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

It's Danny's year in and year out obsession with making a big splash. DJ Hackett jerseys wouldn't sell, but imagine how many #85 jerseys would fly off the shelf if he signed here? It's sad.

That's really what it's all about with him. It is sad. And while he lines his pockets, we fans are cheated out of seeing a consistently winning football team that will give us REAL hope for a Super Bowl season.

They also do a great job filling holes with players whose value is at it's absolute lowest...see a 4th round pick for Moss.

The problem isn't that we are trying to fill a need, it's that we could have offered DJ Hackett a 3 million dollar signing bonus to fill the same need, and instead seem intent on giving up a billion dollars to CJ as well as multiple draft picks to the Bengals.

A second round pick for CJ would be worth 2 years of an elite receiver, IMO. If we hold out the Bengals might drop their asking price to the point where we could get him at that price. According to Mortensen though, we are hell-bent on getting this deal done now, which kinda renders 3 months of patience totally irrelevant.

To win a deal, you have to be willing to risk losing the deal entirely. Snyder and Cerrato will never win a trade until they learn this concept.

It is disingenuous to imply that DJ Hackett and Chad Johnson are comparable or would bring similar abilities to the team. As I've stated previously, I also think historical precedent says Johnson has more like 5-7 very productive years ahead of him rather than 2, but ok.

Now, the second half of your point is very well taken. You are probably right that in order to maximize their gain the Redskins need to be willing to lose the deal entirely. That is something that they have not done in past deals, even when the players acquired have worked out well (Portis/Brunell). A 2nd for Johnson would be ideal, or maybe a 2nd this year and a conditional pick in 2009. On that I would certainly agree ... less is more. I suspect they wanted to put the feelers out (assuming these reports are accurate) prior to the draft so they would be ahead of Philadelphia or Dallas. Plus, JLC has reported that Chad Johnson was the object of the FO's desire from the end of the season.

If reports are accurate, they've effectively set the market so any other team would have to come bigger than that. If the 21st pick comes and goes ... along with the 19th and then the 22nd and 28th ... then maybe the Bengals will relent and give in for the 51st and a conditional pick in '09. I am kind of thinking Mike Brown is willing to go to the mat with this pissing match, though, and that he won't deal Johnson at all.

Am I the only person who has a huge problem with this price? I don't mind the first this year, but NEXT year?!?! That's absolutely going to set this team back.

If we end up where we're picking 25-26 next year then I would deal with it, but I really expect some growing pains this season.

I think the point is that it really hasn't hurt them at all, because despite having a high payroll, they always have money on hand to do what they need to do to improve.

Chad Jackson may never amount to anything in the NFL, but they picked him well behind his projected slot. There was certainly risk with that pick, but the New England Patriots could afford that risk.

The Redskins, on the other hand, I think that same pick would have been a disastrous selection, because we would have played Chad Jackson anyway because we drafted him, and he might have hurt the offense in the long run.

I am impressed by the way the Redskins throughly work through the draft, but again, this is not a team that can afford to make the high risk picks because they need a contribution from every player they draft to stay competitive.

I completely agree with you.

The Redskins have not built that solid foundation to be able to take on risk or build trading leverage. Every selection/acquisition that the team makes has to work out or the team is in shambles.

The Skins have to tiptoe on the wire of mediocrity and pray that the winds of bad fortune don't blow upon them.

Am I the only person who has a huge problem with this price? I don't mind the first this year, but NEXT year?!?! That's absolutely going to set this team back.

If we end up where we're picking 25-26 next year then I would deal with it, but I really expect some growing pains this season.

No, you're not. It's a terrible price to pay for a team that desperately needs every draft picks as possible to stay competitive on the field.

Am I the only person who has a huge problem with this price? I don't mind the first this year, but NEXT year?!?! That's absolutely going to set this team back.

If we end up where we're picking 25-26 next year then I would deal with it, but I really expect some growing pains this season.

Once again it's a conditional 3rd rounder next year, not a guaranteed 1st.

It is disingenuous to imply that DJ Hackett and Chad Johnson are comparable or would bring similar abilities to the team. As I've stated previously, I also think historical precedent says Johnson has more like 5-7 very productive years ahead of him rather than 2, but ok.

Now, the second half of your point is very well taken. You are probably right that in order to maximize their gain the Redskins need to be willing to lose the deal entirely. That is something that they have not done in past deals, even when the players acquired have worked out well (Portis/Brunell). A 2nd for Johnson would be ideal, or maybe a 2nd this year and a conditional pick in 2009. On that I would certainly agree ... less is more. I suspect they wanted to put the feelers out (assuming these reports are accurate) prior to the draft so they would be ahead of Philadelphia or Dallas. Plus, JLC has reported that Chad Johnson was the object of the FO's desire from the end of the season.

If reports are accurate, they've effectively set the market so any other team would have to come bigger than that. If the 21st pick comes and goes ... along with the 19th and then the 22nd and 28th ... then maybe the Bengals will relent and give in for the 51st and a conditional pick in '09. I am kind of thinking Mike Brown is willing to go to the mat with this pissing match, though, and that he won't deal Johnson at all.

yeah I'm not sure how that comparison came into the picture... it's absolutely ridiculous

I have mixed feelings about getting Chad Johnson. I'm wary about once again jettisoning draft picks, but he's a far cry from Brandon Lloyd and TJ Duckett. He's hasn't missed a start in years, he works hard, he's a first down machine, and is good for 1300-1400 yards and 9-10 TDs a year. But I worry about bringing a mouth like him into a football team that has a rookie head coach and a very cohesive locker room as it is. He could mess with chemistry, and I wonder how equipped Jim Zorn is to handle that. Shipping away high draft picks make me cringe, but you can't argue against CJ's production on the field. I'm on the fence, but I don't think it matters b/c he ain't leaving Cincy.

Very true, but I still think even the possibility of giving up two first round picks is a super steep price.

I really like CJ, but unless our offense totally EXPLODES with him there, I'm going to feel really slighted as a fan. Now, a first and third next year I'm fine with, but that would mean he didn't meet those performance initiatives...

Once again it's a conditional 3rd rounder next year, not a guaranteed 1st.

:smashfrea :madani: :doh: :frusty: :cussing: