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

[Warren85Ellard]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Why would he be a nightmare?

Jim Zorn will be trying to establish himself as the leader and he'll face many challenges. He has huge shoes to fill and is inheriting a team that was very loyal to Gibbs and Williams. Zorn doesn't need a self-absorbed hot head like Ocho Sinco adding fuel to the fire if things go wrong. Jason Campbell is learning yet another offense. If Chad Johnson can't deal with Carson Palmer, is he going to keep his mouth shut if Campbell isn't getting him the ball? Chad Johnson is obviously very talented, but I don't think he's worth the risk (or the draft picks).

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Warren85Ellard

Jim Zorn will be trying to establish himself as the leader and he'll face many challenges. He has huge shoes to fill and is inheriting a team that was very loyal to Gibbs and Williams. Zorn doesn't need a self-absorbed hot head like Ocho Sinco adding fuel to the fire if things go wrong. Jason Campbell is learning yet another offense. If Chad Johnson can't deal with Carson Palmer, is he going to keep his mouth shut if Campbell isn't getting him the ball? Chad Johnson is obviously very talented, but I don't think he's worth the risk (or the draft picks).

I don't know that Chad Johnson can't deal with Palmer. I mean, his stats certainly show that he dealt with Palmer. Yeah, they had that one argument on the sidelines and they had a little spat last week. But really I don't think CJ at any point has said he can't play with Carson Palmer.

I think that Campbell can really benefit from having a top WR like Chad Johnson. Maybe it's just me, but I think (from what I've seen) CJ-unlike say Randy Moss-doesn't let up on the field because he's upset off the field. He may not be as good an option as say Boldin or Williams but I don't see him holding Campbell's progress back.

[memphisskin]

Chad Johnson won't be a locker room problem anywhere outside of Cincy. But trading two picks for one guy tells me 1) The Skins have an awful lot of confidence in Jim Zorn and 2) all the talk about learning was just that, talk.

This smells like a panic move, since the Giants won the SB and we beat the Giants then we can win the SB. But the transitive property works in math, not football.

Best move in the end, keep the picks and find a big body in the draft. Contrary to popular opinion, solid guys can be found in the later rounds too. Overpaying for Chad Johnson is so 2003 Dan Snyder.

[GTripp0012]

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

ARE ranked 15th in (per play) DVOA and 24th in DPAR (total value) last season. Of course, I think you could make the argument that he was our Number One WR last year, but 12 teams did not have any receivers as strong as ARE was last season.

It was probably a career year for him as he's best suited to be a no. 2 or no. 3, but he's totally capable of staying in the No. 2 role if we need him.

[mooby]

51 receptions the norm for a #3 wideout? That's crazy talk imo, I'd consider that the exception, not the norm. I think ARE would put up better numbers as the #3 because that's probably his most natural position. I asked this question earlier in the thread but it didn't seem to be answered. Is this Danny/Vinny wanting Chad or is this Danny/Vinny/Zorny wanting Chad? I think I'd be ok giving up a first and a third for Chad if Zorn wanted him and thought he would fit into the WCO, but if this was just Dan and Vinny wanting Chad because he's the big name guy and they think he'd solve their problems, but Zorn wasn't on board then I probably wouldn't want it to happen. What if we did get Chad but he didn't fit into the system and wasn't able to be productive? I mean there's a slim chance of that happening but the possibility exists. I'm still hurting over giving up a third and a fourth for B-Lloyd, I don't want to invest heavily in another wideout and then find out that he can't be productive for us.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by mooby

I asked this question earlier in the thread but it didn't seem to be answered. Is this Danny/Vinny wanting Chad or is this Danny/Vinny/Zorny wanting Chad? I think I'd be ok giving up a first and a third for Chad if Zorn wanted him and thought he would fit into the WCO, but if this was just Dan and Vinny wanting Chad because he's the big name guy and they think he'd solve their problems, but Zorn wasn't on board then I probably wouldn't want it to happen.

I heard on ESPN's Redskins Radio that all HC candidates were told that the team was going to target a #1 WR like Chad. All signs indicate that the trade for Chad was conceived and orchestrated by Vinny and/or Snyder.

Originally Posted by mooby

What if we did get Chad but he didn't fit into the system and wasn't able to be productive? I mean there's a slim chance of that happening but the possibility exists. I'm still hurting over giving up a third and a fourth for B-Lloyd, I don't want to invest heavily in another wideout and then find out that he can't be productive for us.

