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, 11:24 PM   #346
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 39
Posts: 4,261
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
I just don't get this signing. Sure Johnson may have a year left in the tank, but look at his age, why in the world would we not just go young and get old cap issues off the books?
Assuming you can wrap your mind around the Johnson signing AND keeping Portis, the brass signs Rex freakin Grossman???? So our QB situation sucked last year, and the answer is rex grossman...our rb situation sucked last year and our answer is the aged Larry Johnson...why not coax Russ Grimm out of coaching to sure up our line?

I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)
So what better alternatives did they pass up on?

They haven't gotten rid of cap issues? They are the third lowest payroll in the league.
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-19-2010, 11:25 PM   #347
Playmaker
 
mlmdub130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Age: 32
Posts: 3,239
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
I just don't get this signing. Sure Johnson may have a year left in the tank, but look at his age, why in the world would we not just go young and get old cap issues off the books?
Assuming you can wrap your mind around the Johnson signing AND keeping Portis, the brass signs Rex freakin Grossman???? So our QB situation sucked last year, and the answer is rex grossman...our rb situation sucked last year and our answer is the aged Larry Johnson...why not coax Russ Grimm out of coaching to sure up our line?

I don't know about you guys, but I had a lot of faith in the brass, until these signings. They are just flat out not smart. We should be taking advantage of the no cap season. (yes, I get that "likely" there will never be a cap again according to the NFLPA, but can we really trust that?)
i really don't mind either move, if you asked for a straight up trade of betts and johnson, who would you take? i would take johnson everytime

as far as rex, he knows the system which gives him a head start, and i would rather have him as a backup/coach than todd collins any day of the week
__________________
"I don't think anybody should have regrets, especially me, ... You don't regret what you do in your life. If you do it, you do it for a reason."

ST21
mlmdub130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 11:34 PM   #348
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight View Post
So what better alternatives did they pass up on?
You are assuming a FA...I thought we should have signed a young player out of the draft. Fresh legs.

Quote:
They haven't gotten rid of cap issues? They are the third lowest payroll in the league.
I didn't say we had a high payroll, but Portis cap number is astronomical, and NOT worth it, why didn't Shanny just go ahead and start over?
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 11:37 PM   #349
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 39
Posts: 4,261
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno View Post
You are assuming a FA...I thought we should have signed a young player out of the draft. Fresh legs.



I didn't say we had a high payroll, but Portis cap number is astronomical, and NOT worth it, why didn't Shanny just go ahead and start over?
Who says they won't draft a runningback? Most teams carry 3. We have two definites right now.

They can cut Portis next year and gain a lot of cap space. There problem solved....
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 11:46 PM   #350
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
Posts: 9,534
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlmdub130 View Post
i really don't mind either move, if you asked for a straight up trade of betts and johnson, who would you take? i would take johnson everytime
I absolutely agree...however, why would you sign a 30 year old that has not produced in a few years to a THREE year contract? Also, when everyone says Portis legs are not there anymore, and his age is showing, why get OLDER at the position? I just don't get this plan.

Quote:
as far as rex, he knows the system which gives him a head start, and i would rather have him as a backup/coach than todd collins any day of the week
I am not sure I agree here. Rex is not an answer for any team. His career comp % is only 54%. That's terrible for a pocket passer. 33 career passing tds, and 36 career int's (36 total tds, and 56 career turnovers)...another bad sign.
I certainly don't think we should have kept Collins, I agreed with dropping him, I would have much rather gotten a rookie QB to back up Campbell / Colt. That being said, there is no way in hell I'd take Rex over Collins in terms of coaching skills. Collins is an intelligent QB, he just doesn't have the physical tools to be good.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin
jsarno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2010, 11:48 PM   #351
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
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
Old 03-19-2010, 11:52 PM   #352
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
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   #353
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 39
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   #354
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
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   #355
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 39
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   #356
Franchise Player
 
jsarno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 40
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   #357
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 27
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   #358
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 27
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   #359
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   #360
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
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 05:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.42524 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