Chad 24/7

[jjakq27]

It's only Tuesday. I don't think this is done yet.

An alternative is to try and parlay this into draft picks beyond next year. If you look at what the Pats did a few years back, it is how they were able to build a big part of their team. It seems like they always have an extra pick or two in the first three rounds. That gives them the option to trade up, down or out of a particular round. I would like to see something like this so that the impact on this years cap isn't so much if they have to eat $8M but it gives them some flexability in the future.

[HoosierCat]

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.

It's only a bad decision if you think Chad is actually going to sit out the season. Everyone knows he won't. In which case it's a decision not to trade a top-tier wideout for a first round pick in a draft in which no WR appears to approach his talent. That's certainly not a clear-cut case of failing to improve the team, to say the least. And without knowing what the escalators are for that 3rd rounder next year, you can't count on it being anything but a 3rd.

All we've learned to day is that the Bengals, despite their alleged rock-solid no-trade position, are indeed listening to offers. And that their price for Chad is something along the lines of two firsts. And that one team has offered a first and a third (with unknown escalators to a first). If you are the Bengals, why be in a rush? Heck, you are actually thisclose to getting your price.

[cincyhokie]

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.

It's only a bad decision if you think Chad is actually going to sit out the season. Everyone knows he won't. In which case it's a decision not to trade a top-tier wideout for a first round pick in a draft in which no WR appears to approach his talent. That's certainly not a clear-cut case of failing to improve the team, to say the least. And without knowing what the escalators are for that 3rd rounder next year, you can't count on it being anything but a 3rd.

All we've learned to day is that the Bengals, despite their alleged rock-solid no-trade position, are indeed listening to offers. And that their price for Chad is something along the lines of two firsts. And that one team has offered a first and a third (with unknown escalators to a first). If you are the Bengals, why be in a rush? Heck, you are actually thisclose to getting your price.

I agree with you to an extent but here's what confuses me:

1. How could the Bengals afford to take the dreaded "cap hit" for Chad and 2 first round picks?

2. What purpose does it serve for the Bengals to consistently state they are not going to trade him? Hell, let it be known he's being shopped and let the NFCN bidding begin.

The last thing I want to see is Chad Johson here in the fall and a trade before the draft looks a hell of a lot better for the season coming up as opposed to a June 1st trade.

[BengalszoneBilly]

This update from Marvin:

Lewis says Chad Johnson should keep his word and sit out

By JOE KAY, AP Sports Writer

CINCINNATI (AP)—The Bengals are calling Chad Johnson’s bluff.

Tired of the receiver’s posturing for a trade, coach Marvin Lewis said Tuesday that Johnson should keep his word and sit out the season—the strongest comment yet from an organization that is reluctant to let him go.

The Bengals also turned down Washington’s offer of two high-round draft picks for Johnson, who had hoped to be traded before the draft this weekend. The move indicated that Johnson will be staying in Cincinnati, like it or not.

Lewis also said that linebacker David Pollack is leaning toward retirement. The former first-round draft pick broke a bone in his neck while making a tackle during the 2006 season and went through months of difficult healing and rehabilitation.

Pollack’s decision isn’t a surprise. He has said all along that he doubted he would return if there was a chance he could injure his neck again.

Lewis was pointed in his comments about Johnson. The Pro Bowl receiver has been disgruntled since the middle of last season, when his look-at-me antics came under criticism.

He became the epitome of Cincinnati’s 7-9 season when he sniped at quarterback Carson Palmer during a loss to New England. Johnson ran the wrong route on a pass play, resulting in a game-turning interception. He initially blamed Palmer for the problem.

Since the end of last season, Johnson has been lobbying for a trade even though he agreed to a long-term deal with the Bengals two years ago. Johnson’s contract would pay him $3 million next season and extends through 2010, with a club option for 2011.

Although Johnson stopped talking to reporters in Cincinnati, he has done numerous national interviews during which he threatened to sit out the season if he’s not traded. Lewis responded Tuesday by saying he should follow through with his threat.

“I’ve stated our case with Chad,” Lewis said. “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.”

