Would the Bengals be better without Chad Johnson?
In some respects, a good argument was made during the New York Giants Super Bowl run, that the team actually became better when Tiki Barber retired and Jeremy Shockey went on IR for the season. Head Coach Tom Coughlin made it a point to change his own character and player approach after 11 seasons as a head coach with the Giants and Jaguars. The Giants didn't win because they made a splash in free agency. Nor did they draft a guy or two that revolutionized their team. A majority of the players were the same team that went 8-8 the year before.
Granted, I'm not a Giants fan. I don't follow them nor keep tabs on their performances. The impression I saw was the Giants became better, after losing good talent, because they united as a team with the distractions long gone.
See, as a Bengals fan, this is why I'm confused. Wide receiver Chad Johnson, this week, reiterated his position that he wants to go to any team other than the Cincinnati Bengals.
Why does he want to leave?
Money?
"Wait a minute, stop 85. It’s always about the money. This is a business. You play this game for a reason, because it’s about the money. We fill those stands for those owners because it’s about the money. Coaches want to win because you get new deals because it’s about the money. Players want to play at a very high level because you get money. … Chad continues to play at a very high level, so he can get that money. But right now in this situation, I don’t want any money from where I am. That’s not what I asked for." [PFT]
Chad, it's pretty hard to know what you want. But we know it's rarely about team, is it? If he's not bear hugged by head coach Marvin Lewis after committing a 15-yard penalty for an end-zone celebration, he's walking out of bounds yards short of a first on fourth down. If he's not dropping critical third down passes that forces a punt to the opposition who scores another touchdown, he's shouting -- whinning? -- to Carson Palmer on national television. If he's not punching coaches in the eye because he's not getting the ball after the world unraveled due to Palmer's knee injury, he's being "restrained." From what exactly? We don't know. Well, we do know. But the team thinks we're suckers for spin.
Chad wants to go to a team to win a playoff game. Perhaps even a Super Bowl. Yet, Chad, the leading nomination for distraction saturated wide receiver this off-season, fails to observe the simple concept of team. No one is stupid enough to actually believe Johnson is willing to do what it takes to be a team and lead them to a playoff win. He shouts at quarterbacks, has to be restrained in a headlock for some unknown reason (umm, punching coaches?), drops critical passes and fails to keep his head in the game -- like trotting out of bounds three yards short of a first on fourth. When I say trot, I mean he didn't even turn around to work nor fight for the first down.
It seems to me, as the off-season goes, that the Bengals will not make any post-season as long as Chad Johnson remains on this team. That's not a slam on his talent nor production. It's a slam on his inability to join the team, be a teammate and work together as a team for a greater goal. Assuming that he's the ring-leader of this broken lockerroom we keep hearing about, I just don't see how the team can unite with Chad Johnson. He's divisive, selfish and angry.
Perhaps, just perhaps, trading Johnson will make the team better. A trade would hurt the team's salary cap. Sure. The passing attack would be too focused on T.J. Houshmandzadeh. However, would that price for a silent unified lockerroom be well worth it?
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Trade Chad?
So...eliminate locker room problems, swap an aging WR on the downhill side of his career for a young stud and -- depending on exactly who we get -- maybe even upgrade the return game to boot? It isn't a slam-dunk given Chad's known on-field production versus a rook's unknown potential, but it's a solid argument for moving on.
Organization
by IgnatiusJReilly on Mar 22, 2008 2:05 PM EDT reply actions
We aren't getting rid of Chad...
I know Chad says he plays for the money. But, I have never heard him say that he wants a new contract. I really think this is about winning. Carson doesn't think the current staff can make the changes needed. And Chad doesn't either. There might be something to it.
Chad will play in Cincy next year.
by sledridge @ Cincy Jungle on Mar 22, 2008 2:51 PM EDT reply actions
The cap hit...
Would the Bengals be better without Chad Johnson?
Re: Chad.
I'm no longer on the bandwagon because let's face it, who in the hell needs this kind of horseshit.
Chad doesn't want to be in Cincinnati and it could be for any number of reasons. It could because his skills are declining or it could be because he wants more money or because he's no longer top dog of the receiving corp to his wanting to bully and control the team and to get whatever he feels he wants.
The prospect, as I see it, is that if Cincy keeps Chad is that he may end up finishing his career running patterns over the middle and taking the punishment that comes along with it. Thinking in proper perspective I don't think we need more cowardice and injuries either.
Basically, as I see it, it's time to move Chad much like they did with Dillon. As I see it he's unhappy and who needs to hear anyone whinning when they really don't have it that bad. It's time to get rid of chad and to get as much as they can get for him.
To me, two things need to happen in Cincinnati. The team needs to make a concentrated effort to put a winning team on the field day in and day out and with that they need to become a perennial contender. Second they need to get rid of players who don't want to play in Cincinnati. I think that #1 will pave the way for #2 to happen. Above all, Cincinnati has to make a commitment to winning and right now the jury is out.
by davidincincinnati on Mar 22, 2008 8:54 PM EDT reply actions
get rid of him
by toolmaker on Mar 22, 2008 10:10 PM EDT reply actions

by 
























