HairOnFire Posted April 7, 2006 Report Posted April 7, 2006 I'm betting the Bengals want to keep him, but won't match a big offer. JJ doesn't play enough snaps to justify big coin, with needs on defense and possibly the O-line the 49'ers draft pick is very attractive, and the Bengals may want to use more two back sets featuring Rudi and Perry. Quote
The_Next_Big_Thing Posted April 7, 2006 Report Posted April 7, 2006 I'm betting the Bengals want to keep him, but won't match a big offer. JJ doesn't play enough snaps to justify big coin, with needs on defense and possibly the O-line the 49'ers draft pick is very attractive, and the Bengals may want to use more two back sets featuring Rudi and Perry.If JJ leaves, it also makes an H-back type more attractive than a fullback and a new tight end. There are a couple guys who will be available on day two that can fill that role. Quote
ArmyBengal Posted April 7, 2006 Report Posted April 7, 2006 I'm betting the Bengals want to keep him, but won't match a big offer. JJ doesn't play enough snaps to justify big coin, with needs on defense and possibly the O-line the 49'ers draft pick is very attractive, and the Bengals may want to use more two back sets featuring Rudi and Perry. Agree agree agree !!!WHODEY !!! Quote
Stripes Posted April 7, 2006 Author Report Posted April 7, 2006 If JJ leaves, it also makes an H-back type more attractive than a fullback and a new tight end. There are a couple guys who will be available on day two that can fill that role.Maybe David Thomas? I love what Chris Cooley has been able to do with Washington. Quote
The_Next_Big_Thing Posted April 7, 2006 Report Posted April 7, 2006 If JJ leaves, it also makes an H-back type more attractive than a fullback and a new tight end. There are a couple guys who will be available on day two that can fill that role.Maybe David Thomas? I love what Chris Cooley has been able to do with Washington.I like David Thomas. I think he could be a Chris Cooley type, but he's more of a full time TE.Conner Long is definately in the mold of Chris Cooley. He's a great blocker, and catches with good hands. Quote
HoTbOy Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 I also would hate to lose JJohnson, but at this time extending to O-line is more pressing...the thing is does HE want to be here, he knows that they are trying to extend the O-line, stay with the team for a little less $ and maybe win a championship, or go to SF for more $ and be the leagues practice dummy...i doubt he would be the same person behind SF's O-line, he needs to think about that also... Quote
Whur CHad At? Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 49ers | Team not interested in signing J. JohnsonSat, 8 Apr 2006 08:47:47 -0700Matthew Barrows, of the Sacramento Bee, reports despite a report to the contrary, the San Francisco 49ers are not considering signing restricted free agent FB Jeremi Johnson, (Bengals). That is good news Quote
Kazkal Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 probbley gonna have poison in the contract if your not highest payed RB + Play for a team named the bengals you get yer contract in full.If JJ leaves, it also makes an H-back type more attractive than a fullback and a new tight end. There are a couple guys who will be available on day two that can fill that role.Maybe David Thomas? I love what Chris Cooley has been able to do with Washington.me too he got it on with christy If JJ leaves, it also makes an H-back type more attractive than a fullback and a new tight end. There are a couple guys who will be available on day two that can fill that role.Maybe David Thomas? I love what Chris Cooley has been able to do with Washington.me too he got it on with christy Quote
Whur CHad At? Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 You Repeated yourselfYou Repeated yourself Quote
Spain Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 JJ had two good years here one bad. If he goes bernstein looks god to me. Quote
Whur CHad At? Posted April 8, 2006 Report Posted April 8, 2006 Doesn't anyone around here read!49ers | Team not interested in signing J. JohnsonSat, 8 Apr 2006 08:47:47 -0700Matthew Barrows, of the Sacramento Bee, reports despite a report to the contrary, the San Francisco 49ers are not considering signing restricted free agent FB Jeremi Johnson, (Bengals). Quote
ArmyBengal Posted April 9, 2006 Report Posted April 9, 2006 Once again, JJ is the man... However, even if he doesn't go anywhere THIS year, he's unrestricted next year and will probably go test the market (which he will enjoy) and I'm not sure we will be able to do it then either. If we have to tag someone like Back or Levi, it might make it hard to give JJ anything big. Chad is going to be getting a new deal soon as well. WHODEY !!! Quote
Whur CHad At? Posted April 9, 2006 Report Posted April 9, 2006 He is a fullback, he won't get anything BIG. I don't know of any Full Back getting anything big. C'mon guys, just because a player is good doesn't mean we are going to have to spends millions and millions of dollars to keep them back. Lorenzo Neal was the best Fullback in football for us, and he went to SD for two years at like 3 Mill, not even that. Tony Richardson went to Minnesota for like 3 years $2 mill. He wont get anything BIG. Quote
ArmyBengal Posted April 9, 2006 Report Posted April 9, 2006 Again, even if it is 3 million, that's 3 million that night need to spent on someone else of greater impact. I think it should get done, but always trying to keep things in perspective...WHODEY !!! Quote
Whur CHad At? Posted April 9, 2006 Report Posted April 9, 2006 JJ would prob. get a deal for about 5 years $4 mill tops. No way he gets more. He is def. worth it. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.