HoosierCat Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Little note from Curnette in the Enquirer:Also today, there was no confirmation available from the Bengals on whether tailback Rudi Johnson had signed his $6.3 million one-year tender as the team’s franchise player.Maybe he got wind they had a deal in place to send him someplace that sucked like Arizona, so he won't sign?Maybe he's trying to pressure the Bengals into pulling the tag so they can sign other FAs?Maybe there's someone dumb enough to cough up 2 first round picks for him?Maybe his pen just ran out of ink and Staples was closed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Stripes Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 gotta be one of those reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schweinhart Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Well...he's got 6.3 million pretty damn good reasons to sign if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whur CHad At? Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Sign and Trade Rudi for Corey Simon or Shawn Alexanderhey i can dream can't I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted March 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 No surprise, Schaffer is pointing to the Jordan deal as a benchmark for Rudi. At the end it mentioned that Rudi is supposed to sign the tender today...we'll see. From bengals.com:Rudi Johnson agent Peter Schaffer is hoping the five-year contract Jets running back Lamont Jordan signed in Oakland this week provides some sort of a breakthrough in the stalemate with the Bengals. Even though he’s never started in 62 NFL games, Jordan is going to take home a reported $27.5 million.The Jordan contract sent some shock waves around the NFL. All you have to know is that both Johnson and Jordan arrived in the NFL in 2001, Jordan has barely rushed for 1,200 career yards and he got more than four-time 1,000-yard rusher Corey Dillon got in a five-year, $25 million contract. Schaffer and the Bengals won’t discuss their proposals, but the Bengals may not be ready to give Johnson Dillon money. “The issue is what is Rudi’s value and there haven’t been many new running back deals recently,” Schaffer said. “We hope this shows the Bengals and the fans that Rudi is simply looking for a fair-market deal. We’re happy for Lamont Jordan, and when a back that has just 1,200 career yards gets that kind of money, it shows what can happen when you go on the open market. Rudi is certainly a much more accomplished back. And the thing is, Rudi wants to be a Bengal and stay in Cincinnati. The sides have 12 more days to work on a long-term deal before talks have to stop until July 15. Schaffer said he expects Johnson Friday to sign the one-year, $6.3 million franchise tender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bgal Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 The sides have 12 more days to work on a long-term deal before talks have to stop until July 15. Schaffer said he expects Johnson Friday to sign the one-year, $6.3 million franchise tender.I was really hoping for a long term deal, but after this Jordan signing, I highly doubt anything gets done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Maybe he's trying to pressure the Bengals into pulling the tag so they can sign other FAs? The only leverage Rudi has left is agreeing to sign the one year tender and force the Bengals to assume a bigger cap hit than they'd like. Assuming for a minute that the Bengals finally upped their bid a little immediately AFTER putting the tag on Rudi...I'd guess that the Jordan deal dictates the Bengals bid against themselves again before things get serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TippCityRick Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 There will be no long term deal for Rudi in Cincy . . . not after the Jordan deal. As ridiculous as Oakland's signing of Sapp was last year, they have outdone themselves this year. Talk about a roll of the dice. . . they have WAY overpayed for Jordan. I don't believe there is any way that ML is going to pay Dillon numbers to Rudi . . . not with Perry in the wings. Rudi will either be traded or will play one year at 6.3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyline Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 There will be no long term deal for Rudi in Cincy . . . not after the Jordan deal. As ridiculous as Oakland's signing of Sapp was last year, they have outdone themselves this year. Talk about a roll of the dice. . . they have WAY overpayed for Jordan. I don't believe there is any way that ML is going to pay Dillon numbers to Rudi . . . not with Perry in the wings. Rudi will either be traded or will play one year at 6.3. I agree. I read this morning that Rudi's agent was saying the Bengals need to look at the Jordan deal to get an idea of fair market value...I hate agent talk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted March 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Maybe he's trying to pressure the Bengals into pulling the tag so they can sign other FAs?The only leverage Rudi has left is agreeing to sign the one year tender and force the Bengals to assume a bigger cap hit than they'd like. Well, signed or unsigned, the tender still counts against the cap. But if he signs it the Bengals have the option of freeing up the space by dealing him; unsigned the can only cut/restructure elsewhere, or remove the tag, if they find someone else they like. Staying unsigned gives him a touch more leverage, I think.Last I recall hearing the Bengals' last long-term offer to Rudi was rumored to be around $5 million/year. With Jordan at the $5.5 million mark you have to think Rudi & Schaffer have visions of $6 million/year average dancing in their heads. I agree with Rick: it's looking more and more like they'll end up eating the 1-year deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whur CHad At? Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 if you sign him long term, from my understanding you cannot use the "franchise tag" any of those years you sign him long term Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted March 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 if you sign him long term, from my understanding you cannot use the "franchise tag" any of those years you sign him long term You lose the tag for the duration of the contract signed, correct. But teams get around that by having the player sign the 1-year franchise tender first, and then doing a second long-term contract soon after. That way they only lose the tag until the next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whur CHad At? Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 Never thought of that, Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjakq27 Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 The sides have 12 more days to work on a long-term deal before talks have to stop until July 15. Schaffer said he expects Johnson Friday to sign the one-year, $6.3 million franchise tender.I was really hoping for a long term deal, but after this Jordan signing, I highly doubt anything gets done. The bad part is when guys like AL DAvis and Daniel Snider or Jerry Jones overpay a guy by 50 to 100% it f's things up for everyone else and blows up any sense of proportion. Lamont Jordan should have gotten half of what he's getting. Unfortunately that deal screws things up with Rudi since they will be asking for more than what Jordan got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalboomer7 Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 That's why teams like the raiders go to the super bowl one year and then go 4-12 the next. Marvin and co are doing this the right way. I don't like it that much, but Marvin said it best when he said That this gives them the best chance for 2005, or something like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted March 4, 2005 Report Share Posted March 4, 2005 With Jordan at the $5.5 million mark you have to think Rudi & Schaffer have visions of $6 million/year average dancing in their heads. I agree with Rick: it's looking more and more like they'll end up eating the 1-year deal. Fair enough, but eating the one-year deal was never a bad thing.....just a worst case scenario. Look, when you consider what the real market price for a young feature back really is...and we've got something to play off of now, ehh....then that once staggering tender amount starts to look like a years worth of relatively cheap insurance. 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.