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.