Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Redskins Locker Room


View Poll Results: Your opinion on the Redskins signing Larry Johnson
Thumbs up 119 76.77%
Thumbs down 36 23.23%
Voters: 155. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2010, 11:48 PM   #346
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight View Post
Who says they won't draft a runningback? Most teams carry 3. We have two definites right now.
You're right, it just leans towards they won't.

Quote:
They can cut Portis next year and gain a lot of cap space. There problem solved....
Assuming there is no cap.

So explain to me why we decided to get older at the one position that can't afford to get older? Help me understand why this is a good signing especially when you factor in his off the field issues?
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-19-2010, 11:52 PM   #347
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Okay, I'll bite. How should we, specifically, be taking advantage of the uncapped season?
In particular, drop Portis. I applauded the effort of dropping Randel El, but not dropping Portis is a head scratcher unless we decided to get a rookie and let Portis mentor him. We really need youth. We had a lot of issues revolving around older players, and while we have gotten rid of a lot, we also lost a lot of talent (ie: Thomas / Samuels retirement). I just don't agree with signing a 30 year old to a 3 year contract at a position that hands down needs to be young.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 12:02 AM   #348
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 4,261
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
You're right, it just leans towards they won't.



Assuming there is no cap.

So explain to me why we decided to get older at the one position that can't afford to get older? Help me understand why this is a good signing especially when you factor in his off the field issues?

From my perspective, I don't see any reason why they can't sign a runningback, in fact, I think that signing Johnson may signal that they will. Unless Portis turns into Marshall Faulk, he is gone after this year (I don't see him willing to re-work his deal). Cutting Portis in 2011 saves them 5 million on their cap number for that year (maybe that means nothing but his release fee will be 5 million less than his cap number) so that along with his age make him almost a certain cut after 2010. Even though they signed Johnson, they know he isn't a long term solution so I think they draft or acquire a young runningback this year. Thankfully they didn't see Mason and Ganther as the future, because I certainly didn't.

I think signing Johnson was a good signing because he is a proven back with relatively low mileage. Hearing what Herm Edwards and Vermeil said sealed it for me. I truly believe that Johnson thinks he is going to start this year and he is ready to compete. I also think that Portis is a competitor too (he held off some pretty good backs at Miami and Denver, he has never been challenged here). Assuming that Portis is ready to battle, they will push eachother and ultimately the Redskins are better off.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 12:13 AM   #349
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight View Post
From my perspective, I don't see any reason why they can't sign a runningback, in fact, I think that signing Johnson may signal that they will. Unless Portis turns into Marshall Faulk, he is gone after this year (I don't see him willing to re-work his deal). Cutting Portis in 2011 saves them 5 million on their cap number for that year (maybe that means nothing but his release fee will be 5 million less than his cap number) so that along with his age make him almost a certain cut after 2010. Even though they signed Johnson, they know he isn't a long term solution so I think they draft or acquire a young runningback this year. Thankfully they didn't see Mason and Ganther as the future, because I certainly didn't.
Well, I do hope you're right that we draft a RB, I just hope he's not some piece o poo in the 6th round or later. We need a solution at RB, not another problem.
I certainly agree Mason and Ganther were not the answer.

Quote:
I think signing Johnson was a good signing because he is a proven back with relatively low mileage. Hearing what Herm Edwards and Vermeil said sealed it for me. I truly believe that Johnson thinks he is going to start this year and he is ready to compete. I also think that Portis is a competitor too (he held off some pretty good backs at Miami and Denver, he has never been challenged here). Assuming that Portis is ready to battle, they will push eachother and ultimately the Redskins are better off.
Competition is DEFINATELY a great thing, but aren't you concerned that we will have the oldest backfield in the league?
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 12:24 AM   #350
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 4,261
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
Well, I do hope you're right that we draft a RB, I just hope he's not some piece o poo in the 6th round or later. We need a solution at RB, not another problem.
I certainly agree Mason and Ganther were not the answer.



