Re: Trading #85
 

[quote=TheBigD;368894]WHAT! 2 first round picks, who is this Ocho Cinco you speak of? He is a good player, no doubt, but no reciever would be traded for 2 first round picks.[/quote]


What did you guys pay for Joey Galloway a few years back? And that's Joey Galloway! Chad Johnson is worth 2 first round picks that or at least a quality player and a first round pick.

Re: Trading #85
 

What would Chad do for this offense? Gibbs is scared to let Campbell make plays already. The Skins have already invested millions into the WR position. I can't see adding yet another huge contract to that unit.

Re: Trading #85
 

Ocho Cinco is one of the best WRs in the league. Why would you pass on him for a draft pick? Because he's got an attitude problem? Well, Randy Moss and his attitude problem are headed to the Super Bowl and a possible undefeated season.

Chad Johnson would be a great addition to the team, if they let JC throw the ball more, which they might do after he's had a year in the system. Which secondary would be able to match up with Santana Moss, ARE, and CJ?!?! Clearly, our offense needs more fire power. Why would you not make this move?

Re: Trading #85
 

[quote=theJBexperience;368935]Ocho Cinco is one of the best WRs in the league. Why would you pass on him for a draft pick? Because he's got an attitude problem? Well, Randy Moss and his attitude problem are headed to the Super Bowl and a possible undefeated season.

Chad Johnson would be a great addition to the team, [B]if they let JC throw the ball more[/B], which they might do after he's had a year in the system. Which secondary would be able to match up with Santana Moss, ARE, and CJ?!?! Clearly, our offense needs more fire power. Why would you not make this move?[/quote]CJ will demand far more money than we're already paying Moss, and I have my doubts that Gibbs will ever loosen the reigns on Campbell. The Cowboys and Packers all but handed us a blueprint to attack the weak Giants secondary early and often, yet Gibbs stuck with a conservative approach with the lead in that game, as he did last week vs. Arizona with the lead. I guarantee that if Brady gets us down, he will step on the Skins' collective throats on Sunday. Gibbs seemingly prefers to play for a 17-14 win than to bury an opponent that's down. CJ's talents would be wasted here.

Re: Trading #85
 

[QUOTE=GhettoDogAllStars;368899]So you're saying if the best they can get is a 6th rounder they would take it? No. They wouldn't.

Also, Moss was largely considered to be past his prime, plus a malcontent, and a lot of his success was credited to working with Culpepper and Carter. Obviously that's not the case, but perception is everything.[/QUOTE]


is that what i said.....read, I said they will take the best offer, which mean, no they want give him away, but if someone offers up a 2nd or 3rd with another player or a 2nd and 3rd, then yea.........maybe a low 1st, but not 2 1st rounders......thats what i said!!!!!!

Re: Trading #85
 

I really doubt that the bengals trade him....I just can't see that happening. But they are in DESPERATE need of some of defense...so who knows. I really find it odd that Marvin Lewis can't get that D any better than it is.

Re: Trading #85
 

CJ is not a redskin style of player. The grandstanding has never been the character for WR's as much as Gibbs has lead at the helm. Gary Clark was the most spirited WR's an he spoke volumes with his ablility on the field. Chad is a talented player who doesn't understand when people are laughing with him and when they are laughing at him. The later is more accurate when your'e not winning.

Re: Trading #85
 

I see him going to philly before coming here.

Re: Trading #85
 

If a 4th rounder could net Randy Moss, I give no more than a 3rd for Chad Johnson.

Re: Trading #85
 

Cincy will never trade Johnson...Skins need to stop investing in the WR position and use the guys they have:pimp:

Re: Trading #85
 

I love chad Johnson. No way Joe Gibbs has him on our team, but he would be the next best thing to moss. He also would cost a first rounder. He is not like Moss who had done nothing for three years. He is still the second best receiver in the game today
.

Re: Trading #85
 

what are we the lions? they invested 4 first rounders in recievers 4 outta they last 5 drafts. do we really need another reciever to come here and have zero touchdown passes to go along with our other 3 receivers that have contracts over 30 million? Next year we are going to need CBs and Liineman. SAVE OUR PICKS.....

Re: Trading #85
 

When I first saw the title of this thread, I thought it was referring to Brandon Lloyd! I laughed out loud and said, "for what, a coke and a smile?" Ha!

Re: Trading #85
 

[quote=saden1;368924]What did you guys pay for Joey Galloway a few years back? And that's Joey Galloway! Chad Johnson is worth 2 first round picks that or at least a quality player and a first round pick.[/quote]
Sorry, I meant to say "no receiver SHOULD be traded for 2 first round picks". Galloway was a great receiver and he is still good, Dallas could not get a hold of a good QB.

Re: Trading #85
 

[QUOTE=DEVIL'S OWN;368939]is that what i said.....read, I said they will take the best offer, which mean, no they want give him away, but if someone offers up a 2nd or 3rd with another player or a 2nd and 3rd, then yea.........maybe a low 1st, but not 2 1st rounders......thats what i said!!!!!![/QUOTE]

I know what you meant, but your post didn't reflect it. I know that you know they won't give him away.

You obviously don't think any team would give up 2 first rounders for him, and neither do I. However, stranger things have happened. Keep in mind that both 1st rounders would not likely be in the same year. One would be next draft, and the other would be the draft after that. Generally, a pick in next years draft is worth the same as a pick one round lower in this years draft. So, a 1st next year is worth a 2nd this year. If you think about it that way, you might say it would only be a 1st and 2nd -- not two firsts. But, you'd probably just be kidding yourself. :)