Question of the Day: Bring Tank Johnson back?

by Josh Kirkendall on Feb 21, 2010 4:02 PM EST in Analysis

I remember watching Hard Knocks last summer when Tank Johnson asked, during a player security meeting, if it was possible to change Google results to, you know, easily forget that anything actually happened in Chicago. Like you, I thought to myself, oh man, everyone is going to have a field day with this.

At the time, Johnson hadn't proven much to Bengals fans and most had the whole "character issue" ahead of the thinking benefit he could bring to the field. In 14 games played (13 starts), Johnson recorded 39 tackles and two quarterback sacks. Furthermore, as the season closed and as Tank was getting healthier, he proved to be a solid defensive tackle again recording five tackles against the Vikings -- including a quarterback sack -- and seven tackles against the Kansas City Chiefs -- including two for loss. For a defensive tackle that signed for $620,000, that's not bad. Consider if he signed something similar, maybe incentive based, for a full season with a healthy Tank would only help the Bengals improve their fourth ranked defense.

When asked if the head coach would like Tank Johnson (and Roy Williams) back, Marvin Lewis said, "Oh yeah, they came in and did a great job and provided what we were looking for."

Here's the question of the day. Would you support bringing Tank Johnson back?

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Definitely, Tank did a great job. I wouldn’t break the bank to keep him, but I think he’s solid and worth keeping around

by The Dealio on Feb 21, 2010 4:28 PM EST reply actions

Ya i think they should totally sign him back!!! He did a good job!!!

by BradKellerDA on Feb 21, 2010 4:39 PM EST reply actions

I think we need him

He isn’t the future at DT, but he’s Mr. Right Now. Sign him…draft a DT and see what happens.

by goffchile on Feb 21, 2010 5:06 PM EST reply actions

of course

by Mr. X on Feb 21, 2010 5:08 PM EST reply actions

As long as it don't break the bank bring back Tank

I think we should denfinately bring him back and draft a DT

by The Natti Daddi on Feb 21, 2010 5:09 PM EST reply actions

Agreed… and agreed.

For those who can't remember the uncapped FA rules, this link's for you.

by FriarBob on Feb 21, 2010 5:13 PM EST up reply actions

3 year 8 million should be the offer

$1.1m for 2010
$2.9m year 2011
$4.0m year 2012

that would be a fair offer, we still have pat sims as our 2/3 DT

www.fantasydaddy.com

by Joe Goodberry on Feb 21, 2010 5:35 PM EST reply actions

Yes Sir

Bring him back. Zim loves him…and his name is tank!

by Alex Kuhns on Feb 21, 2010 5:36 PM EST reply actions

Don't Bring Him Back!!!

JK, I thought this debate needed some controversy….

This is our year!

by Paul Cannon on Feb 21, 2010 8:00 PM EST reply actions

hell yes, and pay the man. tank was a beast on the line all year, and he and peko make up a pretty dominant tandem. he’s also an underrated mental player.

i'm going to go america all over your ass!

by Raging Clue on Feb 21, 2010 10:38 PM EST reply actions

wouldn't go that far

Peko, Simms and Tank had 2.5 sacks for the enitre year between the 3 of them… thats 2nd worst in the league for 4-3 teams interior D-lineman behind the 1-15 rams by only .5 sack… historically all the great 4-3 teams have their interior DL avg 10+ sacks a year… then look at all the great 3-techs like La-Roi Glover’s 17 sack season in 2000 and guys like Kevin Williams, Rod Coleman and thee 3-tech DT standard Warren Sapp… all had multiple 10+ sack seasons. Peko and Simms are both 1-techs and you can’t expect much sack wise from them, rightly so… but to be great we need the 3-tech DT opposite of Peko to be a 7-8 sack a year average guy… I like Tank, he is a solid DT and should be re-signed to let the Drafted DT get time to progress… but his 2 sacks last year and 2.5 sack a year career average isn’t the answer either…

by Jaydolla on Feb 21, 2010 11:38 PM EST up reply actions

the contribution from dt’s in the pass rush game doesn’t come in sack numbers. sacks are a completely meaningless stat when dealing with defensive tackles. tank was constantly creating pressure and collapsing the pocket, but what impressed me the most about his play was in the run game, which was supposed to be his weakness. i’d argue that he was our second-best run stopper behind peko.

