Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=QBall;415834]Is it just me or does IRISH hate the Skins? Its a fact you hate GIBBS[/quote]


Why would he hate Gibbs or the Skins for saying he rather have Moss and want to develop draftees instead of overpriced FAs? I agree with Irish. Chad would rock here, but to get him we would have to give up some serious coin on top of some top notch draft selections. Can we please focus on building a consistent winner in DC? Instead of the knockout homerun with some explosive FA's, go for the saner approach of building a team with draft picks and maybe lower tie FA's. The high priced FA's of Snyder have been mostly mediocre or just plain busts. Also, when did the great Chad Johnson get the Bengals to the playoffs much less the SB? Carson Palmer has a rocket arm like JC so it is not like he doesn't have a QB. The answer is the Bumbling Bengals stink. We have too many glaring deficiencies with regards to many postions as well as depth in those positions. Chad Johnson most likely will just guarantee more sellouts for Mr. Snyder than getting him a Lombardi Trophy.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=freddyg12;421860]hope you're right sand, but

1) don't put too much stock into what the bengals brass is saying, that's part of postering to gian leverage if they do deal him,
2) If I'm correct, can't a team agree to take on the cap hit in a trade? I know it's all subject to the individual deal, but I recall us & the Jets negotiating this when we traded coles for Moss. Ditto last year when we sent Arch to the Bears, they took some of the cap hit/bonus.

If you're right that it's an 8mil cap hit (what's yo source?) that might even be too much for the danny & his crack team of capologists to manoever around.

What about this scenario, CJ acts a fool during the season & the Bengals choose to deal him rather than keyshawn him. Wonder what the price would be then?[/quote]

Source is the dead money associated with Johnsons current contract in Cincy. The remainder of his pro-rated signing bonus through 2011 is about 8 mill. And as soon as he is traded all 8 mil counts against the Bengals cap.

[quote=The Posse] Look like Dallas is already sweating at just the mention of us getting him, lol I love it.[/quote]

No not sweating it at all. What is there to sweat? Johnson would probably have better numbers in Cincinnati with a Pro Bowl QB in Palmer than he would with a QB who is changing offensive systems for, what, the 3rd time?
And who is still considered to be "developing"? Johnson's production will take a hit if traded to Washington.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Where there is a will there is a way. Especially with DS. I'm no capologist but I'm sure there is a way....possibly even agreeing to sign a new contract that is back loaded like DS likes then being traded to the Skins.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Wow....this thread is huge. I don't see it happening anymore. Cinncy seems to be sticking by the "He's not going anywhere" statement. I belive them. Also, as stubborn as Chad is, he would rather sit than get paid just to prove his point. Kinda like a new-age Barry Sanders?

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=Longtimefan;421858]All I want to know is: How you can begin talking contract with a player already under contract with another team? League rules do not permit that.[/quote]

We did the same thing with Briggs. We had a deal in place ready to be signed before a trade fell through. I'm not sure of the specifics regarding any league rules, but discussing contract parameters does not seem to be against the rules if teams are discussing a trade.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;421809]Well according to WP link that was posted awhile back, they were talking about getting rid of McCardell (Why???) and possibly Caldwell? (I'm not sure. I don't remember) That would leave room to draft a WR. Plus Espy might be back this season, correct?[/quote]

McCardell is old and may retire.

Caldwell has knee issues.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;421883]Source is the dead money associated with Johnsons current contract in Cincy. The remainder of his pro-rated signing bonus through 2011 is about 8 mill. And as soon as he is traded all 8 mil counts against the Bengals cap.[/QUOTE]I would venture to say though that his Cap Number is between 6-8 million anyway, so obviously this wouldn't cripple the Bengals cap any more than Brandon Lloyd would ours.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Does anyone on here honestly think our first year head coach can come to our pressure cooker of a team, coach the team, help JC's progression AND deal with high maintenace chad johnson. The poor guy would most certainly be set up for failure. I like CJ, but he wouldn't be right for our team, wouldn't put up the numbers he's used to and become frustrated. We have too many chiefs, not enough indians. Javon walker is a more feasible candidate anyway. I feel for Zorn, i hope he has the biggest bottle of aspirin in the world to put up with danny's bullshit.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3245503]ESPN - Lewis says it again: Chad Johnson isn't going anywhere - NFL[/url]


Sorry guys I know you love to talk Chad Johnson but it aint gonna happen!!!!

