Rosenhaus on his knees

[TJJackson]

Curnutte had this on his blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQxLx4Ong0I...383&index=0

Is this part of the TO script? I did not follow the original TO scenario fully as it played out.....

As I watched this, I found myself muttering "eat sh1t and die" under my breath over and over again

[HoosierCat]

Yeah, I saw that. I had the exact same reaction: boy, is that pathetic or what? Agent makes his own little youtube begging the bengals to trade Chad.

[duus]

I say, "Go Drew!" Wouldn't it just simply be tremendous that he keep pushing and pushing to the point where we get 2 solid first round picks? Or even more.

[jjakq27]

Yeah, I saw that. I had the exact same reaction: boy, is that pathetic or what? Agent makes his own little youtube begging the bengals to trade Chad.

Almost as bad as the rich beotch that was getting divorced and ripped the guy on her own video.

[BengalszoneBilly]

I say, "Go Drew!"

You'd probably be screaming that over and over as he took you from behind, just like what he's trying to do to the Bengals.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I say, "Go Drew!" Wouldn't it just simply be tremendous that he keep pushing and pushing to the point where we get 2 solid first round picks? Or even more.

The funny thing is, he's so damned pushy that if they played it right, they could make Rosenwhore work for them. Tell him they want 3 first round picks (or some ridiculously high value on the trade chart) and turn him loose. If he wants his commission badly enough, he'll make it happen.

That's the funny thing about agents (player, real estate, or otherwise) - since he doesn't get paid by Chad without a deal, his interests are, in a way, more aligned with the Bengals now. He basically works for us. Give him a crazy target, and let him earn it.

[duus]

Here's what I want you to get for us, Drew ... now you go boy:

1. Redskins 1st round this year (#21) and 1st round in 2009 for Chad, including a restructuring of his contract such that our cap hit is about half what it is right now (is that permitted? ... not sure)

then,

2. We trade our #9 and some other pick for the Chiefs #5 ... we get Ellis.

3. With our newly acquired #21 pick, we have various options ... best receiver on the board or o-line. I would take the best receiver given Chad and Henry gone.

4. We still have plenty of picks in this year's draft PLUS we have 2 first rounders in 2009. Keep 'em or trade one for some big old deal. Sky's the limit here.

5. We all send Drew Christmas cards this year.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

1. Redskins 1st round this year (#21) and 1st round in 2009 for Chad, including a restructuring of his contract such that our cap hit is about half what it is right now (is that permitted? ... not sure)

Only if Chad actually reduced his contract with the Bengals, which the union probably will scream bloody murder at. Even then it's probably not possible, because he's already received the bonus, and part of it counted against past years' cap.

The way it works, when you trade him, all the remaining portion of the bonus hits the cap immediately (or spread over 2 years if applicable). But no matter how you distribute it, it all hits right away.

The only question is whether there's some way to get their pick this year, but spread Chad's hit over two years. As I understand it, the two year hit only applies after June 1. So let's say we trade them John Thornton for two first round picks, and on June 2 we trade them Chad Johnson for a conditional 6th round pick in 2057. A little 'wink and a nod' thing done on the down-low.

Yeah, the league won't have any problem with that trade, right?

But it seems to me that if they want 2008 picks, they need to make a deal before the draft (duh) which means no cap split over two years.

Unless...and this is totally crazy...let's say they have a tentative deal with Washington, but we don't want to close before June 1. What if there was a pick who would work with both teams? They need a big WR, and also help at DE. What a coincidence, so do we! So let's say they take such a player, don't negotiate with his agent, and trade his rights to us on June 1. If we got a deal done quick (and let's face it, tampering rules are almost never enforced, especially if the other team's OK with it, so we could be negotiating in May), our minicamp starts June 1. So all the kid would miss is the May three-day minicamp for rookies. No big deal.

Don't know what the NFL could do about it, they couldn't prove anything.

[Walrus]

"It would be GREAT for the Bengals organization to unload a disgruntled player and get two first round picks. According to the reports that I've seen. Obviously I haven't talked to any of the teams -- I don't have permission."

*wink wink, nudge nudge*

[rwalling]

Make the little ferret grovel. LFMAO

[rishipatel]

Here's what I want you to get for us, Drew ... now you go boy:

1. Redskins 1st round this year (#21) and 1st round in 2009 for Chad, including a restructuring of his contract such that our cap hit is about half what it is right now (is that permitted? ... not sure)

As far as my understanding goes, this is not allowed. You can't restructure a player's contract to make the cap hit more friendly before you trade or release that player.

This is why, no matter what, the bengals are on the line for Chad's $8 mill. This really doesn't seem all that bad though if they can spread it over two yrs.

If they can get two extra 1st rounders plus somehow get Ellis in this draft, that would be worth it.

:player:

[HoosierCat]

Again, the cap hit isn't the issue. It's nowhere near as bad as the Bengals would have you believe, and they only get away with saying it is because most sportswriters are like Peter King: bored to tears with the actual nitty-gritty details of how the business they cover actually works. Much easier to write puff pieces on Brett Favre and Bill Belichick.

The big issue is trade compensation. Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders brought this home in a column a couple days ago on espn.com. Though he wasn't directly addressing Chad's trade value, this graph popped out at me:

Of course, there is no precedent for a consistent wide receiver of Johnson's caliber changing teams. Johnson was third in the NFL last year with 1,440 receiving yards, and has five straight seasons with at least 1,200 receiving yards. No wide receiver in NFL history has ever changed teams after two straight 1,200-yard seasons, let alone five. No wide receiver has ever changed teams after five straight 1,000-yard seasons, and only two changed teams after four (Owens and Muhsin Muhammad).