I would be nothing short of stunned if Chad wasn't highly productive for at least two years. My concern isn't with Chad being unproductive, it's with the price (in terms of cap space and draft picks) to acquire him, the risk that he would disrupt locker room chemistry, and the possibility that he could have a TO-like meltdown.

[T.O.Killa]

I dont believe that the Redskins ever made this offer. I believe that it is Drew Rosenhous using the Reskins as a tool,to get his client out of Cincinati. The offer is outlandish for a player over 30. I know many people will tell say that a reciever can play well into their thirties, but teams just dont give that kind of comprnsation for potential trouble maker stars like Chad. Dont get me wrong, I would love to see Chad in B&G. Just look at a superstar like Deangelo Hall. They only gave up a second rounder for him. A talent that is usualy found in the top of the first round. He is only twenty four.

[SC Skins Fan]

I'm going to say this once, because it just occurred to me, and I'm sure I'll get blasted by some, but whatever.

Chad Johnson is a funny guy; outspoken, gregarious, playful. In fact, his touchdown celebrations are not totally unlike Clinton Portis dressing up as wacky characters on Wednesdays in 2005 ... the guy is keeping it loose. He had a few VERY publicized spats with Carson Palmer during games but, newsflash, receivers tend to do things like that - Santana Moss can get pretty moody, if not as vocal (largely a product of the fact that they only see the play from a very small perspective and don't see all the things going on around the LOS I think, but I digress). But he has never been in trouble with the law, he has not had injury problems, he has been to multiple Pro Bowls, put up HOF numbers quite frankly.

Now what happened last year is that the the media in Cincinnati jumped on Chad and started blaming his antics - which somehow were never a problem when the team was winning back in 2005 and everyone thought they were pretty funny then - were the cause of Cincy's troubles (as opposed to the non-existent run game or wretched defense). Chad Johnson took great offense to that and stopped talking to the local press. This situation seems vaguely familiar ... like Sean Taylor's distrust of the media. Now Taylor decided not to talk at all, but that is not Chad Johnson ... the guy is a character ... and also represented by Drew Rosenhaus ... so he is making a play to get out of town.

I think if he comes to D.C. all the haters - those who don't hurl themselves out of a window - will embrace him the same way that they have embraced Clinton Portis. Both are characters. Both are elite talents. Both produce on the field. I think all the hatred directed at Chad Johnson is misguided, and as I said, not totally unlike some of the representations made about Sean Taylor that had us all up in arms. The guy is getting way too much hate heaped upon him, stop the madness.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I'm going to say this once, because it just occurred to me, and I'm sure I'll get blasted by some, but whatever.

Chad Johnson is a funny guy; outspoken, gregarious, playful. In fact, his touchdown celebrations are not totally unlike Clinton Portis dressing up as wacky characters on Wednesdays in 2005 ... the guy is keeping it loose. He had a few VERY publicized spats with Carson Palmer during games but, newsflash, receivers tend to do things like that - Santana Moss can get pretty moody, if not as vocal (largely a product of the fact that they only see the play from a very small perspective and don't see all the things going on around the LOS I think, but I digress). But he has never been in trouble with the law, he has not had injury problems, he has been to multiple Pro Bowls, put up HOF numbers quite frankly.

Now what happened last year is that the the media in Cincinnati jumped on Chad and started blaming his antics - which somehow were never a problem when the team was winning back in 2005 and everyone thought they were pretty funny then - were the cause of Cincy's troubles (as opposed to the non-existent run game or wretched defense). Chad Johnson took great offense to that and stopped talking to the local press. This situation seems vaguely familiar ... like Sean Taylor's distrust of the media. Now Taylor decided not to talk at all, but that is not Chad Johnson ... the guy is a character ... and also represented by Drew Rosenhaus ... so he is making a play to get out of town.

I think if he comes to D.C. all the haters - those who don't hurl themselves out of a window - will embrace him the same way that they have embraced Clinton Portis. Both are characters. Both are elite talents. Both produce on the field. I think all the hatred directed at Chad Johnson is misguided, and as I said, not totally unlike some of the representations made about Sean Taylor that had us all up in arms. The guy is getting way too much hate heaped upon him, stop the madness.

I think you make several valid points.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I'm going to say this once, because it just occurred to me, and I'm sure I'll get blasted by some, but whatever.