MOVE ON TO NEW BS RUMORS.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=GTripp0012;422024]I would venture to say though that his Cap Number is between 6-8 million anyway, so obviously this wouldn't cripple the Bengals cap any more than Brandon Lloyd would ours.[/quote]

The difference being that fans don't buy tickets to see Brandon Lloyd or buy his jersey. So Washington does not really make anything from his presence.

Johnson, on the other hand, sells jerseys and tickets which means millions of additional revenue for just being on the roster and on the field.

By dumping Lloyd, the Skins do not loose any fan revenue, because he does not exactly sell tons of fan merchandise.

By letting Johnson go not only does the Bengals take a substantial cap hit in dead money, but they would also loose some valuable fan revenue in addition to the cap hit.

Trust me there are more Chad Johnson Bengals jerseys being sold then there are Brandon Lloyd Redskins Jerseys.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Since when does Marvin Lewis call the shots for the Bengals?

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

And further more, not one of their front office people have said a word about not trading Johnson.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=ksmitty7723;422064]And further more, not one of their front office people have said a word about not trading Johnson.[/QUOTE]

Oh Brother.........

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Just saying that you don't see Zorn chiming in about Johnson.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=ksmitty7723;422067]Just saying that you don't see Zorn chiming in about Johnson.[/QUOTE]

There is nothing for him to say. Marvin Lewis makes personel decisions for the Bengals, he has full control.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=QBall;422068]There is nothing for him to say. Marvin Lewis makes personel decisions for the Bengals, he has full control.[/QUOTE]
I just went on Bengals' website and his name was not mentioned under front office....

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Randy Moss is the right pick!

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

I know this was mentioned earlier and I apologize if I'm repeating this, but isn't it considered tampering to discuss a player that is under contract w/ another team.

Just going by memory from a few days ago on the John Riggins show Zorn, when asked if he would like for CJ to play for the skins in 2008 he said he would love to have him. At the time, i was wondering why he'd be talking about a player under contract.

I don't know if this is over yet though. $ talks. Is this tampering though?

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;422054]The difference being that fans don't buy tickets to see Brandon Lloyd or buy his jersey. So Washington does not really make anything from his presence.

Johnson, on the other hand, sells jerseys and tickets which means millions of additional revenue for just being on the roster and on the field.

By dumping Lloyd, the Skins do not loose any fan revenue, because he does not exactly sell tons of fan merchandise.

By letting Johnson go not only does the Bengals take a substantial cap hit in dead money, but they would also loose some valuable fan revenue in addition to the cap hit.

[B]Trust me there are more Chad Johnson Bengals jerseys being sold then there are Brandon Lloyd Redskins Jerseys[/B].[/quote]

Sandtrap, that's as insightful as your boy Emmit Smith!:)

Don't know that player merchandise sales really factor into such deals that much, however if you look at the overall economic impact of having a certain player, e.g. Vick in Atl. before he let the dogs out, you may have a point. Does CJ sell tickets & market the team? I think so & that adds to his value in cincy, a small market.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Thank god Marvin Lewis has the insight to let us not hurt ourselves.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

I'm disappointed, I wanted Ocho to come here, but as long as we address the position thru free agency or a trade (Roy Williams) I'll be happy..

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

This is an interesting take from ESPN. I think that the MOOSE would be a great veteran pick-up and he's a tall guy who's awesome in my book. He would be way cheaper than Chad anway. Think the Bears passing attack sucked and he could play a big part in our Superbowl run this year.

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=yasinskas_pat&id=3244611]ESPN - McNabb, Shockey, Harrison among stars in limbo - NFL[/url]

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=QBall;422051][URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3245503"]ESPN - Lewis says it again: Chad Johnson isn't going anywhere - NFL[/URL]


Sorry guys I know you love to talk Chad Johnson but it aint gonna happen!!!!

MOVE ON TO NEW BS RUMORS.[/quote]

after reading this, it seems Lewis is trying to reach out to CJ through the media. I take this as he wants to mend fences w/CJ & bring him back to camp w/out any animosity lingering.

The thing to watch is whether he's successful or not. CJ might continue to act up, talk to the press, or refuse to show up in camp.

At this point, I'll have to partially concur w/sandtrap et al, don't see a trade happening before the draft, but don't be surprised if he's on the trading block during camp or early in the season.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

You know if a WR is a top priority of Snyder and the team, why have we not heard Bernard Berrians name mentioned as a possible candidate to don the burgundy and gold?

The guy is an UFA and Chicago is going to let him walk.

Won't cost any draft picks and won't need to trade. Just sign the guy on March 1st.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=sandtrapjack;422129]You know if a WR is a top priority of Snyder and the team, why have we not heard Bernard Berrians name mentioned as a possible candidate to don the burgundy and gold?

The guy is an UFA and Chicago is going to let him walk.

Won't cost any draft picks and won't need to trade. Just sign the guy on March 1st.[/QUOTE]

MOOSE better than him.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=sandtrapjack;422129]You know if a WR is a top priority of Snyder and the team, why have we not heard Bernard Berrians name mentioned as a possible candidate to don the burgundy and gold?

The guy is an UFA and Chicago is going to let him walk.

Won't cost any draft picks and won't need to trade. Just sign the guy on March 1st.[/QUOTE]

And in moments Matty will cite to all his past references about Berrian.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;422143]And in moments Matty will cite to all his past references about Berrian.[/QUOTE]

Bite your tongue! Contrary to popular belief, Matty and I are not the same person

[url]http://www.redskinswarpath.com/374063-post52.html[/url]

[url]http://www.redskinswarpath.com/378329-post8.html[/url]

but admittedly, I have some "reservations" here:

[url]http://www.redskinswarpath.com/380641-post12.html[/url]

As of today, I'm not sure. I was impressed with Caldwell down the stretch and had things stayed the same (Gibbs returned) then I would have probably leaned toward keeping Caldwell here. Now? I don't know that either Caldwell or Berrian are high on my list.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

I knew it was one of you mods suggesting it -I just figured it was the smart one.

Oooops. my bad.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;422180]I knew it was one of you mods suggesting it -I just figured it was the smart one.

Oooops. my bad.[/QUOTE]

Oh snap!! Stop, drop, and roll....I just got burned!!

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;422013]We did the same thing with Briggs. We had a deal in place ready to be signed before a trade fell through. I'm not sure of the specifics regarding any league rules, but discussing contract parameters does not seem to be against the rules if teams are discussing a trade.[/QUOTE]


I have been trying to find more information that will clarify the NFL rules regarding tampering.

I do beleive in the case with Briggs last year, both sides were open to trade possibilities, in the case of CJ Bengals management is maintaining they have no intention of trading him. I could be wrong, but I beleive we're dealing with a different set of circumstances.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=Longtimefan;422459]I have been trying to find more information that will clarify the NFL rules regarding tampering.

I do beleive in the case with Briggs last year, both sides were open to trade possibilities, in the case of CJ Bengals management is maintaining they have no intention of trading him. I could be wrong, but I believe we're dealing with a different set of circumstances.[/QUOTE]

I believe the essential difference was that last year Briggs was a free agent, that the Bears applied the "franchise tag" to.

So once free agency begins all parties can have discussions and try to work out essentially a sign and trade. After all, that's tone of the main purposes of applying the "franchise tag", to make sure if you're going to lose a free agent you get something in return.

There's probably more to it...but I'm tired

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

This from Cincinnati.com THE ENQUIRER

REPORT: REDSKINS WANT CHAD

The latest Chad Johnson trade rumor involves another team, the Washington Redskins.

Redskins' owner Daniel Snyder is interested in trading with the Bengals for the disgruntled Johnson, according to a report published Tuesday in the Washington Post.

The newspaper reported that Drew Rosenhaus, Johnson's agent, is working quietly with the Bengals and Redskins to broker a trade. Johnson, a member of five consecutive AFC Pro Bowl teams, was the fourth highest paid wide-out in the NFL in 2007, according to NFL Players Association figures.