"No wide receiver in NFL history." Any team that want to do a deal on those levels is going to have to pony up more than a low first-rounder and a maybe-better-than-a-third next year.

[blueridge]

When 85 hired Rosenhaus some media pundit ( whose name I cannot recall) warned that something like the T.O. fiasco would transpire in a year or two. I scoffed. Was I wrong. Rosenhaus is such a slimeball. If he wants to facilitate a trade he needs to encourage some other team to make Mike Brown an offer he cannot refuse. Simple as that. Rosenhaus must have Dan Snyder's ear, because the Redskins' offer of a conditional 2009 pick is the kind of s**t that has weasel stink all over it. Anyway, Mike Brown should not seriously consider any offer unless it begins with 2 first round picks. Seriously. I'm telling you that the Bengals have the upper hand as to any potential trade of 85. Their big advantage is that they really seem to have no intention of trading him while Snyder has got the itch.The worst thing the Bengals could do is soften from their currently inflexible position. I hope thy get the unrefusable offer. The Bengals really need the additional picks because of the disastrous drafts of 2004 and 2005. Still, I suspect that 85 will not be traded. Too bad. He hasn't had a truly amusing TD celebration since 2006.

[GregCook]

Mike Brown is refusing to be low balled and you got to respect that.

I do believe Chad is available for the right bid, its just Mike hasn't heard or see it yet. Lets see what happens between now and 3pm ET tomorrow.

If Mike Brown can come out of this with a monster deal for Chad, 2 first round picks, plus a 2ed or 3rd in this years draft, I think Chad can be had and Mike will have made his point. There might be a couple teams willing to pay especially those very close to a championship run, such as Dallas, Washington or teams needing some pizazz like KC with 2 pics in the top 20, Oakland needing someone for JaMarcus to throw too.

[Kazkal]

Hmmmm Drew they didn't offer us 2 1st rounders yet just a chance at 2 tamper some more get us 2 1st's strait up.

[Kirkendall]

Yeah, I saw that. I had the exact same reaction: boy, is that pathetic or what? Agent makes his own little youtube begging the bengals to trade Chad.

He's done, I believe, at least five now specifically for Chad. I think he has several more just simply updating his client list. Anyway, the agency that he does this through routinely emails me about these before they come out so I'm, what's the word, prepared for in-mouth vomit. Anyway, on the website (mine), I started calling him "Oil Slick". The notification emails stopped coming.

Anyway, like I said, if this is the "next question" moment for Chad Johnson, then I'm severely disappointed. I expected more out of both instead of "ahhhhh, c'monnnnnn".

[HoosierCat]

Anyway, on the website (mine), I started calling him "Oil Slick". The notification emails stopped coming.

Now that's funny!

[redsfan2]

I had heard about this while I was on the road, but this was the first chance that I really had to see it.

I was struck ... and deeply moved as well by the " It would make Chad happy " aspect. Well fer chrissakes .. why didn't you say that in the first place ? I mean if it will make CHAD happy then let's all just jump right to it and get this thing done. Cause we alll want happiness for Chad.

How about this ???? Hey Drew . Bite my ass!

Guys on Sirius had what I thought was a good idea. Chad wants out so bad ??? Let him go the same route that Arrington went. Write out that check for 3.5 mil as a buy out on your contract and be on your way.

3.5 from Chad and 2 #1's sounds just about right. That way Chads happy ... Drews happy that Chads happy ... and we're Happy that this soap opera is over.

[BengalChamps]

Mike Brown is refusing to be low balled and you got to respect that.

Wow. Not sure that sentence has ever been used before.

I'm cool with MikeyBoy playing poker. Not sure if he is smart enough to be doing it for the right reason.

I know Chad has awesome stats but HE WILL NOT HAVE SIMILAR STATS WITHOUT A QB LIKE CARSON! He is not a team player and this team will be better without him and his fantasy stats.

[HairOnFire]

The NFL Network and ESPN are both peppered with ex-NFL GM's who overwhelmingly support the Bengals stance and tactics in their dealings with Ocho Doucho. Casserlly, Reese, Kirwan, Lombardi, etc....all agree that you don't negotiate under threat of douchebaggery, nor do you settle for what the Redskins offered.

[BengalszoneBilly]

The NFL Network and ESPN are both peppered with ex-NFL GM's who overwhelmingly support the Bengals stance and tactics in their dealings with Ocho Doucho. Casserlly, Reese, Kirwan, Lombardi, etc....all agree that you don't negotiate under threat of douchebaggery, nor do you settle for what the Redskins offered.

Smart men. We are in short supply here, eh? Many here are far too eager to bend over and grab 'em.

[COB]

The NFL Network and ESPN are both peppered with ex-NFL GM's who overwhelmingly support the Bengals stance and tactics in their dealings with Ocho Doucho. Casserlly, Reese, Kirwan, Lombardi, etc....all agree that you don't negotiate under threat of douchebaggery, nor do you settle for what the Redskins offered.

I suspect those pundits' support for Mike Browns stance is rooted not in what they believe is in the best interests of the Bengals, but in their desire to see Red House get publicly humiliated. Which is something we can all get behind. Pat Kirwan is a joy to listen to. Smart, insightful, he pretty much brings it all to the table.

[BengalszoneBilly]

I suspect those pundits' support for Mike Browns stance is rooted not in what they believe is in the best interests of the Bengals, but in their desire to see Red House get publicly humiliated.

I'd say it's in the best interest of the big picture. As in what's best for the NFL. To let agents continually have their way is short sighted. There needs to be a balance, and this case isn't balancing the beams.

[Kazkal]

On the bengals.com article I found interesting that was mentioned that the thought is bengals are willing trade chad for two first and ocho returns part of his signing bonus....you'd think he'd be willing cough up a few million if it got him a new big deal.