On Tuesday morning, Lewis said the Bengals hadn’t received a trade offer for Johnson. Later in the day, the club released a statement saying it had turned down an offer from Washington, which was willing to give up its first-round pick and a conditional third-round pick next year.

The club has been consistent in saying it won’t trade the Pro Bowl receiver, who became the franchise leader in career catches and yards last season. He caught 93 passes for a team-record 1,440 yards.

Other teams have traded away stars when they started becoming divisive. Bengals owner Mike Brown has a history of refusing to give in to player demands. When running back Corey Dillon tried to force the team to trade him in 2003, the Bengals waited until after the season to send him to New England.

In that case, it was more about getting rid of a player they no longer needed—Rudi Johnson had emerged as the starter—than it was about satisfying Dillon.

The Bengals need Johnson in the short-term. No. 3 receiver Chris Henry was released after yet another arrest earlier this month, leaving the Bengals with little depth at the position. They might take a receiver high in the draft this weekend.

Johnson didn’t return a phone message Tuesday. Last week, when Palmer told reporters that Johnson had assured him he would show up for mandatory team activities, the receiver took issue with him.

“I take it with a grain of salt,” said Palmer, who is working out with the team in Cincinnati. “I’ve moved on and I’m over it. I’m not really going to comment on it much more.”

Asked if the two could get along if Johnson stays, Palmer said, “I’ve always been a forgiving guy, and I hope he’s here because he’s a good player, and I hope to see him here.”

It’s been an eventful month for the Bengals. Besides getting rid of Henry, they had linebacker Odell Thurman reinstated by the NFL on Monday. Thurman was suspended for the last two seasons after skipping a drug test and getting arrested for drunken driving.

Lewis said Thurman still must prove he can stay out of trouble.

“There’s an opportunity, possibly, if we want, to keep him on the football team and have the opportunity for him to compete for a roster spot,” Lewis said. “He’s got to do things the right way constantly. That still remains to be seen, whether he can handle that kind of scrutiny day-in and day-out.”

Pollack, a first-round pick out of Georgia in 2005, hurt his neck in the second game of the 2006 season. He had surgery and has made a full recovery from the injury, but doesn’t want to take the risk of hurting the neck again.

Lewis talked to Pollack earlier this month to get an idea of his plans.

“David has expressed to me: Where he’s headed is retirement,” Lewis said. “He is not completely comfortable (with) where he is medically.”

I back Marvin 100% here. Call his bluff.

[HoosierCat]

1. How could the Bengals afford to take the dreaded "cap hit" for Chad and 2 first round picks?

The cap hit thing has been gone over before, but briefly, Chad counts $6 million if he stays on the roster, so the net hit from trading him is just $2 million. If the espn report is correct and the Bengals can designate the trade as a post-June-1 trade, then they could spread the hit out over two years ($4 million each this year and next) so they would actually gain $2 million in cap space this year.

2. What purpose does it serve for the Bengals to consistently state they are not going to trade him? Hell, let it be known he's being shopped and let the NFCN bidding begin.

Dunno but it seems to have worked so far, eh?

[Horsemen]

(Jerry Jones will never be misidentified as a great mind)

Greater then Mike Browns mind...

[kingwilly]

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.

It's only a bad decision if you think Chad is actually going to sit out the season. Everyone knows he won't. In which case it's a decision not to trade a top-tier wideout for a first round pick in a draft in which no WR appears to approach his talent. That's certainly not a clear-cut case of failing to improve the team, to say the least. And without knowing what the escalators are for that 3rd rounder next year, you can't count on it being anything but a 3rd.

All we've learned to day is that the Bengals, despite their alleged rock-solid no-trade position, are indeed listening to offers. And that their price for Chad is something along the lines of two firsts. And that one team has offered a first and a third (with unknown escalators to a first). If you are the Bengals, why be in a rush? Heck, you are actually thisclose to getting your price.

If the Bengals are going to call his bluff and let him sit out, then that must be a one-way ticket, ie, you sit, you are suspended with no coming back. No coming to play when it suits ou. You want to sit, you sit. Force the pecker to lose a season for all his horseshiit. This is not some threat where he is gone and then one day in October he just wanders back to the practice field and everybody hugs and moves on. Nope. you are out. have a nice fall raking leaves.