Competition is DEFINATELY a great thing, but aren't you concerned that we will have the oldest backfield in the league?
We are definitely old back there. Maybe I am in the minority, but I wouldn't be shocked if Portis broke the team rushing record again next year. I think he has more left in the tank than people give him credit for (I feel the same about Johnson). He didn't blow out a knee last year, he had a concussion. Something tells me that if they were fightingn for a playoff spot, he would have been on the field. I know his stats were bad but Zorn's offense was putrid. Seriously, a guy who was out of the league for years came of the street and gave them a shot in the arm and this was without Samuels and Thomas. I bet Portis would have had some big games with Sherm Lewis.

I think that the Portis/Johnson platoon is the best solution to be competitive this year (just like the Campbell/Grossman platoon). Now the key is the draft. I think they pick a QB and a RB with 2 of the 5 picks. We need both picks to pan out, maybe not by next year but we are in trouble down the road if we whiff.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 12:46 AM   #351
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 39
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight View Post
We are definitely old back there. Maybe I am in the minority, but I wouldn't be shocked if Portis broke the team rushing record again next year. I think he has more left in the tank than people give him credit for (I feel the same about Johnson). He didn't blow out a knee last year, he had a concussion. Something tells me that if they were fightingn for a playoff spot, he would have been on the field. I know his stats were bad but Zorn's offense was putrid. Seriously, a guy who was out of the league for years came of the street and gave them a shot in the arm and this was without Samuels and Thomas. I bet Portis would have had some big games with Sherm Lewis.
I will take it all back if Portis breaks the record. Unfortunately, I don't see either of them being more than barely breaking 1000 yards. Damn, I hope you're right.

Quote:
I think that the Portis/Johnson platoon is the best solution to be competitive this year (just like the Campbell/Grossman platoon). Now the key is the draft. I think they pick a QB and a RB with 2 of the 5 picks. We need both picks to pan out, maybe not by next year but we are in trouble down the road if we whiff.
Agreed. I can bitch and moan all I want, but fact is they are here to stay, so I better get used to it. Best case scenario is that they create competition and we see players perform a lot better. Here's to hopin!
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 04:38 AM   #352
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
In particular, drop Portis. I applauded the effort of dropping Randel El, but not dropping Portis is a head scratcher unless we decided to get a rookie and let Portis mentor him. We really need youth. We had a lot of issues revolving around older players, and while we have gotten rid of a lot, we also lost a lot of talent (ie: Thomas / Samuels retirement). I just don't agree with signing a 30 year old to a 3 year contract at a position that hands down needs to be young.
I agree that you don't need a mentor to teach a rookie the playbook at RB, but a season from now, Portis' cap hit if released will be $5 million under the current rules (which, of course, are certainly subject to change). Granted that's $5 million we would otherwise have if we released him this year, but if we cut him this year, we lose somewhere between $7-9 million just to have him not play.

If we cut Portis in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $5 million dollar deadcap hit.

If we cut Haynesworth in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $19.8 million deadcap hit. ($3 million unrecognized of 2009 bonus + $16.8 million of unrecognized 2010 bonus). If we cut him today, we would owe him $25 million "cap dollars" (which come at no cost, this year) to get the heck out, but we'd recover $63.4 million of the "100 million dollar deal." If we kept Haynesworth though 2012 (it's effectively a four year deal), we would save $52.3 million of the 100 million. So Haynesworth's deal is essentially 4/48, as many before me have written. Or it can be 1/36. The marginal difference for the next three years of Albert Haynesworth is just $12 million dollars of bonuses and salary.

If we cut Hall in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $13.4 million deadcap hit. But we'd save $28.5 million of the $53.5 million. So essentially, his deal would become 2/25. There's no real marginal gain on the Hall contract, so he's progressively more likely to get released every year, as opposed to Haynesworth, who is almost certainly going to be held through 2012, and then released.

