UPDATE II: Confirmed. Trade Offer Was Made.

by Kirkendall on Apr 22, 2008 10:55 AM EDT in Chad Johnson Campaign Comment 10 comments

UPDATE II: Alright, alright. So, the report was truthful now.

"Once I actually read what was reported, I have to be truthful and say that the story is accurate," Lewis told ESPN. "Unfortunately, I didn't read it until after our press conference."

So the Bengals DID turn down the offer. I think. I think my head is going to explode. Alas, everyone laughs harder at our silly little team.

UPDATE: Marvin Lewis denies that the Bengals have received any trade offers from the Redskins for Chad Johnson. Not just the Redskins. ANY-one. The Bengals are vehemently denying that any trade offer has taken place. This Washington Post blog writes that " the Redskins are prepared to guarantee Johnson about $21 million as part of a new contract."

The Pro Football Talk guys are adamantly claiming tampering charges because Oil Slick and the Washington Redskins have a "very strong relationship" and that "a situation like this presents the prime example of how unauthorized communications with a player who belongs to another team can undermine that team’s relationship with its player"

Let's go back to that known $21 million guarantee figure in the Washington Post. The Pro Football Talk guys conclude that "the Redskins apparently are doing is 1000 times worse than the conduct that formed the basis for the Bears tampering allegations against the 49ers. In our opinion, the Bengals should file tampering charges against the Redskins today, if for no reason other than to get the Redskins to back off."

ORIGINAL: ESPN is reporting that the Bengals refused a Redskins offer that could have given the Bengals two first round picks in 2008 and 2009. The deal was for the first-round pick in 2008 and a third-round pick in 2009. But if Johnson reached certain performance benchmarks, the 2009 pick could have been upgraded to a first round pick.

I guarantee you that the discussion and attitude with fans instantly went from Chad is a prick, to the Bengals front office are bigger idiots than we realized. Still, everyone laughs at our silly little team.

Poll

Would you have made the trade?

Yes

67 votes

No

25 votes

92 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

HAHA

I absolutely agree. I will renounce my Bengals fan status, if this stupidity continues.

by sgiridharan on Apr 22, 2008 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh man

They could have used that third round pick in 2009 to move up in the draft.

Scenario: Swap spots with Miami or St. Louis and include their third round pick next year or their 2nd rounder this year.

by sgiridharan on Apr 22, 2008 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hm...

That sounds like a pretty good offer but maybe they thought Chad couldn't live up to the performance standards? The Redskins have one of the worst passing offenses in the NFL if I recall correctly and they play in possibly the toughest division of the NFC.

I hope the Bengals are just using this as leverage for a better deal (lower performance standards or a 1st this year, 2nd next year, etc.) If another deal like it comes along before the draft they shouldn't hesitate. If Ocho is still in Cincy by the pre-season, I fear for his life.

by BengalChronic on Apr 22, 2008 11:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Bingo

"That sounds like a pretty good offer but maybe they thought Chad couldn't live up to the performance standards?"

Exactly. We have no idea what upgrading that third might entail. The report said it was both personal and team items. What if included the Skins winning the Super Bowl?

"I hope the Bengals are just using this as leverage for a better deal"

Of course they are. Otherwise why would marvin come back out, reverse his position, and in doing so specifically say the team did NOT reject a 2-firm-first-rounders offer? That's a pretty good indication of what they want, I'd say.

by BeerRun on Apr 22, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

Does it matter though what the performance would be? Heck, I'd take the first pick in 2008 and be done with it. The third round pick for 2009 was icing on the cake.

Though the cake is over cooked now and in the trash.

by Kirkendall on Apr 22, 2008 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, it matters

A first alone doesn't get us anything except a shot a WR less talented than Chad. And Chad is NOT going to sit out the season, if only because if he does, the year doesn't count toward his contract and he's stuck in Cincy until 2012! Give me, oh, two firsts straight up and we'll talk.

by BeerRun on Apr 22, 2008 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Hm...

"I hope the Bengals are just using this as leverage for a better deal..."

I hope so too...but deep down I know that this mess will continue and Chad will remain. Here's the part where Mike Brown proves to the rest of the league that he is incompetent. It all comes down to us being too cheap.

Man...can you imagine if we pulled that trigger? We wouldn't have to worry about Chad anymore and would be salivating on who else to draft at 21.

by mp45242 on Apr 22, 2008 11:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

RE: Better deal?

I don't know. It would seem to me that they're not looking for a better deal. First off, you have ever question of a trade flatly answered with "no, no how, no way" and then this report comes along? It doesn't seem like they are looking for anything at all.

To me, and this is strictly me, but the Bengals should have jumped on this. Unless something is cooking up on draft day... which I doubt especially if teams are convinced that they're offers and questions will go unheard. They'll just give up asking.

The Bengals are going to start looking like fools that worry more about their little egos than smart minds.............. wait.

Even if the Bengals only get a 2009 w/o performance benchmarks to upgrade to a 2009 first round pick, it would still have been a good deal.

by Kirkendall on Apr 22, 2008 11:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Isn't there

some way that we could wrest control of the team from the gene-pool diluted Brown family? Maybe a community-owned franchise ala Green Bay, with a revolving lottery style dispersion of season tickets to account for the significantly larger population here? I mean, Jeebus, the #21 would guarantee us, if not a complete replacement, a reasonable facsimile- maybe a DeSean Jackson for returns as well. I'm with Kirkendall in that it doesn't matter much to me whether the 2009 pick is or is not performance weighted.

However, I still don't quite understand the cap implications- i.e, the hit that seemed to preclude moving Chad at all just a couple days ago, that same hit that would supposedly have us cutting folks exacerbated by having to pay two first round draft picks, and just how much extra room under the cap additional draft picks merit. Any thoughts? Does trading Chad depend on Washington negotiating a new contract with him so that we get out from under it?

Chances are, under new coach Jim Zorn, the Skins will be pretty pass-friendly. Unfortunately, the man doing the passing is suspect at best. It might be more fun to trade him to Miami for the aging but high-character Jason Taylor and picks just so he could see what sitting and waiting on a wounded duck from Cleo Lemon or John Beck does to one's "Hall of Fame 2 0 - -" stats.

by IgnatiusJReilly on Apr 22, 2008 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Interesting take on this at profootballtalk.com

These guys have taken an interesting point of view regarding potential tampering by the Redskins.

The link is on the top of the PFT site, but basically their argument is that there's good possibility Chad is acting like an idiot only to force the Bengals to trade him because he already knows the deal the Redskins will give him (tampering!).

If tampering could be proven, the Bengals would still receive a first round pick without having to trade him, I believe. Stay tuned!

by bengalred on Apr 22, 2008 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs