Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

Good. I still think he can be great for us, he and LJ will push each other and the team will benefit from both of them.

So RB could be solid...onto getting blocking for them.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=SmootSmack;674850]Apparently, Clinton Portis has shown up in great shape. So that's a good sign[/quote]

thats def a good sign..i really hope he takes the signing of lj as more motivation to get that ass in gear..and i def hope that these two guys push each other and we'll have a good 1 2 punch....we shall see

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=BURgUnDy21;674853]thats def a good sign..i really hope he takes the signing of lj as more motivation to get that ass in gear..and i def hope that these two guys push each other and we'll have a good 1 2 punch....we shall see[/quote]

Welcome!

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=SmootSmack;674850]Apparently, Clinton Portis has shown up in great shape. So that's a good sign[/quote]

Where did you see that at SS?

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=SmootSmack;674850]Apparently, Clinton Portis has shown up in great shape. So that's a good sign[/quote]

That's to bad...I was hoping he wouldn't so we could cut him.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=BURgUnDy21;674853]thats def a good sign..i really hope he takes the signing of lj as more motivation to get that ass in gear..and i def hope that these two guys push each other and we'll have a good 1 2 punch....we shall see[/quote]
indeed

welcome to thewarpath bro

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=celts32;674866]That's to bad...I was hoping he wouldn't so we could cut him.[/quote]

considering we're not going to cut him I'm glad that he's in great shape

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=celts32;674866]That's to bad...I was hoping he wouldn't so we could cut him.[/quote]

Patience grasshopper... :)

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

people are referring to the tandem as "porta john" haha

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=freddyg12;674805]I think that's very debatable. If you're out of shape you can look older than your years. He definitely couldn't hit holes, find holes the same or keep his balance. But at least some of that has to be attributed to his lack of practice. When younger he could get away w/out practicing & being in shape. Now he needs it more than ever.

The way he lost his balance w/out being touched really shows that he was out of shape. When older players don't practice or stay in shape, they not only lose their quickness & speed, they lose their balance & timing. I agree he's lost a step, but he could've been much better in 09 if he prepared like a pro. I don't think your 2011 prediction is far off.[/quote]

Physiologically, quick twitch muscle fiber is what it is and generally cannot be created or enhanced much through working out. Slow twitch is exactly opposite, where you can build and enhance strength and endurance through working out. RB's/sprinters/boxers use quick twitch muscle, which is why they usually fade very quickly when that part of their body starts to give out.

While I could see CP avoiding some injuries and being more productive late in games if he were in better shape in 2009, I don't think hitting the hole quickly can be fixed. Love to be proved wrong, but I don't see it.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=tryfuhl;674869]considering we're not going to cut him I'm glad that he's in great shape[/quote]

Doesn't matter...I believe that Shanny will put a good running game together whether CP is here or not. I am done with him...he stabbed 1 to many teammates in the back and skipped way to many practices. I am looking for a clean start and CP is the poster child for everything we have done wrong in the last decade. In fact...part of me is even a little annoyed that he may be here to reap the benefits of the new running game that Shanny will put together.

That's my personal feelings...but I also have total faith in Allen & Shanny so I will put up with CP if they want to keep him which it appears they do.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Mc2guy;674878]Physiologically, quick twitch muscle fiber is what it is and generally cannot be created or enhanced much through working out. Slow twitch is exactly opposite, where you can build and enhance strength and endurance through working out. RB's/sprinters/boxers use quick twitch muscle, which is why they usually fade very quickly when that part of their body starts to give out.

While I could see CP avoiding some injuries and being more productive late in games if he were in better shape in 2009, I don't think hitting the hole quickly can be fixed. Love to be proved wrong, but I don't see it.[/quote]

correct, and I understand your point about him losing a step (quick twitch muscles), but it wasn't just a matter of speed. His balance looked very poor. All the things he could've done to compensate some for less speed, he didn't do, and it showed.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

Thought this was pretty interesting..

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/16/vermeil-johnson-will-take-portis-job/]Vermeil: Johnson will take Portis' job | ProFootballTalk.com[/url]

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Mc2guy;674878]Physiologically, quick twitch muscle fiber is what it is and generally cannot be created or enhanced much through working out. Slow twitch is exactly opposite, where you can build and enhance strength and endurance through working out. RB's/sprinters/boxers use quick twitch muscle, which is why they usually fade very quickly when that part of their body starts to give out.

While I could see CP avoiding some injuries and being more productive late in games if he were in better shape in 2009, I don't think hitting the hole quickly can be fixed. Love to be proved wrong, but I don't see it.[/quote]

I'll be back to correct some things on this later tonight, have a job interview. Either can be enhanced.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;674901]Thought this was pretty interesting..

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/16/vermeil-johnson-will-take-portis-job/]Vermeil: Johnson will take Portis' job | ProFootballTalk.com[/url][/quote]

pssst

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/674779-post316.html[/url]

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

Nuckle heads 1a and 1b. Who knows maybe their two super large egos may make this thing work out for the better, but I'm not a big fan of the move.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=tryfuhl;674907]pssst

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/674779-post316.html[/url][/quote]

Psssssssssssst

[quote=Dirtbag359;674375]Oh my God. So I like totally found this article.

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/clinton-portis/dick-vermeil-makes-bold-predic.html#comments]Redskins Insider - Dick Vermeil makes bold prediction about Larry Johnson, Clinton Portis[/url][/quote]

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;675036]Psssssssssssst[/quote]

Last edited by Dirtbag359; 03-17-2010 at 03:14 AM.

right before you made this post

trying to be clever are we? ;)

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=tryfuhl;675047]Last edited by Dirtbag359; 03-17-2010 at 03:14 AM.

right before you made this post

trying to be clever are we? ;)[/quote]

Wait, let me get in on this fun :)

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/674603-post291.html[/url]

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=SmootSmack;675076]Wait, let me get in on this fun :)

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/674603-post291.html[/url][/quote]

damn Smoot, you DO have the inside scoop

had the article a day before it came out :laughing2

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

Welcome to the Warpath. Where everyone takes your idea and makes sure you get no credit (notice how theres an edit in credit).

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=tryfuhl;675079]damn Smoot, you DO have the inside scoop

had the article a day before it came out :laughing2[/quote]

Did he predict Rex also? :D

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Buster;675186]Did he predict Rex also? :D[/quote]

he's been itching for that namechange

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

I just don't get this signing. Sure Johnson may have a year left in the tank, but look at his age, why in the world would we not just go young and get old cap issues off the books?
Assuming you can wrap your mind around the Johnson signing AND keeping Portis, the brass signs Rex freakin Grossman???? So our QB situation sucked last year, and the answer is rex grossman...our rb situation sucked last year and our answer is the aged Larry Johnson...why not coax Russ Grimm out of coaching to sure up our line?

I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676838]I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)[/quote]Okay, I'll bite. How should we, specifically, be taking advantage of the uncapped season?

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676838]I just don't get this signing. Sure Johnson may have a year left in the tank, but look at his age, why in the world would we not just go young and get old cap issues off the books?
Assuming you can wrap your mind around the Johnson signing AND keeping Portis, the brass signs Rex freakin Grossman???? So our QB situation sucked last year, and the answer is rex grossman...our rb situation sucked last year and our answer is the aged Larry Johnson...why not coax Russ Grimm out of coaching to sure up our line?

I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)[/quote]

So what better alternatives did they pass up on?

They haven't gotten rid of cap issues? They are the third lowest payroll in the league.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676838]I just don't get this signing. Sure Johnson may have a year left in the tank, but look at his age, why in the world would we not just go young and get old cap issues off the books?
Assuming you can wrap your mind around the Johnson signing AND keeping Portis, the brass signs Rex freakin Grossman???? So our QB situation sucked last year, and the answer is rex grossman...our rb situation sucked last year and our answer is the aged Larry Johnson...why not coax Russ Grimm out of coaching to sure up our line?

I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)[/quote]

i really don't mind either move, if you asked for a straight up trade of betts and johnson, who would you take? i would take johnson everytime

as far as rex, he knows the system which gives him a head start, and i would rather have him as a backup/coach than todd collins any day of the week

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;676840]So what better alternatives did they pass up on?[/quote]

You are assuming a FA...I thought we should have signed a young player out of the draft. Fresh legs.

[quote]They haven't gotten rid of cap issues? They are the third lowest payroll in the league.[/quote]

I didn't say we had a high payroll, but Portis cap number is astronomical, and NOT worth it, why didn't Shanny just go ahead and start over?

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676846]You are assuming a FA...I thought we should have signed a young player out of the draft. Fresh legs.



I didn't say we had a high payroll, but Portis cap number is astronomical, and NOT worth it, why didn't Shanny just go ahead and start over?[/quote]

Who says they won't draft a runningback? Most teams carry 3. We have two definites right now.

They can cut Portis next year and gain a lot of cap space. There problem solved....

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=mlmdub130;676841]i really don't mind either move, if you asked for a straight up trade of betts and johnson, who would you take? i would take johnson everytime[/quote]

I absolutely agree...however, why would you sign a 30 year old that has not produced in a few years to a THREE year contract? Also, when everyone says Portis legs are not there anymore, and his age is showing, why get OLDER at the position? I just don't get this plan.

[quote]as far as rex, he knows the system which gives him a head start, and i would rather have him as a backup/coach than todd collins any day of the week[/quote]

I am not sure I agree here. Rex is not an answer for any team. His career comp % is only 54%. That's terrible for a pocket passer. 33 career passing tds, and 36 career int's (36 total tds, and 56 career turnovers)...another bad sign.
I certainly don't think we should have kept Collins, I agreed with dropping him, I would have much rather gotten a rookie QB to back up Campbell / Colt. That being said, there is no way in hell I'd take Rex over Collins in terms of coaching skills. Collins is an intelligent QB, he just doesn't have the physical tools to be good.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;676848]Who says they won't draft a runningback? Most teams carry 3. We have two definites right now. [/quote]

You're right, it just leans towards they won't.

[quote]They can cut Portis next year and gain a lot of cap space. There problem solved....[/quote]

Assuming there is no cap.

So explain to me why we decided to get older at the one position that can't afford to get older? Help me understand why this is a good signing especially when you factor in his off the field issues?

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=GTripp0012;676839]Okay, I'll bite. How should we, specifically, be taking advantage of the uncapped season?[/quote]

In particular, drop Portis. I applauded the effort of dropping Randel El, but not dropping Portis is a head scratcher unless we decided to get a rookie and let Portis mentor him. We really need youth. We had a lot of issues revolving around older players, and while we have gotten rid of a lot, we also lost a lot of talent (ie: Thomas / Samuels retirement). I just don't agree with signing a 30 year old to a 3 year contract at a position that hands down needs to be young.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676850]You're right, it just leans towards they won't.



Assuming there is no cap.

So explain to me why we decided to get older at the one position that can't afford to get older? Help me understand why this is a good signing especially when you factor in his off the field issues?[/quote]


From my perspective, I don't see any reason why they can't sign a runningback, in fact, I think that signing Johnson may signal that they will. Unless Portis turns into Marshall Faulk, he is gone after this year (I don't see him willing to re-work his deal). Cutting Portis in 2011 saves them 5 million on their cap number for that year (maybe that means nothing but his release fee will be 5 million less than his cap number) so that along with his age make him almost a certain cut after 2010. Even though they signed Johnson, they know he isn't a long term solution so I think they draft or acquire a young runningback this year. Thankfully they didn't see Mason and Ganther as the future, because I certainly didn't.

I think signing Johnson was a good signing because he is a proven back with relatively low mileage. Hearing what Herm Edwards and Vermeil said sealed it for me. I truly believe that Johnson thinks he is going to start this year and he is ready to compete. I also think that Portis is a competitor too (he held off some pretty good backs at Miami and Denver, he has never been challenged here). Assuming that Portis is ready to battle, they will push eachother and ultimately the Redskins are better off.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;676852]From my perspective, I don't see any reason why they can't sign a runningback, in fact, I think that signing Johnson may signal that they will. Unless Portis turns into Marshall Faulk, he is gone after this year (I don't see him willing to re-work his deal). Cutting Portis in 2011 saves them 5 million on their cap number for that year (maybe that means nothing but his release fee will be 5 million less than his cap number) so that along with his age make him almost a certain cut after 2010. Even though they signed Johnson, they know he isn't a long term solution so I think they draft or acquire a young runningback this year. Thankfully they didn't see Mason and Ganther as the future, because I certainly didn't.[/quote]
Well, I do hope you're right that we draft a RB, I just hope he's not some piece o poo in the 6th round or later. We need a solution at RB, not another problem.
I certainly agree Mason and Ganther were not the answer.

[quote]I think signing Johnson was a good signing because he is a proven back with relatively low mileage. Hearing what Herm Edwards and Vermeil said sealed it for me. I truly believe that Johnson thinks he is going to start this year and he is ready to compete. I also think that Portis is a competitor too (he held off some pretty good backs at Miami and Denver, he has never been challenged here). Assuming that Portis is ready to battle, they will push eachother and ultimately the Redskins are better off.[/quote]

Competition is DEFINATELY a great thing, but aren't you concerned that we will have the oldest backfield in the league?

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676855]Well, I do hope you're right that we draft a RB, I just hope he's not some piece o poo in the 6th round or later. We need a solution at RB, not another problem.
I certainly agree Mason and Ganther were not the answer.



Competition is DEFINATELY a great thing, but aren't you concerned that we will have the oldest backfield in the league?[/quote]

We are definitely old back there. Maybe I am in the minority, but I wouldn't be shocked if Portis broke the team rushing record again next year. I think he has more left in the tank than people give him credit for (I feel the same about Johnson). He didn't blow out a knee last year, he had a concussion. Something tells me that if they were fightingn for a playoff spot, he would have been on the field. I know his stats were bad but Zorn's offense was putrid. Seriously, a guy who was out of the league for years came of the street and gave them a shot in the arm and this was without Samuels and Thomas. I bet Portis would have had some big games with Sherm Lewis.

