Bengals keep saying no to Chad Johnson trade, but to what end?

Not long after we posted a musing post about the Eagles and Chad Johnson, NFL Network's Adam Schefter reiterates the Bengals position since day one. No. No. No. Almost like a five-year old refusing to eat brussel sprouts. "No matter the offer," Schefter says.  "No matter the circumstances.  No deal."

Sure, a part of me wants the team to keep Chad and let him pout. His off-season character suicide campaign has worked so well that no matter what he says, that he'll remain the idiot -- not, ironically, the Bengals. Those tides could shift though (see below).

But another part of me wonders to what end. Keeping Chad because of over-inflated front office egos to teach a young, rich, spoiled, egomaniac wide receiver a lesson of contract loyalty, doesn't promise any benefit. I could care less for Chad anymore. He's not my concern. The Bengals are. Keep Chad and run the risk of T.J. Houshmandzadeh's prophesy coming true that it will "be a problem". Sure, it would mean giving Chad what he wants. But when he's gone, he's gone. No worries.

Alright, keep Chad. Then when when drops three third down passes, doesn't reach for a pass over the middle in the endzone, obliterates the locker room chemistry, then it's not Chad's fault. It's yours, the organization. The idiots that had a little fun watching Chad squirm -- admittedly, we had fun too -- but this will ultimately confirm that the team is, and here's the word that Marvin Lewis hates, being enablers.

If a first round offer comes around, why not take it? Because Chad needs to fulfill his contract? Look. I'm the first to criticize pampered players, but at the risk of the football team? There's bigger issues here and the team and its fans could literally find themselves the biggest losers in this.

While beat writers and other official web sites claim that the move is something the Bengals can't do, I find myself asking why? Economics? Do you, team officials, beat writers, Cincinnati sports aficionados, mean to tell me that the cost of dumping Chad Johnson outweighs the risk of keeping him? Is there no possible way to trade him? Other than the rookies, what possible signing would need that money that could make a difference? Injury pool?

NFL Network also reports that the Jacksonville Jaguars could be interested in Chad Johnson. Of course, we're sure that if Jacksonville offers their first five picks that the Bengals will say no. It's this type of thing that makes the league laugh at our silly little team.