[BengalszoneBilly]

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.

It's only a bad decision if you think Chad is actually going to sit out the season. Everyone knows he won't. In which case it's a decision not to trade a top-tier wideout for a first round pick in a draft in which no WR appears to approach his talent. That's certainly not a clear-cut case of failing to improve the team, to say the least. And without knowing what the escalators are for that 3rd rounder next year, you can't count on it being anything but a 3rd.

All we've learned to day is that the Bengals, despite their alleged rock-solid no-trade position, are indeed listening to offers. And that their price for Chad is something along the lines of two firsts. And that one team has offered a first and a third (with unknown escalators to a first). If you are the Bengals, why be in a rush? Heck, you are actually thisclose to getting your price.

If the Bengals are going to call his bluff and let him sit out, then that must be a one-way ticket, ie, you sit, you are suspended with no coming back. No coming to play when it suits ou. You want to sit, you sit. Force the pecker to lose a season for all his horseshiit. This is not some threat where he is gone and then one day in October he just wanders back to the practice field and everybody hugs and moves on. Nope. you are out. have a nice fall raking leaves.

The game Marvin and the Bengals are playing is called "Hard Ball." What a great game!

[Ickey44]

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.

I agree to a point. Everyone up here drooling all over the place thinking about who the Bengals will get is akin to a kid in a candy store. Has it crossed anyone's mind that the Bengals may intend NOT to trade him? As much as it will suck this year with him as a distraction, I would love to see an NFL team stick it to one of these rich, spoiled, malcontent, infantile players and let him sit. If he shows up on week 10 the Bengals do have to make a spot on the roster for him, but they don't have to play him. If he starts running his mouth, suspend him.

Anyway, that's what I think...

[sparky151]

I wouldn't mind trading Chad if we get a good offer. Picks 22 and 28 would get it done. If Washington offers this year's first and next year's first (firm, not conditional) plus something else to reflect the discount of waiting a year, I'd do that. Washington has a rookie coach and plays in a very competitive division. They might well finish in last place with next years pick being in the top half of the first round.

The other thing is that there seems to be evidence of tampering here. Once he's traded the Bengals can file complaints vs the various teams that tampered and maybe get something extra.

I'd also be open to trading Chad for players as well as picks. Not interested in Bobby Carpenter though. He's a good athlete but not very impactful.

Best we might reasonably hope for is a first this year, a first next year plus a 3rd or 4th this year to compensate for waiting. That's 3 picks with a chance next year's will be a high one. A mid to late first could get us a DE like Merling, a LB like Mayo, a RB like Stewart, or a WR like Hardy. We'll probably have to draft two WRs this year anyway, one to replace Henry and one as a returner. We could also afford to give up a pick to trade up and ensure Ellis or offer a pick to another team for a veteran receiver who isn't at Chad's level but is solid with some upside that Carson can bring out.

[NJ29]

I'm all for the team standing it's ground, but at what point do you hurt the team in order to make a point?

[BengalszoneBilly]

I'm all for the team standing it's ground, but at what point do you hurt the team in order to make a point?

At what point do you give in and let every player with a greedy agent make them trade you. You pick which hurts the team most. I say the one being a chump and let every malcontent walk on you.

[HoosierCat]

I'm all for the team standing it's ground, but at what point do you hurt the team in order to make a point?

Again, no need to rush. Just as Stacy Andrews has no huge incentive to sign a long-term deal with the Bengals unless they break the bank, because he knows he'll get paid if he hits FA next year, the Bengals have no huge incentive to deal Chad ahead of draft day unless they get a blockbuster offer. They pretty much know they could deal him to Dallas or Washington for a first. DC might even kick in a bit more (why else would Marvin rush to un-deny his denial? Let's not anger that nice Danny Snyder!).

But depending on how things fall, dealing him might not be the best move. Heck, everyone says this is not a particularly great draft, maybe it turns out to be better to wait until later, deal him to some team this summer, and take picks in 2009 and maybe 2010 with an eye on that (as someone mentioned earlier) Patriots-like long-term improvement.

Bottom line: I may not like Mikey very much, but if there is one thing he can do, it's negotiate. I'm willing to let him play this out.