If there's still no cap in 2011, I'd suggest that Hall is more likely than not to get released.

Compared to some of our more highly paid players, Portis is real easy to get rid of in 2011 even if there is a cap. We actually would SAVE $5 million over having him on the roster. It's Haynesworth and Hall who become huge strains on the cap if it gets reinstated in 2011.

I agree with you that if we decide we're not going to use him, we should release him prior to opening day.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 04:46 AM   #353
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

I'd also argue that there's no chance that Johnson and Portis (who are both under contract in 2011) are both here next year, and that it's pretty likely that neither will be here.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 08:39 AM   #354
Special Teams
 
Beneil (diehard since 87)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 118
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

You know, the more I think of it, the more i am begining ot like these moves. At first it thought of them in the replacement aspect. As replacements taking a number one spot, Rex and JL are HUGE mistakes! i mean, Rex at his best is HORRIBLE. LJ is even older than CP. And when it all adds up, neither replacement has anything in their resume that makes them a clear #1.

BUT!!!!

If you compare them to the number 2 guys, it TOTALY makes sense. Betts vs LJ is laughable! Comparing either their bests or average years make the decision very easy. As for Todd vs Rex... don't get me started. Todd has hardly any GAME experience and is too old to even JOKE that he has 'fresh legs'. I'll take a loser that lost a superbowl over a loser that hasn't won a starting spot in over a decade.
Beneil (diehard since 87) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 10:47 AM   #355
The Starter
 
wolfeskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: chesapeake,va.
Posts: 2,160
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Larry Johnson might not be a better fit for shanny's offense than Willie Parker, LT, Chester Taylor or Thomas Jones but he's a better fit for the nfc east. that could be part of the reason he was chosen over the others.

sorry if this has already been said, too many posts to read through.
__________________
Hail to Allen/Shanahan .... bring in some baby hogs and load up on diesel fuel !!! (budw38)
wolfeskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 11:30 AM   #356
MVP
 
12thMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,456
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

I just don't get the confusion nor the discontent with Larry Johnson's contract and better yet, his age.

By reading some of the posts you would think Larry Johnson is some 50 year old, escape convict returning to the NFL. Johnson is a CLEAR upgrade over Betts/Cartwright.
12thMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 01:44 PM   #357
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

[QUOTE=12thMan;676887]I just don't get the confusion nor the discontent with Larry Johnson's contract and better yet, his age.

By reading some of the posts you would think Larry Johnson is some 50 year old, escape convict returning to the NFL. Johnson is a CLEAR upgrade over Betts/Cartwright.[/QUOTE]

...that's definitely true and he could even be an upgrade over Portis as the season unfolds.
The Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2010, 02:29 PM   #358
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,509
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12thMan View Post
I just don't get the confusion nor the discontent with Larry Johnson's contract and better yet, his age.

By reading some of the posts you would think Larry Johnson is some 50 year old, escape convict returning to the NFL. Johnson is a CLEAR upgrade over Betts/Cartwright.
We're not going into the season with just two backs. I think complaints will disappear when we have a new young back after the draft. People are complaining about an unfinished picture. Jahvid Best, Portis, and LJ would make a not too bad backfield.
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 05:05 PM   #359
Camp Scrub
 
BlindReckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 36
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

I like Portis and Johnson 1-2 in either order.I also like Aldridge in the mix. I'd like to see the Skins pick up Ryan Torian if he is available as a fourth back if only just as camp fodder. Injury prone but drafted by Shanny I think as a prototypical zone blocking runningback. He played well in the one game he played in. Unproven either way but worth taking a chance on. Ironically enuff he had no injury history in college.
BlindReckoning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 07:22 PM   #360
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,627
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

I'm a bit surprised they haven't signed Torain yet. I fully expect him to be a participant in training camp. That's not based on any knowledge, just speculation
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.39971 seconds with 10 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25