Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=GTripp0012;441496]One 1st is way too much.

He's not on the "trading block" until you can get him at a reduced price, like a 2nd round pick. If he's not on the trading block, why in the heck are we trying to trade for him?!?!?!

Those deals never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever work out in our favor.[/quote]

I agree. I just finished listening to John Clayton say that the Bengals will not not not trade CJ no matter what, and Marvin Lewis is basically daring him to be a man, live up to his word, and sit out the season.

I think the Bengals are treating this entire CJ fiasco as one big temper tantrum. They're hoping that once he realizes all his crying, pouting, and foot stomping is getting him no where, once he realizes his $8M/yr salary and QB are both damn good, then he'll eventually tuck his tail and report to the team.

On a side note, not only did Cincy nix our offer for CJ, but they have apparently called Philly and Dallas and told them to not even bother making an offer. Looks like Stinko will either be playing for the Bengals or playing couch potato this fall.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=SFREDSKIN;441491]Nope. I would shell that for a more physical, younger and better WR. ROY WILLIAMS!! If Roy W. had Carson Palmer as QB he's stats would be better than CJ's.[/QUOTE]

Well I think Roy Williams is a great WR, but let's not canonize him while demonizing CJ. We shouldn't complain about CJ's celebrations while forgetting this.

[QUOTE]When Albom asked Williams why he celebrated a reception with his team already trailing by two scores, Williams responded, "I celebrate first downs all the time. I'm not gonna stop that. I'm an exciting player. If I do something exciting, I'm gonna show my actions."

Albom responded, "But you were losing, 10-0."

"What does that mean? ... That means nothing to me. The score means nothing," Williams told Albom.[/QUOTE]

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2592484]ESPN - Lions' Roy Williams says 'score means nothing' - NFL[/url]

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;441428]

My concern with Chad Johnson isn't the production. It's a possible shift away from the running game that will stunt the running games growth, sort of like New England lasat year. I mean seriously we'll have Cooley, Johnson, ARE, and Moss competing for catches. Not to mention the desire to use Portis and Sellers in the passing game. As long as we stick to the running game and add an O-lineman or two through the draft then I'm fine with the trade.[/quote]


I also think this would impact the running game, but not only that the rest of our receivers. What happens when Chad isn't getting the ball, because Cooley is constantly open? That leaves us in the same boat the Bengals are in now. I presonally want him on the team, but it's going to be very fragile for a while. Also, would you want a first year coach to have to put up with Chad's outburst's? Or how about a QB who is finally coming into his own zone to have his go-to guy in his face if he's not feeding his stats enough? Now that I think of it, I'm 50/50 on Chad coming here.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;441494]Never said that we should do it even though we are only losing one pick this year and one pick next year.[/QUOTE]

We need to get out of the habit of giving away draft picks like they're candy. The New Englands, Indianapolises, Pittsburghs and New York Giants of the world use ALL of their draft picks, groom their own talent and get themselves into situations where EACH of those picks are contributing on the field. The Giants had all of their draft picks playing in their Super Bowl run. We need to quit being star-struck and build from within.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SmootSmack;441507]Well I think Roy Williams is a great WR, but let's not canonize him while demonizing CJ. We shouldn't complain about CJ's celebrations while forgetting this.



[URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2592484"]ESPN - Lions' Roy Williams says 'score means nothing' - NFL[/URL][/quote]

Williams is a tremendous talent, and a when healthy can dominate. He has, however, had difficulty remaining healthy apart from the year he made the Pro Bowl and he can disappear for games at a time. I think if people looked really really hard at Williams - the way they have at Johnson - they would see a supreme talent who has been less consistent, less productive, and more injury prone than Johnson. Not saying I wouldn't want Williams (though his team also insists he won't be traded, so why not wait a year and target him and Colston?) but I wouldn't want to make as big an offer for him as I would for Johnson.

