. I believe the team is happy with him replacing Jansen and He did perform well. Everyone needs to remember it was his first year also. I'm sure Bugel will coach him up this yr and he will be 100% better.

As far as "skilled" positions go though it's a crap shoot as to what you will get. Now that we have Zorn I'm not afraid of who we would pick as a QB if we did need to draft one because he has a way of building a good QB much like Bugel and his O-line. Who do we have at WR coach to build a drafted player? I hope you all are not going to say Stan Hixon. I have not been impressed with him and have felt he is a liability. Almost all young WR we draft turn into camp fodder. Either we can't seem to draft a good WR or Stan is not the guru at building a WR. My example would be Espy. No he's no number 1 but I felt he had potential. Apparently someone failed to develope him. So in a nut shell if we can't seem to develope WR's then we better be able to find one that already has been developed. ie; Williams or CJ.

My only problem with Williams is his durability. I believe someone pointed out he has been unjury prone in the past and has not put the numbers. CJ has been a staple of the Bengals and played all games for the past what 5-7 yrs. Can't say that about T.O. he gets a boo boo and he's down.

Some are comparing CJ to Hackett and this is total crap. Hackett will never be a Moss or a T.O. or a CJ. Hackett is a #2 at best and [B]also[/B] has proven to be injury prone. Probably why Zorn said make an offer but don't go over board on him. I guess we could continue to try to get by with a bunch of #2 WR's and continue to make the play off to only have other teams continue to play us as they have. Shut down our only close #1 WR and keep everything with in 10-15 yrds.

If the trade was for a DE or DL would you jump on the same deal? What if it was for a CB or Safety? How about if it was for a O-lineman? I really wonder how many of you are against the WR position period and have your own agenda? Some of you are set for a O-lineman, or DE or DL, or Safety, or CB. No different then us arguing for a WR. I will say that I'm not looking for a WR at the #21 pick though if we are picking. I would prefer a Kicker.........just kidding. Thought I would raise some eye brows. LOL. No I'm interested in a DE/DL , a nice pash rusher to compliment Carter. However I'm also not stupid to pass up on the chance to get CJ or Williams if available. This would make the whole dynamics of this offense so much better. Who would teams cover?

I also was not impressed with how Gibbs tied Saunders hands when it came to his play calling but it also could have very much been Saunders plays. Although it's kinda hard to ague when it worked with the Rams and Chiefs.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Angry;441970]Dude, I am so tired of arguing that I don't want to anymore. To continue this fight with you I would have to repeat every post that I have made regarding the team over the past offseason. I do not have the time or the energy to keep revisiting the same discussions. I will just agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.

Enjoy the Draft.[/QUOTE]

Well, I'm sorry it's not what you want to hear. Chad Johnson is not the answer for this team right now.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441981]Well, I'm sorry it's not what you want to hear. Chad Johnson is not the answer for this team right now.[/quote]

I said agree to disagree. Move on.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=KB24;441959]The Vikings made it a point to do their homework and Allen has been very contrite about how he's made mistakes and is owning up to them. Chad is constantly talking about me, me, me, I want to get paid. At least Allen will fill a bigger need immediately. We're not a player away from a Super Bowl and Chad Johnson by himself isn't going to get us there.

Bottom line. With a new head coach on board, we need to build a corps of "young players" instead of trading away picks for players in their '30s who may or may not help us.[/QUOTE]

HOW is picking a DE when you already have a strong D-Line doing your homework? The Vikings have a mediocre offense, that would be right down terrible if it wasn't for Adrian Peterson. Their passing game is non-existent, they have a below average QB and no WRs whatsoever. I'm sorry but your CJ bashing is making you make no sense.

Oh and way to overlook the fact that Allen (according to what some have posted) had a DUI. So ur telling me a guy that talks wayy too much is worst than a guy that got busted for a DUI? Please.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;441938]Smoot, you think ARE is a very good receiver? I'm not so sure anymore. Maybe it's because Campbell is still developing, maybe the offense has been "stuck in the mud" with more conservative approach, I don't know.