[kingwilly]

I'm all for the team standing it's ground, but at what point do you hurt the team in order to make a point?

Again, no need to rush. Just as Stacy Andrews has no huge incentive to sign a long-term deal with the Bengals unless they break the bank, because he knows he'll get paid if he hits FA next year, the Bengals have no huge incentive to deal Chad ahead of draft day unless they get a blockbuster offer. They pretty much know they could deal him to Dallas or Washington for a first. DC might even kick in a bit more (why else would Marvin rush to un-deny his denial? Let's not anger that nice Danny Snyder!).

But depending on how things fall, dealing him might not be the best move. Heck, everyone says this is not a particularly great draft, maybe it turns out to be better to wait until later, deal him to some team this summer, and take picks in 2009 and maybe 2010 with an eye on that (as someone mentioned earlier) Patriots-like long-term improvement.

Bottom line: I may not like Mikey very much, but if there is one thing he can do, it's negotiate. I'm willing to let him play this out.

That is Mikey, king of the pyrrhic victory!

There are two ways to go:

1. Screw Chad as much as possible, and by extension the team, by sitting him the whole season and driving his value down, ruining the morale of the team by virtue of the constant storyline of CJ being absent and depriving the team of the extra picks that would result in a pre-draft deal.

<or>

2. Use the countdown to the draft to increase interest and accelerate bidding for CJ and deal him for the maximal value Saturday, thereby gaining the team the extra picks needed to overcome the current defensive personnel deficiencies, losses at WR and begin the "healing" process as quickly as possible.

Given SoP's and the FO's track record of "hard nose" negotiating, you all can decide which option is most likely.

All of this aside, I will respect the organization more if they just screw CJ over. But as a fan, I'd really like those extra picks and the promise that would exist in a new era for the team without CJ(douche-o cinco) that could result.

damn this whole thing pisses me off.

[GregCook]

I wonder if the Bengals have gone from "no trade, no way" to "no trade, unless you blow me away" ? I find it interesting that just before the draft a firm, credible offer is thrown out there and of course its leaked. Would a first and 2ed do it? Or are the Bengals holding out for 2 first rounders? I'm guessing that now, its the Bengals seeing who will pay up. If they don't get the deal they want, its status quo.

[Kazkal]

Depends on the requirements of next years pick,If it was have a 1000+ yard season for a 1st sure I'd be up for it.

But if it was Probowl 1,600 yards play in all 16 games type of crap then I'd say wait it out till they just offered up the 2009 1st with no kickers.

[HoosierCat]

I wonder if the Bengals have gone from "no trade, no way" to "no trade, unless you blow me away" ? I find it interesting that just before the draft a firm, credible offer is thrown out there and of course its leaked. Would a first and 2ed do it? Or are the Bengals holding out for 2 first rounders? I'm guessing that now, its the Bengals seeing who will pay up. If they don't get the deal they want, its status quo.

That's it in a nutshell.

[BengalszoneBilly]

I wonder if the Bengals have gone from "no trade, no way" to "no trade, unless you blow me away" ? I find it interesting that just before the draft a firm, credible offer is thrown out there and of course its leaked. Would a first and 2ed do it? Or are the Bengals holding out for 2 first rounders? I'm guessing that now, its the Bengals seeing who will pay up. If they don't get the deal they want, its status quo.

That's it in a nutshell.

I disagree. I don't think the organization is holding out for a goddam thing. I think they're sending a message here, and that will be heard loud and clear. If they wanted a good deal, they could have had it with Washington's offer, but they declined.

Wish all you want, but Mike Brown and Marvin Lewis are wielding the hammer. There will be no deals. They will make Chad honor his word or sit out.

We as people are born into this world with few thing we can give. Love is one, respect is another, and our word is the last. If you cannot stand by these three principals, what can you stand by?

[HoosierCat]

I wonder if the Bengals have gone from "no trade, no way" to "no trade, unless you blow me away" ? I find it interesting that just before the draft a firm, credible offer is thrown out there and of course its leaked. Would a first and 2ed do it? Or are the Bengals holding out for 2 first rounders? I'm guessing that now, its the Bengals seeing who will pay up. If they don't get the deal they want, its status quo.

That's it in a nutshell.

