walzav29 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Just a thought. I'd say no, but I wondered if anyone liked the move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 No. Chad is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Nope. Been there done that.Well find somebody. There was a chance that Simpson wasn't coming back next year anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ct_bengal Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 how bout reggie wayne instead? He's close by and i don't think indy will resign him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cincyhokie Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 How about Peter Warrick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkansas Bengal Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 How about Peter Warrick.I would rather have Peter Warrick or even Carl Pickens than Chad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COB Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'd rather play with 10 guys on offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcom69 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Plenty of free agent WRs to fill the spot for Simpson! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 Even if he would come back, he'll have to learn the offense. Ask Tom Brady how that worked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpeldios Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 No, No, No, and ill add a no. Why ruin the good vibe from this past year by moving backwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cHaD711Johnson Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I can't believe that this is a serious question.. :frustrated: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJJackson Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 I'd rather play with 10 guys on offense.This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingwilly Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 F no. And not because he has nothing left to contribute. It's because he is a douche nozzle that frequently clogs with sticky discharge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Its just a f**kin' terrible idea. In all respects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 Thank you for the opportunity to say this yet again...F*CK YOU CHAD !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 No. Negative. Hell naw. Bro, what you smokin'? Give me some. Actually no, that stuff is probably lethal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 Humble pie won't fix the three steps he's lost since he was good. Seriously, at this point, even if he magically learned to run the right route - he's just too slow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 I don't buy any sentence that contains both Chad and the word "humble" either.Not interested in anything that would put Chad anywhere near AJ. 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.