Wraith Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Need to have 22 not 28, it's only 6 picks but it could mean a world of difference in the type of player we get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulture Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 This is sooooo funny...I bet if Chad would have tried a different route to get traded (not rocking the boat) he probably would be a redskin now.You reap what you sow Chad...act like a child, get treated like a child!!Ha Ha Ha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 The point is, this trade would benefit the Bengals immeasurably by eliminating a cancer and getting us far more for him than we thought we would. Actually, it's almost identical to the trade value I guessed several months ago, and it would be attractive to any team in full blown rebuilding mode. The problem I see relates to the Bengals opportunity to remain competitive this season. If Mikey feels the trade is forced on him (by Chad, the league or the Redskins), who cares? Nobody cares, but if I'm Mikey I wouldn't give a second thought to whether or not the trade represents fair value for the Redskins. They came to me, right? And if they're willing to place two 1st round picks on the table, as the rumor claims, then they don't come off just because the Redskins want performance guarantees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Update: Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, who initially denied the team had received offers for Johnson during a Tuesday news conference, confirmed to ESPN that Cincinnati turned down Washington's offer of two picks."Once I actually read what was reported, I have to be truthful and say that the story is accurate," Lewis told ESPN. "Unfortunately, I didn't read it until after our press conference." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Update: Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, who initially denied the team had received offers for Johnson during a Tuesday news conference, confirmed to ESPN that Cincinnati turned down Washington's offer of two picks."Once I actually read what was reported, I have to be truthful and say that the story is accurate," Lewis told ESPN. "Unfortunately, I didn't read it until after our press conference."Yup. They want more. Simple as that.Next bidder, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 "He has a contract through 2011. He's stated without an opportunity to go to a different team and a new contract, he wasn't going to play. I think he's a man of his word and says he's not going to play, so don't play."Marvin said this? He's daring Chad to sit out. Those are tradin' words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Yup. They want more. Simple as that.Next bidder, please.I hope you're right. And if you are, Mike Brown and Marvin have just taken playing hard to get to a new level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwalling Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I LOVE the whole posture Marvin & the Bengals are taking:1) I know Chad's a "man of his word" and I expect he will sit out. Eat your heart out Chad. How do you like being killed with kindness.2) No Mr. Agent we won't trade your cry baby client to Mr. Snyder so you can negotiate a typical screwball Redskins contract (and collect the commission therein) even for potentially 2 firsts. So tell your client to live up to his CONTRACT.3) We're content taking the screws to Chad and his agent, HOWEVER, if the idiots in Dallas (Jerry Jones will never be misidentified as a great mind) and Washington (see the aforementioned nutjob Daniel Snyder) and Philly (thought they were smarter than this) want to get into a bidding war and significantly overpay for the type of primadonna they all enjoy so much, SO BE IT. Misery loves company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 2) No Mr. Agent we won't trade your cry baby client to Mr. Snyder so you can negotiate a typical screwball Redskins contract (and collect the commission therein) even for potentially 2 firsts.Not quite. Marvin specifically said he denied the report because it was mispresented to him as the team rejecting two firsts. Which suggests to me that the bengals would, in fact, take two (firm) first round picks for Chad. That's equal to franchise tag compensation after all.And I think I know the two firsts the bengals have their eye on. They belong to Jerry Jones -- who has already signaled a willingness to part with one of them for an elite wideout. So maybe, come draft day, the alleged apple of Jerry's eye, McFadden, gets snapped up before he slips into a range Dallas can use those two picks to trade up into. And then maybe a new use for them occurs to Jerry?Or maybe not. But in the meantime, pass the popcorn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I would eat chad's 8 million for 22 and 28 in a heartbeat. Who would you take if we had 3 first rounders.Sedrick EllisLimas SweedQuentin Grovesand then Chris Johnson in the second, my god that would be sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 We would not have 3 first rounders,We would have 2 this year then 2 next if chad met the requirements.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 No. If the Cowboys were to offer both their 2008 picks 22 and 28. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 We would not have 3 first rounders,We would have 2 this year then 2 next if chad met the requirements....He's talking about my scenario with Dallas giving us both their firsts this year for Chad... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 We would not have 3 first rounders,We would have 2 this year then 2 next if chad met the requirements....He's talking about my scenario with Dallas giving us both their firsts this year for Chad...Ohhhhhh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Marvin specifically said he denied the report because it was mispresented to him as the team rejecting two firsts. Which suggests to me that the bengals would, in fact, take two (firm) first round picks for Chad. IMHO it doesn't guarantee anything other than a minimum bid of a 1st and 3rd has been established....and rejected. So we know where the floor is and to the suprise of almost nobody that floor is much higher than the Peter King's of the world would lead you to believe. Regardless, it's possible the Redskins can complete the trade by simply firming up their offer by eliminating the qualifiers.And I think I know the two firsts the bengals have their eye on. They belong to Jerry Jones -- who has already signaled a willingness to part with one of them for an elite wideout. Again, this is exactly why you don't agree to a trade on Tuesday. Instead, you let the rumor do your work for you, and on that note...Marvin just helped things along by confirming the offer.Or maybe not. I'm still unconvinced the Bengals have changed their stance, but I like the change in landscape. I like knowing what's on the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalspride1219 Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Why would the Bengals turn that down?OMG....!Maybe they want more.I see three teams from the same division all blowing kisses at the Bengals over Chad. Perfect situation for a bidding war.yeah i would trade any one for two first round picks...damn and if a there actually is a bidding war and we get more than 2 first round picks... that would be insane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Why would the Bengals turn that down?OMG....!Maybe they want more.I see three teams from the same division all blowing kisses at the Bengals over Chad. Perfect situation for a bidding war.yeah i would trade any one for two first round picks...damn and if a there actually is a bidding war and we get more than 2 first round picks... that would be insaneI doubt we get more then 2 first round picks and highly doubt we get them the same year.that being said 2 this year 2 next would also be sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTG Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Anyone have a comment on my idea for a trade (a Dallas' 1st, 3rd, and Bobby Carpenter)?I think Carpenter can play if he's in the right system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walrus Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Anyone have a comment on my idea for a trade (a Dallas' 1st, 3rd, and Bobby Carpenter)?I think Carpenter can play if he's in the right system.I wouldn't be disappointed but I'd prefer Dallas just threw their two 08 first rounders our way. However, seeing as this draft might not have LBs with his talent/skill set, he's still on his rookie contract (and Carpenter is a former Buckeye), maybe this offer would have some appeal to Mike Brown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spor_tees Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 How about trade Chad to Dallas for their 2 First rounders then trade the 28th pick to Miami for Jason Taylor! Now that would be a lot of good players to get Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTG Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 You do realize Jason Taylor is 33 years old and will be 34 when the season begins, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Anyone have a comment on my idea for a trade (a Dallas' 1st, 3rd, and Bobby Carpenter)?I think Carpenter can play if he's in the right system.Seems like it's only marginally better than the offer on the table, if not worse. I'd gun for more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 You do realize Jason Taylor is 33 years old and will be 34 when the season begins, right?I'd try trade a 2nd for jason but hell I'd take a 34 jason taylor and still have 2 1sts this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePong Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Can we please stop the idiocy? You guys just don't get it. It's barely possible to trade Chad - if it's even possible at all. That's if we traded him for absolutely nothing. Forget about getting anything in return for him. Not only do we have to absorb the massive salary cap hit from trading chad, but then we have to take an extra hit for whatever player, or whatever 1st round picks we get in return. So, the only way a trade is even possible is if we trade him for like a 7th round draft pick. And even that may not be possible. I love all th bozos who suggest trades like chad for Jared Allen. So, we take like an $8 million hit for chad or whatever it is, then another $9 million for Allen's franchis tag. Give me a break. Then we have to get rid of numerous other top players just to get under the cap, and we are still without a WR. Then maybe we have to trade away our 1st round pick for a 6th or 7th rounder simply becasue we can no longer afford to sign a 1st rounder. Great way to improve the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacD BengalFan Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 It appears that the rationale for this bad decision is that the players will not the run the team, which I can understand, and the salary cap hit is to much, which is business. But the one aspect that I don't think Bengals management took into consideration was the aspect of the NFL is a "must win now" league. With the possibility of improving the team with two 1st round picks this season and the possibility of 2 again next season would dramatically improve the team almost immediately. Since the decision is to not make the trade, I guess winning is not as important to the Bengals as we have been led to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.