[url=http://www.nfl.com/players/roywilliams/gamelogs?id=WIL511864]Roy Williams: Game Logs[/url]

[url=http://www.nfl.com/players/chadjohnson/gamelogs?id=JOH104425]Chad Johnson: Game Logs[/url]

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;441495]I think he is. Look who's throwing the ball to Williams and who to Johnson. Carson Palmer vs. Jon Kitna, no contest.[/quote]


Doesnt mean that much look who threw the ball to Steve Smith. Chad Johnson is faster, has better hands, runs better routes, and is a better all around player

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=KB24;441513]We need to get out of the habit of giving away draft picks like they're candy. The New Englands, Indianapolises, Pittsburghs and New York Giants of the world use ALL of their draft picks, groom their own talent and get themselves into situations where EACH of those picks are contributing on the field. The Giants had all of their draft picks playing in their Super Bowl run. We need to quit being star-struck and build from within.[/quote]


never said we should do it BUT dont make it seem like the pick we make will automatically pan out

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

Apparently the Bengals said the Redskins DID NOT make an offer, and PFT seems to think we're tampering big time:

[B][URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/04/22/bengals-say-no-offer-has-been-made-for-johnson/"]BENGALS SAY NO OFFER HAS BEEN MADE FOR JOHNSON[/URL][/B]

Posted by Mike Florio on April 22, 2008, 1:28 p.m.
On Tuesday morning, Chris Mortensen of ESPN reported that the Washington Redskins have offered the Cincinnati [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Bengals[/URL] a first-round pick in 2008 and a conditional pick in 2009 that could escalate to a first-rounder for receiver Chad Johnson.
Bengals coach Marvin Lewis says that it never happened.
“[URL="http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6737"]Mike Brown has not received a phone call[/URL],” Lewis said at a Tuesday press conference.
Lewis also continues to call Johnson’s bluff regarding his intention to retire if not traded. “He’s a man of his word,” Lewis said. “He says he’s not going to play, so don’t play. It’s time to do what you’re going to say you do and we’ll just move forward.”
So what’s going on here? It’s possible that the offer [I]was [/I]made, and that the Bengals have opted to deny it in order to avoid the intense pressure that eventually will come from the fan base to spare them the antics of Ocho Psycho by getting real value for him right now and moving on.
Really, what can the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Redskins[/URL] do if the Bengals are lying? Call a press conference to say that an offer has been made? (That would be tampering on its face.)
And we continue to be (more) concerned that tampering might be occurring with Johnson. Even if the ‘Skins aren’t directly talking to agent Drew Rosenhaus, the fact that the [I]Washington Post [/I]knows that the team is [URL="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/"]ready to pay Johnson $21 million[/URL] in guaranteed money strongly suggests that the team is putting this information out there in the hopes of continuing to stoke the “I want out” fire that has escalated into an inferno.
In our opinion, what the Redskins apparently are doing is 1000 times worse than the conduct that formed the basis for the Bears tampering allegations against the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]49ers[/URL]. In our opinion, the Bengals should file tampering charges against the Redskins today, if for no reason other than to get the Redskins to back off.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=KB24;441513]We need to get out of the habit of giving away draft picks like they're candy. The New Englands, Indianapolises, Pittsburghs and New York Giants of the world use ALL of their draft picks, groom their own talent and get themselves into situations where EACH of those picks are contributing on the field. The Giants had all of their draft picks playing in their Super Bowl run. We need to quit being star-struck and build from within.[/quote]

...I heard that.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;441519]never said we should do it BUT dont make it seem like the pick we make will automatically pan out[/QUOTE]

There's no guarantee Chad will automatically pan out. If the pick is a bust, at least we still have that '09 third-rounder and won't take as bad of a hit on the cap.

