Quote:
Originally Posted by jsarno
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.