I disagree. I don't think the organization is holding out for a goddam thing. I think they're sending a message here, and that will be heard loud and clear. If they wanted a good deal, they could have had it with Washington's offer, but they declined.

Wish all you want, but Mike Brown and Marvin Lewis are wielding the hammer. There will be no deals. They will make Chad honor his word or sit out.

We as people are born into this world with few thing we can give. Love is one, respect is another, and our word is the last. If you cannot stand by these three principals, what can you stand by?

Well, obviously we're going to have to disagree about what constitutes a good deal for Chad. Beyond that, while I appreciate the sentiment you express, and agree with it, I think you are falling prey to "Ocho Cinqo Disease" here and letting your emotions get the best of you. It's just football, billy. Outside of us loony fans, no one really gives a poop. And inside, this is how the sausage gets made. Same crap is starting up in your neck of the woods; reports are Boldin has just told the Cards he wants out 'cause they won't give him big bucks just like Larry got. The Bengals will deal Chad if it makes sense...if not, he'll be in stripes on opening day.

[HoosierCat]

Just a data point for the debate over what Chad is worth:

NFL.com's Adam Schefter is reporting that the Minnesota Vikings will send three, count 'em, three picks THIS YEAR -- their first, and two thirds -- to KC for DE Jared Allen. IIRC, the Vikes have the 17th, or thereabouts, pick.

In light of that, is Chad worth more than a 20-something pick this year and a 3rd next year? At this point, I have to think so.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Well, obviously we're going to have to disagree about what constitutes a good deal for Chad. Beyond that, while I appreciate the sentiment you express, and agree with it, I think you are falling prey to "Ocho Cinqo Disease" here and letting your emotions get the best of you. It's just football, billy.

No Dave, it's not just football. It's a statement on society. If someone whines, we give them their way? Sorry, but I'm from the school of "Put A Boot In Their A$$". Give in now, and you set a precedent. Once that is set in place, be prepared to bend over and grab 'em on a very regular basis.

You have to draw a line somewhere. I say here.

[HoosierCat]

Well, obviously we're going to have to disagree about what constitutes a good deal for Chad. Beyond that, while I appreciate the sentiment you express, and agree with it, I think you are falling prey to "Ocho Cinqo Disease" here and letting your emotions get the best of you. It's just football, billy.

No Dave, it's not just football. It's a statement on society. If someone whines, we give them their way? Sorry, but I'm from the school of "Put A Boot In Their A$$". Give in now, and you set a precedent. Once that is set in place, be prepared to bend over and grab 'em on a very regular basis.

You have to draw a line somewhere. I say here.

Oh, no doubt you have to draw the line against whining. As a parent I draw it every day. Several times. OK, about once ever 5-10 minutes. But let's not forget that precedent has already been set in the NFL. From Pickens to Dillon to TO to Moss to on and on, whining guys have got their way. It's how the system has (and, I grant you, unfortunately) evolved. And Mikey, to his credit, has worked to make sure he either gets maximum value for giving in, or makes sure the whiner is in stripes and on the sidelines in September. Like I said before, I'm willing to let him play this one out. Deal him or keep him, at this point I'll trust his call.

Yeah, I just said that whatever Mikey does I'd support him. Somewhere, Hair's head just exploded.

[kingwilly]

...question:

Why does the ESPN article read as if ML had no idea about the DC offer until "AFTER" he read about it? Is he not involved in these types of discussions or is the situation such that noone is really thinking a trade for CJ is even possible and the FO just flatly says "No" to save everyone the hassle?

[BengalszoneBilly]

Oh, no doubt you have to draw the line against whining. As a parent I draw it every day. Several times. OK, about once ever 5-10 minutes. But let's not forget that precedent has already been set in the NFL.

True, it has already been set. The sad part is it wasn't in the right place, eh?

If you or I regular Joe's signed a contract to anything, and for whatever reason we decided we didn't want to abide by said contract, what would be the odds of it coming out in our favor? I'm thinking two options here:

Slim and none.

That's why I am fully behind making Chad stand behind the contract he signed. It's what a man would do.

[TJJackson]

Because it makes for a more evocative read for it to be written that way. Truth be damned