[QUOTE=GMScud;441521]Apparently the Bengals said the Redskins DID NOT make an offer, and PFT seems to think we're tampering big time:

[B][URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/04/22/bengals-say-no-offer-has-been-made-for-johnson/"]BENGALS SAY NO OFFER HAS BEEN MADE FOR JOHNSON[/URL][/B]

Posted by Mike Florio on April 22, 2008, 1:28 p.m.
On Tuesday morning, Chris Mortensen of ESPN reported that the Washington Redskins have offered the Cincinnati [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Bengals[/URL] a first-round pick in 2008 and a conditional pick in 2009 that could escalate to a first-rounder for receiver Chad Johnson.
Bengals coach Marvin Lewis says that it never happened.
“[URL="http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6737"]Mike Brown has not received a phone call[/URL],” Lewis said at a Tuesday press conference.
Lewis also continues to call Johnson’s bluff regarding his intention to retire if not traded. “He’s a man of his word,” Lewis said. “He says he’s not going to play, so don’t play. It’s time to do what you’re going to say you do and we’ll just move forward.”
So what’s going on here? It’s possible that the offer [I]was [/I]made, and that the Bengals have opted to deny it in order to avoid the intense pressure that eventually will come from the fan base to spare them the antics of Ocho Psycho by getting real value for him right now and moving on.
Really, what can the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Redskins[/URL] do if the Bengals are lying? Call a press conference to say that an offer has been made? (That would be tampering on its face.)
And we continue to be (more) concerned that tampering might be occurring with Johnson. Even if the ‘Skins aren’t directly talking to agent Drew Rosenhaus, the fact that the [I]Washington Post [/I]knows that the team is [URL="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/"]ready to pay Johnson $21 million[/URL] in guaranteed money strongly suggests that the team is putting this information out there in the hopes of continuing to stoke the “I want out” fire that has escalated into an inferno.
In our opinion, what the Redskins apparently are doing is 1000 times worse than the conduct that formed the basis for the Bears tampering allegations against the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]49ers[/URL]. [B]In our opinion, the Bengals should file tampering charges against the Redskins today, if for no reason other than to get the Redskins to back off[/B].[/QUOTE]

I'd LOVE for that to happen!

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=KB24;441513]We need to get out of the habit of giving away draft picks like they're candy. The New Englands, Indianapolises, Pittsburghs and New York Giants of the world use ALL of their draft picks, groom their own talent and get themselves into situations where EACH of those picks are contributing on the field. The Giants had all of their draft picks playing in their Super Bowl run. We need to quit being star-struck and build from within.[/quote]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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=KB24;441513]We need to get out of the habit of giving away draft picks like they're candy. The New Englands, Indianapolises, Pittsburghs and New York Giants of the world use ALL of their draft picks, groom their own talent and get themselves into situations where EACH of those picks are contributing on the field. The Giants had all of their draft picks playing in their Super Bowl run. We need to quit being star-struck and build from within.[/QUOTE]

I don't think people realize how many trades the Patriots have made over the years using their draft picks (whether to acquire later picks or veterans). I also don't think people realize that not every player selected by them has panned out.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;441530]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.

[B]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[/B].[/QUOTE]

They're more gung-ho about filling seats and selling shirts. As I said earlier, this organization is run by jackasses.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=KB24;441528]There's no guarantee Chad will automatically pan out. If the pick is a bust, at least we still have that '09 third-rounder and won't take as bad of a hit on the cap.



I'd LOVE for that to happen![/quote]

Well if we're found guilty of tampering, Principal Goodell would take at least 1 draft pick from us.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;441531]I don't think people realize how many trades the Patriots have made over the years using their draft picks (whether to acquire later picks or veterans). I also don't think people realize that not every player selected by them has panned out.[/QUOTE]

Maybe so, but you can't deny what they're doing is working. They have sustained, consistent success since 2000. We have one playoff win.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SmootSmack;441531]I don't think people realize how many trades the Patriots have made over the years using their draft picks (whether to acquire later picks or veterans). I also don't think people realize that not every player selected by them has panned out.[/quote]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.

So far so good, but again, what kind of message are you sending when you say "3 million dollars guaranteed and no picks is too much for an up and coming DJ Hackett, but 20 million dollars guarenteed plus a first and third rounder is a good deal for an over-the-hill CJ." I mean, where is the consistency in player evaluation? That's what worries me most, that the team might not understand the value of money.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=GTripp0012;441535]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.
[B]
So far so good, but again, what kind of message are you sending when you say "3 million dollars guaranteed and no picks is too much for an up and coming DJ Hackett, but 20 million dollars guarenteed plus a first and third rounder is a good deal for an over-the-hill CJ." I mean, where is the consistency in player evaluation? That's what worries me most, that the team might not understand the value of money.[/B][/quote]