Chad Johnson is a funny guy; outspoken, gregarious, playful. In fact, his touchdown celebrations are not totally unlike Clinton Portis dressing up as wacky characters on Wednesdays in 2005 ... the guy is keeping it loose. He had a few VERY publicized spats with Carson Palmer during games but, newsflash, receivers tend to do things like that - Santana Moss can get pretty moody, if not as vocal (largely a product of the fact that they only see the play from a very small perspective and don't see all the things going on around the LOS I think, but I digress). But he has never been in trouble with the law, he has not had injury problems, he has been to multiple Pro Bowls, put up HOF numbers quite frankly.

Now what happened last year is that the the media in Cincinnati jumped on Chad and started blaming his antics - which somehow were never a problem when the team was winning back in 2005 and everyone thought they were pretty funny then - were the cause of Cincy's troubles (as opposed to the non-existent run game or wretched defense). Chad Johnson took great offense to that and stopped talking to the local press. This situation seems vaguely familiar ... like Sean Taylor's distrust of the media. Now Taylor decided not to talk at all, but that is not Chad Johnson ... the guy is a character ... and also represented by Drew Rosenhaus ... so he is making a play to get out of town.

I think if he comes to D.C. all the haters - those who don't hurl themselves out of a window - will embrace him the same way that they have embraced Clinton Portis. Both are characters. Both are elite talents. Both produce on the field. I think all the hatred directed at Chad Johnson is misguided, and as I said, not totally unlike some of the representations made about Sean Taylor that had us all up in arms. The guy is getting way too much hate heaped upon him, stop the madness.

Portis' and Chads' antics are distinguishable. I have no problem whatsoever with a player celebrating a touchdown, dressing up in costumes, etc. I do, however, have a serious problem with a player who plans a celebration days before a game, knowing full well that the celebration is going to draw a 15 yard penalty and put the defense in a bad situation. Portis has never drawn a flag for a post-TD celebration, at least not since he's been a Redskin.

Also, is it me or are all people who oppose this proposed trade getting automatically lumped in with "the world is ending crowd?" Aside from a few select individuals, those of us who have opposed the trade have articulated reasonable arguments in support of our belief that the trade doesn't make sense (e.g., cap considerations, that we are the oldest team in the league, the need for help at multiple positions, etc.). But, for whatever reason, it appears that most people have drawn a line in the sand in this debate, determined that Chad Johnson is Jesus Jr. or pure evil, and labeled anyone with a different POV as a raving lunatic/idiot. I still can't believe that certain people won't admit that Chad will help this team and is an enormous talent. I also can't believe that others won't admit that Chad has some baggage and, on balance, the trade may not make sense.

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by T.O.Killa

I dont believe that the Redskins ever made this offer. I believe that it is Drew Rosenhous using the Reskins as a tool,to get his client out of Cincinati. The offer is outlandish for a player over 30. I know many people will tell say that a reciever can play well into their thirties, but teams just dont give that kind of comprnsation for potential trouble maker stars like Chad. Dont get me wrong, I would love to see Chad in B&G. Just look at a superstar like Deangelo Hall. They only gave up a second rounder for him. A talent that is usualy found in the top of the first round. He is only twenty four.

Well being Marvin Lewis made a public statement about this trade issue, I would have to think your not accurate in your post. Of course the Skins made the trade offer.

ESPN - Skins offer '08 first-rounder, '09 pick for Johnson; Cincy says no - NFL

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I heard on ESPN's Redskins Radio that all HC candidates were told that the team was going to target a #1 WR like Chad. All signs indicate that the trade for Chad was conceived and orchestrated by Vinny and/or Snyder.

Thanks for clearing that up for me, I would definitely feel better about this happening knowing that this isn't just Dan and Vinny.

I would be nothing short of stunned if Chad wasn't highly productive for at least two years. My concern isn't with Chad being unproductive, it's with the price (in terms of cap space and draft picks) to acquire him, the risk that he would disrupt locker room chemistry, and the possibility that he could have a TO-like meltdown.

Well I wasn't trying to say that he's going to be unproductive, I do think if he came here that given his track record there's a great chance that he will be a productive wide receiver and someone who will help this team out for at least 4-5 years given how productive wide receivers are in their 30's.

And for the record, I'm on board with the 1st this year and the third next year (potentially a first) because in the grand scheme of things, that's not a back breaking price to pay for a gamebreaking wide receiver. We do have other needs but it's not like we have 5 picks this year and the next, and we wouldn't have to worry about drafting a wideout this year so we would be free to shore up our lines this season.