Reached Tuesday by the Enquirer, Rosenhaus didn't deny the report.

"I understand the reports," Rosenhaus said. "But I have no comment, other than to say again that whatever conversations I am having with the Bengals regarding Chad will remain private."

An obstacle to any trade of Johnson would be the salary cap hit the Bengals would suffer.

The Bengals would lose $8.03 million on the salary cap-money the club would not have to spend on other players-if it traded or released Johnson before June 1, said Marc Levin, Director of the Salary Cap and Agent Administration Department for the NFL Players Association.

"And there is nothing the Bengals can do about it," Levin said in an e-mail sent by the union to the Enquirer.

A trade or contract termination done June or after gives NFL teams another year to absorb the salary cap implication, in this case, 2008 and 2009. The salary cap for 2008 is $116 million, up from $109 million in 2007.

The Bengals had no comment Tuesday on the Johnson situation, team public relations Jack Brennan said.

NFL tampering rules could come into play. The Bengals could file a complaint with the league if the Washington Post report did originate with sources inside the Redskins organization.

"Any public or private statement of interest in another club's employee is a violation," the rule states.

Johnson remains under contract with the Bengals through 2011, the result of an extension he signed with the club in April 2006.

Citing unnamed "league sources," the Post reported that Snyder, coaching candidates and Redskin Executive Vice President Vinny Cerrato discussed Johnson specifically. And Johnson, two more league sources told the Post, wants a hefty new contract from the Redskins.

Clubs can give a player's agent permission to talk to other teams about a possible trade.

"Yes it is permissible, but if a club does give permission to an agent it is recommended that the permission given to the agent be spelled out in a written document to avoid a dispute about it in the future, "Greg Aiello, NFL Senior Vice President of Public Relations, wrote to The Enquirer in an e-mail Tuesday.

If the Bengals trade Johnson, they would be forced to accelerate what remains of the almost $21 million in up-front money paid Johnson in the contract extensions from November 2003 and April 2006.

"Acceleration of signing bonus after a player is released or traded has always been part of this system," Aiello wrote. "The point is that all money paid to a player will be accounted for under the cap."

The Bengals signed Johnson to what amounts to a six-year contract in 2006. He has been paid almost $16 million by the Bengals in the past two seasons.

Since early January, Johnson has used national media, primarily radio shows, including those with tables on "Radio Row" at the Super Bowl earlier this month, to voice his displeasure with the Bengals. He said if he is the Bengals problem, he should be dealt. Johnson has not talked to local media since mid-October.

The Bengals have the ninth overall pick in the 2008 draft and the Redskins the 21st in the first round.

Rosenhaus negotiated the 2006 extension for Johnson.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;421715]NE went out and spent money on FA's last year. Yeah they came up one game short but I wouldn't be too upset with 18 wins.[/QUOTE]

Matty, I agree that the Patriots did go out and sign Thomas to some big money and trade for Moss. They may have signed some other guys but I don't think they were huge names.

Anyway, I think that is how a team should use free agency: if they are 90% there and they need that extra 10% then they should go out and buy it.

Does anyone thing that the Redskins are 90% there? Have we built a solid enough team foundation to warrant going and getting those last two pieces to the puzzle?

When I look at this team I see some aging stars, overachieving younger guys, and a few stars in the prime of their career. To me, the Skins focus should be on building that solid foundation for the future - not continuing to trade our future away to bring in some hotshot receiver who I can guarantee right now, will not produce after he has signed the monster contract.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=ingibbswetrust;421724]I agree that we should be building through the draft (and that we don't need Briggs) but at a position like WR, I really feel this is a trade worth making. I've been struggling with this lately and I keep coming back to the cowboys getting TO and the lions drafting flop after flop at the WR position. The cowboys took a huge gamble on bringing TO to town and it has put their offense over the top. Just look at them without him over the last few games of this season, they were an average offense at best and with him they are 2nd best offense the NFL.

We're mediocore as is on the offensive side of the ball and I really feel if we could have CJ open up the vertical game and take double teams off of Santana it would open up things for Moss, ARE in the slot and cooley over the middle (and of course the run game).