I'll be interested to see if a different, more innovative offense gives him a new spark. But his numbers are what they are, and last year as the #2 guy he produced like a seldom used #3. To me, he's never been as good as advertised.[/QUOTE]

I should clarify. I think El is a very good #3 receiver, a more than capable #2. But to compare him on the field to Chad Johnson is "reidyquelouz"

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=Larry Michael is Satan;441642]1) Chad goddam Johnson is NOT in the same league as Jerry Rice, Randy Moss, et al, as some have said. That's insane. He's not even the best reciever on his own team, much less all-time great.

2) He plays with an elite NFL QB, and is trashing his team publically because they are not winning. Newsflash: The Skins are a LONG way from being a contender.

3) Do you think getting screamed at on the sideline by some prima dona bitch is gonna help Jason Campbell's confidence and development?

4) Joe Gibbs has obviously left the building if we are making an offer for CJ.

5) No team can afford to pay pro bowl money to THREE recievers.

6) NOBODY is gonna get the ball if we don't have an O-line.

COLOSSAL MISTAKE!!!!!!!![/quote]


I'm sorry you lost me with #1.....How is CJ not the #1 WR on his team? Go to NFL.COM and look up player stats for 2007 and tell me how a #3 ranked WR is not the top WR on his team? and then find the next available Bengal on that roster.....I'll help you out...it's T.J. Houshmandzadeh at #15. and for your info...CJ does compare to Randy Moss who was second on the list. If you look at all the stats they are comparable other then TD's...yes Moss had 23 and CJ had 8, but thats because according to you he had to play with some one who is better then him at #15.

Your #2 is stupid. Palmer is not elite! I think you mean his WR's make him look alot better then he really is. At this point I believe Campbell is better then Palmer.

#3 I regress to #2. Palmer is an idiot. Campbell is not. I'm sure CJ would not stunt Campbells growth and more then likely would help it grow.

#4 I finally agree with you.
#5 Your right. the team should not have thought that Moss who was not the #1 on the Jets was #1 status or that Randel El who was not the #1 on his team nor a #2 was worthy of #1 pay.

#6 I'm back to disagreeing with you. This just makes it harder for other teams to double up on one WR. It would probably force Moss to be more open which means Moss gets more balls, or Cooley, or Randel El.

Now before you go saying then why do we need CJ...its because teams would have to game plan for him and not single out Moss. Also CJ would get the ball when teams start rolling the coverage his way to eliminate him.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Ruhskins;441984]HOW is picking a DE when you already have a strong D-Line doing your homework? The Vikings have a mediocre offense, that would be right down terrible if it wasn't for Adrian Peterson. Their passing game is non-existent, they have a below average QB and no WRs whatsoever. I'm sorry but your CJ bashing is making you make no sense.

Oh and way to overlook the fact that Allen (according to what some have posted) had a DUI. So ur telling me a guy that talks wayy too much is worst than a guy that got busted for a DUI? Please.[/QUOTE]

Well, to be fair Udeze and possibly James are both out for the year. And they did sign Berrian this off-season.

However, the point about the DUI cannot be overlooked. And to think that's better than a guy whose worst offense is that he talks too much is stupid.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=SBXVII;441966]That depends on how you look at it.