I think that the Portis/Johnson platoon is the best solution to be competitive this year (just like the Campbell/Grossman platoon). Now the key is the draft. I think they pick a QB and a RB with 2 of the 5 picks. We need both picks to pan out, maybe not by next year but we are in trouble down the road if we whiff.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;676857]We are definitely old back there. Maybe I am in the minority, but I wouldn't be shocked if Portis broke the team rushing record again next year. I think he has more left in the tank than people give him credit for (I feel the same about Johnson). He didn't blow out a knee last year, he had a concussion. Something tells me that if they were fightingn for a playoff spot, he would have been on the field. I know his stats were bad but Zorn's offense was putrid. Seriously, a guy who was out of the league for years came of the street and gave them a shot in the arm and this was without Samuels and Thomas. I bet Portis would have had some big games with Sherm Lewis.[/quote]

I will take it all back if Portis breaks the record. Unfortunately, I don't see either of them being more than barely breaking 1000 yards. Damn, I hope you're right.

[quote]I think that the Portis/Johnson platoon is the best solution to be competitive this year (just like the Campbell/Grossman platoon). Now the key is the draft. I think they pick a QB and a RB with 2 of the 5 picks. We need both picks to pan out, maybe not by next year but we are in trouble down the road if we whiff.[/quote]

Agreed. I can bitch and moan all I want, but fact is they are here to stay, so I better get used to it. Best case scenario is that they create competition and we see players perform a lot better. Here's to hopin!

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

[quote=jsarno;676851]In particular, drop Portis. I applauded the effort of dropping Randel El, but not dropping Portis is a head scratcher unless we decided to get a rookie and let Portis mentor him. We really need youth. We had a lot of issues revolving around older players, and while we have gotten rid of a lot, we also lost a lot of talent (ie: Thomas / Samuels retirement). I just don't agree with signing a 30 year old to a 3 year contract at a position that hands down needs to be young.[/quote]I agree that you don't need a mentor to teach a rookie the playbook at RB, but a season from now, Portis' cap hit if released will be $5 million under the current rules (which, of course, are certainly subject to change). Granted that's $5 million we would otherwise have if we released him this year, but if we cut him this year, we lose somewhere between $7-9 million just to have him not play.

If we cut Portis in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $5 million dollar deadcap hit.

If we cut Haynesworth in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $19.8 million deadcap hit. ($3 million unrecognized of 2009 bonus + $16.8 million of unrecognized 2010 bonus). If we cut him today, we would owe him $25 million "cap dollars" (which come at no cost, this year) to get the heck out, but we'd recover $63.4 million of the "100 million dollar deal." If we kept Haynesworth though 2012 (it's effectively a four year deal), we would save $52.3 million of the 100 million. So Haynesworth's deal is essentially 4/48, as many before me have written. Or it can be 1/36. The marginal difference for the next three years of Albert Haynesworth is just $12 million dollars of bonuses and salary.

If we cut Hall in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $13.4 million deadcap hit. But we'd save $28.5 million of the $53.5 million. So essentially, his deal would become 2/25. There's no real marginal gain on the Hall contract, so he's progressively more likely to get released every year, as opposed to Haynesworth, who is almost certainly going to be held through 2012, and then released.

If there's still no cap in 2011, I'd suggest that Hall is more likely than not to get released.

Compared to some of our more highly paid players, Portis is real easy to get rid of in 2011 even if there is a cap. We actually would SAVE $5 million over having him on the roster. It's Haynesworth and Hall who become huge strains on the cap if it gets reinstated in 2011.

I agree with you that if we decide we're not going to use him, we should release him prior to opening day.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

I'd also argue that there's no chance that Johnson and Portis (who are both under contract in 2011) are both here next year, and that it's pretty likely that neither will be here.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

You know, the more I think of it, the more i am begining ot like these moves. At first it thought of them in the replacement aspect. As replacements taking a number one spot, Rex and JL are HUGE mistakes! i mean, Rex at his best is HORRIBLE. LJ is even older than CP. And when it all adds up, neither replacement has anything in their resume that makes them a clear #1.

BUT!!!!

If you compare them to the number 2 guys, it TOTALY makes sense. Betts vs LJ is laughable! Comparing either their bests or average years make the decision very easy. As for Todd vs Rex... don't get me started. Todd has hardly any GAME experience and is too old to even JOKE that he has 'fresh legs'. I'll take a loser that lost a superbowl over a loser that hasn't won a starting spot in over a decade.

Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
 

Larry Johnson might not be a better fit for shanny's offense than Willie Parker, LT, Chester Taylor or Thomas Jones but he's a better fit for the nfc east. that could be part of the reason he was chosen over the others.

sorry if this has already been said, too many posts to read through.:)