i'm going to go america all over your ass!

by Raging Clue on Feb 22, 2010 10:31 AM EST up reply actions

don't take this wrong but...

you clearly don’t understand how a 4-3 system works…. or what a 3-technique is or what his job is

by Jaydolla on Feb 22, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions

i’m not worried about a 4-3 system in general, just the system this team uses; and that system employs the tackles to do exactly as i stated before. the job of the defensive tackle in this defense, as stated by marvin lewis and mike zimmer, is to collapse the pocket in the pass game and take up blockers in the run game.

i'm going to go america all over your ass!

by Raging Clue on Feb 27, 2010 10:22 PM EST up reply actions

The Bengals need TANK because he is the only

DT on the roster who can rush the QB. Now with that said……The Bengals are in desperate need for a pass rushing DT.(can you imagine if the shaun rogers trade had went through) who can collapse the pocket and not allow the opposing QB to step up. It has to be addressed this year in the draft because teams just don’t let thease type players to hit the market. I was hoping that we would have a chance at Seymour but not even the Raiders would be stupid enough to let him walk.

Kenneth Lewis Moore

by lightskin350 on Feb 22, 2010 2:09 AM EST reply actions

Absolutely. If it comes down to a bidding war then don't break the bank as many have said,

but if at all possible he needs to be in stripes again next year. No doubt about it.

by Craig Conrad on Feb 22, 2010 7:41 AM EST reply actions

YESH!

He was a solid player for the Bengals D. I agree with finding some fresh players in the draft and FA but there’s no reason to believe he won’t be able to contribute in 2010.

by UpStateMike on Feb 22, 2010 9:14 AM EST reply actions

His foot injury effected his play. If he healthy you can expect more contributions. I would bring him back, but I would also find out what KC would want for Glenn Dorsey. They play a 3-4 and Dorsey is better suited for a 4-3. I read he’s on the trading block. I would seriously look into what the purchase price would be.

by redberkey on Feb 22, 2010 12:12 PM EST reply actions

I don't want anything to do with Dorsey.

He was very nearly too fat to even play football this year. No motivation whatsoever. No thank you.

by Craig Conrad on Feb 22, 2010 5:26 PM EST up reply actions

Well was he too fat to play because he was lazy, or was he too fat because they were asking him to bulk up to play in a 3-4? Or something else entirely?

I suspect it was disgust with the organization, in which case I can’t really expect him to be more motivated for us either. But armchair QBs like us can’t really be sure.

For those who can't remember the uncapped FA rules, this link's for you.

by FriarBob on Feb 23, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions

Yes to Tank, No to Roy

I was skeptical during the season on Tank, due to his foot problems. Plantar fascitis (sp?) can affect players for awhile. He toughed it out in the last half, but how much of that was due to playing for a contract? If he signs a 3-yr deal, what is he going to do if the foot problem returns in week 5 this season? Maybe this time he can’t go, and he sits for 5 weeks, or goes on IR….
I know ~~- too pessimistic -~~- but you have to think about what can go wrong.
Still …. I don’t think they have any choice but to re-sign him. It would be great to come up with a guy they can develop in the draft — perhaps round 3 or 4.

As for Roy Williams — good locker-room guy and all that — but no thanks. That forearm looks like it will never be the same. Why take a chance on that? They already have Crocker, who is a kind of a poor man’s WIlliams. But still, a healthy Crocker is better than Williams on IR.

by California Bengal Fan on Feb 23, 2010 6:11 PM EST reply actions