Moss had 98 receptions to CJ 93. Moss had 1,493 yrds to CJ's 1,440 yrds, Moss had 15.2 average yrds to CJ's 15.5 average yrds, Moss had 23 TD's to CJ's 8. Depending on how you spin it you could be right or one could say Moss was the only go to guy in clutch situations on that team and CJ had to split his time with Houshamizoli (sp-LOL).[/quote]

What??? Didn't Welker have 110 catches?? Didn't Stallworth do his part? I can't count how many times Welker caught passes to keep drives alive in clutch situations. Plus the major difference is one caught 23 td's and has over 100 in his career and the other one doesn't.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=SBXVII;441988]I'm sorry you lost me with #1.....How is CJ not the #1 WR on his team? Go to NFL.COM and look up player stats for 2007 and tell me how a #3 ranked WR is not the top WR on his team? and then find the next available Bengal on that roster.....I'll help you out...it's T.J. Houshmandzadeh at #15. and for your info...CJ does compare to Randy Moss who was second on the list. If you look at all the stats they are comparable other then TD's...yes Moss had 23 and CJ had 8, but thats because according to you he had to play with some one who is better then him at #15.

Your #2 is stupid. Palmer is not elite! I think you mean his WR's make him look alot better then he really is. At this point I believe Campbell is better then Palmer.

#3 I regress to #2. Palmer is an idiot. Campbell is not. I'm sure CJ would not stunt Campbells growth and more then likely would help it grow.

#4 I finally agree with you.
#5 Your right. the team should not have thought that Moss who was not the #1 on the Jets was #1 status or that Randel El who was not the #1 on his team nor a #2 was worthy of #1 pay.

#6 I'm back to disagreeing with you. This just makes it harder for other teams to double up on one WR. It would probably force Moss to be more open which means Moss gets more balls, or Cooley, or Randel El.

Now before you go saying then why do we need CJ...its because teams would have to game plan for him and not single out Moss. Also CJ would get the ball when teams start rolling the coverage his way to eliminate him.[/quote]

You gotta be kidding me. Carson Palmer is a better Qb than JC. I can't even believe you said that.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[quote=KB24;441959]The Vikings made it a point to do their homework and Allen has been very contrite about how he's made mistakes and is owning up to them. Chad is constantly talking about me, me, me, I want to get paid. At least Allen will fill a bigger need immediately. We're not a player away from a Super Bowl and Chad Johnson by himself isn't going to get us there.

Bottom line. With a new head coach on board, we need to build a corps of "young players" instead of trading away picks for players in their '30s who may or may not help us.[/quote]

I wonder if the Vikings checked out this website while doing their 'diligent' research. Clearly this guy won't have any problems with alcohol in the future.

[url=http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2008/03/jared_allens_a_club_dedicated_to_the_man_--_and_to_all_things_69.php]Plog - Jared Allen's: A Club Dedicated to the Man -- And to All Things 69[/url]

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Ruhskins;441984]HOW is picking a DE when you already have a strong D-Line doing your homework? The Vikings have a mediocre offense, that would be right down terrible if it wasn't for Adrian Peterson. Their passing game is non-existent, they have a below average QB and no WRs whatsoever. I'm sorry but your CJ bashing is making you make no sense.

Oh and way to overlook the fact that Allen (according to what some have posted) had a DUI. So ur telling me a guy that talks wayy too much is worst than a guy that got busted for a DUI? Please.[/QUOTE]

I didn't "overlook" his DUI. If you go back and read what I posted, I talked about Allen's mistakes and how he admitted what he did was stupid. Since that time, he's been a model citizen and an excellent player.

I bash CJ because of his me-first attitude, an attitude that can disrupt the locker room. Plus, given the woes of the offensive line, having a play-making receiver like Chad isn't going to matter. We need to keep our picks and build a foundation, much like the Caps have done over the last few years. We don't have that foundation and Chad Johnson by himself won't make us a Super Bowl winner.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=KB24;441960]Our offense wasn't staying on the field long enough because our aging, injury-prone offensive line with little in the way of proven back-ups wasn't getting the job done. We could have, both, Chad Johnson and Anquan Bolden at the wide out positions. It won't matter if the line can't open holes for Portis an Betts consistently, or keep Campbell upright long enough to get the ball to Moss and Company. Yes, the offense needs upgrades, but it has to start with the line.[/QUOTE]

Our offensive line improved by mid to late season. And the Redskins I believe fared well in giving up sacks...I think they were ranked 13th in sacks allowed (giving up around 29 sacks). What was constant last season was our offense's inability to score and put the game away was a big reason we lost those close games, and the fact that our WR receivers didn't score a TD well into the season should tell you something about our passing game. I mean look at how we lost the game in the playoffs, when we recover that kickoff that sailed over Burleson's head, we could not even score 3 points.

While I admit that gambling on our defense, which does need improvements, is a risk somehow they have managed to keep our team competitive two out of the past three years. Wheareas our offense has always held us back.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=KB24;441994]I didn't "overlook" his DUI. If you go back and read what I posted, I talked about Allen's mistakes and how he admitted what he did was stupid. Since that time, he's been a model citizen and an excellent player.

I bash CJ because of his me-first attitude, an attitude that can disrupt the locker room. Plus, given the woes of the offensive line, having a play-making receiver like Chad isn't going to matter. We need to keep our picks and build a foundation, much like the Caps have done over the last few years. We don't have that foundation and Chad Johnson by himself won't make us a Super Bowl winner.[/QUOTE]

Well sorry about missing that, this thread was wayyy too long and I arrived late at the party. However, my whole issue with "building a foundation" is that if we wait to develop these young players that we are building upon, Portis, Santana, ARE and our entire offensive line will be too old to make us a contender. The team needs to figure out a way to move past the first round of the playoffs, and have a strong offense that will allow us to win those games were we end up losing by a few points. If we talk about building a foundation for the future, then we might us well give up any chances for the playoff and get into a rebuilding mode.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Ruhskins;441995]Our offensive line improved by mid to late season. And the Redskins I believe fared well in giving up sacks...I think they were ranked 13th in sacks allowed (giving up around 29 sacks). What was constant last season was our offense's inability to score and put the game away was a big reason we lost those close games, and the fact that our WR receivers didn't score a TD well into the season should tell you something about our passing game. I mean look at how we lost the game in the playoffs, when we recover that kickoff that sailed over Burleson's head, we could not even score 3 points.

While I admit that gambling on our defense, which does need improvements, is a risk somehow they have managed to keep our team competitive two out of the past three years. Wheareas our offense has always held us back.[/QUOTE]

That's a good point. But, we still don't have depth on that line. We only have one proven back-up and had to go the scrap heap for bodies. We can't go into the season "hoping" no one gets hurt. We need young, hungry players who will be ready to step in should one of the starters -- all of whom are in the '30s and, outside of Samuels, are recovering from some type of injury -- goes down. Until we do that, we could have Chad AND Bolden, and it won't matter.

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Ruhskins;441997]Well sorry about missing that, this thread was wayyy too long and I arrived late at the party. However, my whole issue with "building a foundation" is that if we wait to develop these young players that we are building upon, Portis, Santana, ARE and our entire offensive line will be too old to make us a contender. The team needs to figure out a way to move past the first round of the playoffs, and have a strong offense that will allow us to win those games were we end up losing by a few points. If we talk about building a foundation for the future, then we might us well give up any chances for the playoff and get into a rebuilding mode.[/QUOTE]

But, haven't we been doing this very thing since 2000? Getting veteran players to "win now" instead of waiting "to develop these young players that we are building upon?" That very strategy you mentioned has netted us a grand total of one playoff win during that time. I want to see the Redskins win just as much as you do. But, it's obvious the way they've been trying to do it just isn't working. Maybe it's time to start from scratch and build for the future. Remember, we have a new -- not to mention first-time -- head coach and a young quarterback who has to learn yet another offensive system. Chances are, there are going to be growing pains and it will take a couple of years to really learn this system. Wouldn't it be smarter to build for the future when the system can be executed to the point where the Redskins offense will be a bigger threat?

Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
 

[QUOTE=Angry;442001]I was going to post something, but the link didn't work. Rather than trying to fix the whole thing you see this.[/QUOTE]

It's not showing up on my screen. What is it?