I guess it's safe to say that I am about 85-90% on the bandwagon to get him. My only concerns are about his antics, I wouldn't want him coming here and then after 2-3 seasons mouthing off to the media about wanting to get the hell out because we had a bad season or two. And I don't want him to get frustrated and start fighting with JC if things don't go that smoothly. I mean if he caught 93 passes for over 1400 yards and still got in arguments with Carson Palmer I'd hate to see what happens if his numbers severely drop in Washington. The last thing I want would be him badmouthing the Redskins in the media and complaining if things didn't go his way.

My only other concern is his contract. Because he is going to be 30 years old, it's safe to assume he's only gonna be in the league about 7 or so more years. I don't want him to get traded here and then sign a backbreaking deal that pays him huge amounts of money down the road when there's a chance that his skills have diminished. If he wants a new contract (which he shouldn't, considering he's been one of the highest paid wide receivers in the NFL the past few years and will continue to be for the next few seasons) then I would want to see him sign a 4-5 year deal with the money evenly spread out so if the time comes and he's not worth his salary we won't be forced to keep him because of the cap hit.

With all that said, I'd rather see the Redskins trade for Boldin than CJ. This is just because I believe that Boldin would be a better fit in the WCO, and he's younger, and he could be potentially cheaper, not to mention almost no worries about him being a prima donna, and he's a #1 who would be a fine #2.

One last thing I would like to add. If this does happen, I think it would be have to be done before we use our first pick in the draft on Saturday. I know there's a better chance of it happening after June 1st because CJ's salary cap hit would be pretty much cut in half. But if it happened after the draft then we'dve used our picks and chances are we take a wide receiver with one of them, lessening the odds that we trade for another one. Plus what happens if we trade for CJ after the draft, and we give up the '09 first rounder and the '10 third rounder (potentially the first that year too), and one of those picks ends up being top 10 or top 5 and there's a game breaking wide receiver coming out in one of those drafts?

That would suck. I know most fans are thinking this team is one or two pieces away from being a Super Bowl contender, but I remember a similar thing after 05' when we went to the playoffs too, and then '06 just turned into a complete disaster.

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by mooby

51 receptions the norm for a #3 wideout? That's crazy talk imo, I'd consider that the exception, not the norm. I think ARE would put up better numbers as the #3 because that's probably his most natural position. I asked this question earlier in the thread but it didn't seem to be answered. Is this Danny/Vinny wanting Chad or is this Danny/Vinny/Zorny wanting Chad? I think I'd be ok giving up a first and a third for Chad if Zorn wanted him and thought he would fit into the WCO, but if this was just Dan and Vinny wanting Chad because he's the big name guy and they think he'd solve their problems, but Zorn wasn't on board then I probably wouldn't want it to happen. What if we did get Chad but he didn't fit into the system and wasn't able to be productive? I mean there's a slim chance of that happening but the possibility exists. I'm still hurting over giving up a third and a fourth for B-Lloyd, I don't want to invest heavily in another wideout and then find out that he can't be productive for us.

Well I think at least at first it was very clear who wanted CJ Vinny and Dan or vise versa. I'm sure either way Zorn would be on board, although he would and should have input (why would he not, this has been a main area of concern the team has stated for some time and get the chance to get an elite WR?). That is ultimately Vinny's job to bring in the talent as our GM/VP but a group decision with Dan's blessings.

And you sure can't compare CJ to Lloyd, CJ has a proven track record in this league of being an elite WR on the field, as much as I like or don't like him he is one of the very best at his position that requires ultimate respect from opponents. Lloyd for the most part was an unproven WR, and as we all know turned out being still unproven/no good, with a whole lot more cash in his banking account or a rich bust.

I have mixed feelings on this one, but the more I think about this potential trade if it where to ever happen (Which by the way I doubt it will) I would not have a problem giving up a late first round draft pick and next years third for CJ. IF the contract isn't crazy AND their are contract clauses that if he becomes an issue. I'm sure the Redskins and all other NFL teams for that matter have learned from the TO, philly ordeal.

[The Goat]

Otah has gone very high in several boards. Why is 21 too high for him? Cherilus seems pretty likely to fall to 21 and you're probably right about him. I too would be thrilled to see us take more than one o-lineman (like our first and second or first and third). I can't deny being partial to dominant lines on both sides of the ball. I've always thought lines are the core of the team on a week to week basis and my worst fear is another season of injuries to our current coral of o-lineman and average production of our d-line. I think injuries to the guys on o are a matter of when not if, and if we start the season with just RT, JJ, Heyer and Fabini on the right side its gonna get ugly (again) IMO.

[The Goat]

I would not be opposed to trading our 2nd and a contingent next year for Johnson, but obviously that's out of the question since we offered the farm on the first try. I'm glad Cinci rejected the offer.