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;441469]By the way the Patriots only gave up a 4th round pick for Randy Moss.[/quote]

The Patriots gave up a 4th for a player that gave up on his team and was on his second chance. See he was causing the same sort of problems with the Vikes that CJ is doing and everyone wanted him. Then he goes to the Raiders and is not happy and gives up on them and demands a trade. He essentially was given two chances and screwed them both up. Thats why the Patriots didn't have to pay a lot for Moss. No one thought he would produce as he did. Everyone thought he would be just as misserable there as he was in the two previous teams.

CJ has been with one team. Not to be considered the malcontent that Moss was...or T.O. Hell T.O. was a problem with the 49ers prior to leaving. Then a problem with the Eagles. If I remember correctly everyone wanted him from San Fran, then when he started having problems with the Eagles was his reputation seriously marred.

So....I guess my point is if you guys only want to give up a 4th like the Patriots did then I guess we might as well wait for CJ to cause problems with his next team, which by then more then most of you would be saying forget him....probably me to.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

LOL how is CJ over the hill??

I'll take his 90+ catches and 1400 yards if that's over the hill any day.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=GMScud;441521]Apparently the Bengals said the Redskins DID NOT make an offer, and PFT seems to think we're tampering big time:

[B][URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/04/22/bengals-say-no-offer-has-been-made-for-johnson/"]BENGALS SAY NO OFFER HAS BEEN MADE FOR JOHNSON[/URL][/B]

Posted by Mike Florio on April 22, 2008, 1:28 p.m.
On Tuesday morning, Chris Mortensen of ESPN reported that the Washington Redskins have offered the Cincinnati [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Bengals[/URL] a first-round pick in 2008 and a conditional pick in 2009 that could escalate to a first-rounder for receiver Chad Johnson.
Bengals coach Marvin Lewis says that it never happened.
“[URL="http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6737"]Mike Brown has not received a phone call[/URL],” Lewis said at a Tuesday press conference.
Lewis also continues to call Johnson’s bluff regarding his intention to retire if not traded. “He’s a man of his word,” Lewis said. “He says he’s not going to play, so don’t play. It’s time to do what you’re going to say you do and we’ll just move forward.”
So what’s going on here? It’s possible that the offer [I]was [/I]made, and that the Bengals have opted to deny it in order to avoid the intense pressure that eventually will come from the fan base to spare them the antics of Ocho Psycho by getting real value for him right now and moving on.
Really, what can the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]Redskins[/URL] do if the Bengals are lying? Call a press conference to say that an offer has been made? (That would be tampering on its face.)
And we continue to be (more) concerned that tampering might be occurring with Johnson. Even if the ‘Skins aren’t directly talking to agent Drew Rosenhaus, the fact that the [I]Washington Post [/I]knows that the team is [URL="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/"]ready to pay Johnson $21 million[/URL] in guaranteed money strongly suggests that the team is putting this information out there in the hopes of continuing to stoke the “I want out” fire that has escalated into an inferno.
In our opinion, what the Redskins apparently are doing is 1000 times worse than the conduct that formed the basis for the Bears tampering allegations against the [URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#"]49ers[/URL]. In our opinion, the Bengals should file tampering charges against the Redskins today, if for no reason other than to get the Redskins to back off.[/quote]

There's been a correction to the story, Lewis has now confirmed that the offer was made.

As for the tampering I don't see anything here. Sounds like PFT trying to stir the pot as usual.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=GMScud;441539]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=GTripp0012;441530]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=GTripp0012;441535]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;441545]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;441545]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.[/quote]

Once again it's a [I][B]conditional 3rd rounder next year[/B][/I], not a guaranteed 1st.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;441544][B]It is disingenuous to imply that DJ Hackett and Chad Johnson are comparable or would bring similar abilities to the team.[/B] 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.[/quote]

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

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

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.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

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...