Depending on what we have to give up, I think this is a risk worth taking. Even if we were to draft a WR, that's a huge risk when we could draft a dependable linemen. This would obviously be an expensive trade for us but at least we know what we're getting in return (which we didn't really with B. Lloyd) , which is a bonafide game changing consistent WR for the next 5 years.

That's my vote. HAIL.[/QUOTE]

I think the reason we are mediocre on offense has more to do with continuity and the player's comfort in a system.

I think everyone would agree that once Collins stepped in last year and our line started to gel - then suddenly our offense started moving up and down the field.

Going out and getting a Chad Johnson isn't suddenly the magic solution to all our systemic problems - especially when in my opinion, if we want to point to a weakness, I would point to our offensive line last year after the key injuries.

Great teams are built from the lines out - there is no point in having a dynamic receiver in here if our QB is on his back and our RBs are getting stuffed at the line.

Let me ask this question: Would you rather have Chad Johnson at $8 million per year, or find a way to bring in a couple of solid O-line guys and maybe a D-line guy?

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

As long as we bring in young free agents in their prime to play key positions on the D-Line like Antwaan Odom and then use the remaing draft picks on offensive lineman then the Chad Johnson trade would be ok in my book.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=QBall;415823]Bring him in. But how long before he yells at JC on the sidelines if he misses a deep ball or something like that.

The one thing I always loved Gibbs for was the moral behavior of his teams on and off the field. He was a real winner in that area above all.[/QUOTE]

That is a concern I have against Chad Johnson coming here as well. Jason Campbell is not at the level of Carson Palmer or Jon Kitna when CJ is not getting enough throws his way or the Skins start on a losing skid Johnson might become a disruption.

If Gibbs was still here I do not think that would be the case but no one knows how Jim Zorn will handle problem players.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[QUOTE=Drift Reality;422475]Matty, I agree that the Patriots did go out and sign Thomas to some big money and trade for Moss. They may have signed some other guys but I don't think they were huge names.

Anyway, I think that is how a team should use free agency: if they are 90% there and they need that extra 10% then they should go out and buy it.

Does anyone thing that the Redskins are 90% there? Have we built a solid enough team foundation to warrant going and getting those last two pieces to the puzzle?

When I look at this team I see some aging stars, overachieving younger guys, and a few stars in the prime of their career. To me, the Skins focus should be on building that solid foundation for the future - not continuing to trade our future away to bring in some hotshot receiver who I can guarantee right now, will not produce after he has signed the monster contract.[/QUOTE]

I do think we are 90% there I think a D-Lineman & WR are our weak points on this team. We lost several games by a TD or less. TB, GB, DAL, NYG, PHI that's five games we lost by and TD or less if you look at the Giants they aren't that much better than us other than the D-Line & QB. I disagree I don't think it's all about money with Chad true he is 30 but he wants to win and he feels the Bengals don't accept him for who he is that's a passionate player that's an entertainer what is wrong with that?

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Let's go ahead and face reality, WE ARE NOT GETTING CHAD JOHNSON! BENGALS WOULD LOOSE TOO MUCH AND WE WON'T GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT!

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

Lose. The most-often misspelled word on the internet.

Re: Ocho Cinco In B&G
 

[quote=Drift Reality;422475]Matty, I agree that the Patriots did go out and sign Thomas to some big money and trade for Moss. They may have signed some other guys but I don't think they were huge names.

Anyway, I think that is how a team should use free agency: if they are 90% there and they need that extra 10% then they should go out and buy it.

Does anyone thing that the Redskins are 90% there? Have we built a solid enough team foundation to warrant going and getting those last two pieces to the puzzle?

When I look at this team I see some aging stars, overachieving younger guys, and a few stars in the prime of their career. To me, the Skins focus should be on building that solid foundation for the future - not continuing to trade our future away to bring in some hotshot receiver who I can guarantee right now, will not produce after he has signed the monster contract.[/quote]We were 90% there in 2005, so we used that philosophy to try to get over the hump in 2006, and it ended up backfiring.

The point is this: there are many ways to successfully build a team and there is never an oppertune time for a bad move. The 2.0 Gibbs-era defense was built through free agency and supplimented in the draft--and that worked out pretty well, 2006 aside.