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=Mattyk72;441548]Once again it's a [I][B]conditional 3rd rounder next year[/B][/I], not a guaranteed 1st.[/quote]

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

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;441551]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...[/quote]

Apparently the performance incentives were absurd, and they weren't just individual incentives, they also had to do with the performance of the team. So basically it would be very unlikely the conditional pick would have turned into a 1st rounder.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;441551]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...[/quote]

The conditions would probably be pretty steep for it to escalate to a 1st, I think SS speculated the Skins would have to make the NFC Championship and CJ would have to break the all time TD record.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;441491]Nope. I would shell that for a more physical, younger and better WR. ROY WILLIAMS!! If Roy W. had Carson Palmer as QB he's stats would be better than CJ's.[/quote]

I think your giving Palmer more credit then he deserves. Lets see how he does with only one #1 WR to throw to and teams doubling up on that one WR.

Even though some of you don't think he put up the numbers he did exeptionally better then our WR's in yrds and put himself in the top 3 WR's. We have not one on the Skins in the top 30.

and yes we do have other needs. Those other needs can be met in the 2nd round and the two picks we have in the 3rd round. We all know this yrs draft class is deep in DE/DL, S, G, CB. Everyone is talking about how after the first two or three WR all the rest drop off significantly. Basically your looking for the diamond in the rough.

The 3rd round pick was for next yr. Which will not effect us this yr. We would still have 2 third round picks.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=Mattyk72;441549]yeah I'm not sure how that comparison came into the picture... it's absolutely ridiculous[/quote]

Hackett is at least a scheme player and has played along Zorn in the WCO the last three years.

Not comparable to CJ in physical talent but he would at least fit in with our offensive scheme and would not have come at a great cost.

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

For the record Dallas did not inquire about Chad Johnson. Jerry Jones held his annual pre-draft media "bash" today where he was asked about the validity of the report.

He was pretty succinct too. "No" is how he flatly answered the question. But Jerry did say that he has asked another team about the availability of a star receiver. And the smart money says that was either A) Detroit (Roy Williams) or B) Arizona (Anquan Boldin).

"I wouldn't give who it was, but the answer is yes. We have talked (with another team)," Jones said. "I wouldn't give you a timeframe on it either, if you're talking the last week or the last few days. But certainly since (the start of) the offseason."

But one thing is certain, it was NOT Chad Johnson.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=Skinny Tee;441557]Hackett is at least a scheme player and has played along Zorn in the WCO the last three years.

Not comparable to CJ in physical talent but he would at least fit in with our offensive scheme and would not have come at a great cost.[/quote]

yeah I get that and I was a supporter of bringing in Hackett, but the two situations are completely different.

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

If these reports are true then Vinny and the gang are still a bunch of tools. Haven't we learned our lesson with tempermental wr's. We've got an aging o-line, an aging #1 corner and a starting DE that's about to collect social sercurity. Do they even know the formula to success in the NFL? Vinny and Dan all you have to do is look north on route 95! It's not WR play. Sorry but it's not. You need some pass rushers, you need an offensive line and you need not spectacular, but solid mistake free qb play.

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

[quote=skinsfan69;441560]If these reports are true then Vinny and the gang are still a bunch of tools. Haven't we learned our lesson with tempermental wr's. We've got an aging o-line, an aging #1 corner and a starting DE that's about to collect social sercurity. Do they even know the formula to success in the NFL? Vinny and Dan all you have to do is look north on route 95! It's not WR play. Sorry but it's not. You need some pass rushers, you need an offensive line and you need not spectacular, but solid mistake free qb play.[/quote]

We would still have 8 picks to fill holes.

I think we're going a little overboard here if trading away one pick means the draft is blown.

Re: Offer made on Chad
 

[quote=Mattyk72;441548]Once again it's a [I][B]conditional 3rd rounder next year[/B][/I], not a guaranteed 1st.[/quote]

So that's two potential starters for one?? Either way it's a bad deal and I'm glad Cinn saved us from the FO's stupidity. That's why we have no depth cause we always do these two for one deals.

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

Actually I think the deal that was offered was very fair for both sides. CJ is a guy who routinely puts up 90+ catches and 1300-1400 yards. You're not going to get a guy like that for a 4th round pick, this isn't Maddens we're talking about.