Chad ain't goin' nowhere (1 Viewer)

[twitch]

I keep seeing "Screw him, let him ride the pine". As someone who has close ties with the Eagles organization and knows first hand what Owens put them through, I can't strongly enough express how bad an idea this is. I too thought the way you did and I'm sure you could dig up quotes saying the exact same thing about Owens. Johnson will divide the locker room and be a general distraction and pain in the ###.

Long story short, it ain't worth it......

So you let the second best wide receiver on your team cry, #####, and moan until he gets his way. I hope your not raising kids with that philosophy.

I hope noone views their kids as employees. Employees are expendable and can be replaced, and in some cases, actually upgraded. Kids, not so much.

Yeah I'm not in favor of giving a #####ing, complaining employee what they want either. You punish your malcontent employees which is exactly what Lewis is proposing

Chad Johnson probably has roughly twice as much money in his bank account as Marvin Lewis. I mention that only to point out that he can actually afford to sit out a season financially. Ive never seen that guy in a $5000 suit or driving a $300,000 Bentley. He's made big bucks for a few years. He's a major endorser. He's a top 5 athlete at his position. Marvin Lewis is a decent coach that really hasnt done anything as the head guy. He's a defensive coach who's defense is an embarassment. He's punished that team himself for years now by not improving the defense. And now he's about to hurt his organization by attempting to punish a player who simply doesnt want to play there anymore? I dont think its really Lewis' decision exclusively. Im sure this strategy trickles down from ownership, which is of course among the very worst in professional sports. Why does the rest of the entire world see this stance of the Bengals organization as a grave mistake, yet the dogs caught up in the fight cant see the forest thru the trees? Because theyre not thinking clearly. Theyre so mad over the situation that they cant do what's really best for their organization. Youve got another team volunteering a 1st and at minimum an additional 3rd, more than likely a 2nd or another 1st, for what is currently a problem player, and youre trying to PUNISH someone?? That's just knucklehead thinking. Plain and simple.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

I keep seeing "Screw him, let him ride the pine". As someone who has close ties with the Eagles organization and knows first hand what Owens put them through, I can't strongly enough express how bad an idea this is. I too thought the way you did and I'm sure you could dig up quotes saying the exact same thing about Owens. Johnson will divide the locker room and be a general distraction and pain in the ###.

Long story short, it ain't worth it......

So you let the second best wide receiver on your team cry, #####, and moan until he gets his way. I hope your not raising kids with that philosophy.

I hope noone views their kids as employees. Employees are expendable and can be replaced, and in some cases, actually upgraded. Kids, not so much.

Yeah I'm not in favor of giving a #####ing, complaining employee what they want either. You punish your malcontent employees which is exactly what Lewis is proposing

Chad Johnson probably has roughly twice as much money in his bank account as Marvin Lewis. I mention that only to point out that he can actually afford to sit out a season financially. Ive never seen that guy in a $5000 suit or driving a $300,000 Bentley. He's made big bucks for a few years. He's a major endorser. He's a top 5 athlete at his position. Marvin Lewis is a decent coach that really hasnt done anything as the head guy. He's a defensive coach who's defense is an embarassment. He's punished that team himself for years now by not improving the defense. And now he's about to hurt his organization by attempting to punish a player who simply doesnt want to play there anymore? I dont think its really Lewis' decision exclusively. Im sure this strategy trickles down from ownership, which is of course among the very worst in professional sports. Why does the rest of the entire world see this stance of the Bengals organization as a grave mistake, yet the dogs caught up in the fight cant see the forest thru the trees? Because theyre not thinking clearly. Theyre so mad over the situation that they cant do what's really best for their organization. Youve got another team volunteering a 1st and at minimum an additional 3rd, more than likely a 2nd or another 1st, for what is currently a problem player, and youre trying to PUNISH someone?? That's just knucklehead thinking. Plain and simple.

Of course he can afford to sit out for one year. He just took 16 mil of the Bengals' money over the last 2 years. It's not about whether he can afford to. The question is whether he can stand to sit out for, not one, but the next four years. I think that answer is no.I think you're right that this is coming from ownership. While they have been horrible and cheap in the past, they haven't been that way to Chad. You have to remember that just 2 years ago, they extended Chad's contract even though he had 4 years left, an act that even Rosenhaus called unprecedented. The Bengals aren't the 1st team to force a player to sit out and they won't be the last. This isn't about punishing him. Why shouldn't he have to honor his contract?

 

[Godsbrother]

Chad Johnson probably has roughly twice as much money in his bank account as Marvin Lewis. I mention that only to point out that he can actually afford to sit out a season financially. Ive never seen that guy in a $5000 suit or driving a $300,000 Bentley. He's made big bucks for a few years. He's a major endorser. He's a top 5 athlete at his position. Marvin Lewis is a decent coach that really hasnt done anything as the head guy. He's a defensive coach who's defense is an embarassment. He's punished that team himself for years now by not improving the defense. And now he's about to hurt his organization by attempting to punish a player who simply doesnt want to play there anymore? I dont think its really Lewis' decision exclusively. Im sure this strategy trickles down from ownership, which is of course among the very worst in professional sports. Why does the rest of the entire world see this stance of the Bengals organization as a grave mistake, yet the dogs caught up in the fight cant see the forest thru the trees? Because theyre not thinking clearly. Theyre so mad over the situation that they cant do what's really best for their organization. Youve got another team volunteering a 1st and at minimum an additional 3rd, more than likely a 2nd or another 1st, for what is currently a problem player, and youre trying to PUNISH someone?? That's just knucklehead thinking. Plain and simple.

Chad Johnson is not going to sit out the season. He can whine, moan and threaten all he wants but it does him absolutely NO GOOD to sit out because he is Bengals property for 4 years. If he sits out 5 years he'll still owe the Bengals 4 seasons. If he were in the final year of his contract it might make sense to sit for 10 games and then report for the final 6 to fulfill the contract but that is not the case. CJ is stuck.The ball is in the Bengals court -- they have to decide whether to keep Johnson and put up with his BS or work out a trade that gives them the best value. Personally I would have taken the deal the Redskins offered and never looked back. It is not a question of setting a precedent or giving in -- at this point CJ is a cancer on a team with smoker's lung.

 

[twitch]

I keep seeing "Screw him, let him ride the pine". As someone who has close ties with the Eagles organization and knows first hand what Owens put them through, I can't strongly enough express how bad an idea this is. I too thought the way you did and I'm sure you could dig up quotes saying the exact same thing about Owens. Johnson will divide the locker room and be a general distraction and pain in the ###.

Long story short, it ain't worth it......

So you let the second best wide receiver on your team cry, #####, and moan until he gets his way. I hope your not raising kids with that philosophy.

I hope noone views their kids as employees. Employees are expendable and can be replaced, and in some cases, actually upgraded. Kids, not so much.

Yeah I'm not in favor of giving a #####ing, complaining employee what they want either. You punish your malcontent employees which is exactly what Lewis is proposing

Chad Johnson probably has roughly twice as much money in his bank account as Marvin Lewis. I mention that only to point out that he can actually afford to sit out a season financially. Ive never seen that guy in a $5000 suit or driving a $300,000 Bentley. He's made big bucks for a few years. He's a major endorser. He's a top 5 athlete at his position. Marvin Lewis is a decent coach that really hasnt done anything as the head guy. He's a defensive coach who's defense is an embarassment. He's punished that team himself for years now by not improving the defense. And now he's about to hurt his organization by attempting to punish a player who simply doesnt want to play there anymore? I dont think its really Lewis' decision exclusively. Im sure this strategy trickles down from ownership, which is of course among the very worst in professional sports. Why does the rest of the entire world see this stance of the Bengals organization as a grave mistake, yet the dogs caught up in the fight cant see the forest thru the trees? Because theyre not thinking clearly. Theyre so mad over the situation that they cant do what's really best for their organization. Youve got another team volunteering a 1st and at minimum an additional 3rd, more than likely a 2nd or another 1st, for what is currently a problem player, and youre trying to PUNISH someone?? That's just knucklehead thinking. Plain and simple.

Of course he can afford to sit out for one year. He just took 16 mil of the Bengals' money over the last 2 years. It's not about whether he can afford to. The question is whether he can stand to sit out for, not one, but the next four years. I think that answer is no.I think you're right that this is coming from ownership. While they have been horrible and cheap in the past, they haven't been that way to Chad. You have to remember that just 2 years ago, they extended Chad's contract even though he had 4 years left, an act that even Rosenhaus called unprecedented. The Bengals aren't the 1st team to force a player to sit out and they won't be the last. This isn't about punishing him. Why shouldn't he have to honor his contract?

I would respectfully disagree with your stance that its not about punishing the guy. And I dont necessarily support his unwillingness to 'honor' that contract. But this is a relationship that is obviously beyond repair. And I really blame Chad Johnson because he gave up on the Bengals. But nevertheless, you just cant avoid the reality of the situation. Btw, how many guys have actually been forced to sit out an entire season in recent memory? How many ownership groups have done that to premier athletes? Someone on Chad Johnson's level, drawing 2-draft, 1st round value? Got any names? Im drawing a blank right now.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

I keep seeing "Screw him, let him ride the pine". As someone who has close ties with the Eagles organization and knows first hand what Owens put them through, I can't strongly enough express how bad an idea this is. I too thought the way you did and I'm sure you could dig up quotes saying the exact same thing about Owens. Johnson will divide the locker room and be a general distraction and pain in the ###.

Long story short, it ain't worth it......

So you let the second best wide receiver on your team cry, #####, and moan until he gets his way. I hope your not raising kids with that philosophy.

I hope noone views their kids as employees. Employees are expendable and can be replaced, and in some cases, actually upgraded. Kids, not so much.

Yeah I'm not in favor of giving a #####ing, complaining employee what they want either. You punish your malcontent employees which is exactly what Lewis is proposing

Chad Johnson probably has roughly twice as much money in his bank account as Marvin Lewis. I mention that only to point out that he can actually afford to sit out a season financially. Ive never seen that guy in a $5000 suit or driving a $300,000 Bentley. He's made big bucks for a few years. He's a major endorser. He's a top 5 athlete at his position. Marvin Lewis is a decent coach that really hasnt done anything as the head guy. He's a defensive coach who's defense is an embarassment. He's punished that team himself for years now by not improving the defense. And now he's about to hurt his organization by attempting to punish a player who simply doesnt want to play there anymore? I dont think its really Lewis' decision exclusively. Im sure this strategy trickles down from ownership, which is of course among the very worst in professional sports. Why does the rest of the entire world see this stance of the Bengals organization as a grave mistake, yet the dogs caught up in the fight cant see the forest thru the trees? Because theyre not thinking clearly. Theyre so mad over the situation that they cant do what's really best for their organization. Youve got another team volunteering a 1st and at minimum an additional 3rd, more than likely a 2nd or another 1st, for what is currently a problem player, and youre trying to PUNISH someone?? That's just knucklehead thinking. Plain and simple.

Of course he can afford to sit out for one year. He just took 16 mil of the Bengals' money over the last 2 years. It's not about whether he can afford to. The question is whether he can stand to sit out for, not one, but the next four years. I think that answer is no.I think you're right that this is coming from ownership. While they have been horrible and cheap in the past, they haven't been that way to Chad. You have to remember that just 2 years ago, they extended Chad's contract even though he had 4 years left, an act that even Rosenhaus called unprecedented. The Bengals aren't the 1st team to force a player to sit out and they won't be the last. This isn't about punishing him. Why shouldn't he have to honor his contract?

I would respectfully disagree with your stance that its not about punishing the guy. And I dont necessarily support his unwillingness to 'honor' that contract. But this is a relationship that is obviously beyond repair. And I really blame Chad Johnson because he gave up on the Bengals. But nevertheless, you just cant avoid the reality of the situation. Btw, how many guys have actually been forced to sit out an entire season in recent memory? How many ownership groups have done that to premier athletes? Someone on Chad Johnson's level, drawing 2-draft, 1st round value? Got any names? Im drawing a blank right now.

I can't think of anyone who sat out the entire year. But I also can't think of a situation where a player began his holdout and ownership gave in. It certainly didn't happen with the Eagles. They made the players report before any change in their status. The threat of sitting out, especially with 4 years remaining on your contract, should not be allowed to become an acceptable bargaining tool.

 

[twitch]

I can't think of anyone who sat out the entire year. But I also can't think of a situation where a player began his holdout and ownership gave in. It certainly didn't happen with the Eagles. They made the players report before any change in their status. The threat of sitting out, especially with 4 years remaining on your contract, should not be allowed to become an acceptable bargaining tool.

There have been plenty of similar situations where players were threatening holdouts, making contract demands, etc. And they get moved all the time. Eric Dickerson and Marshall Faulk are examples of players that were moved for high value. Guys like Randy Moss and TO are examples of cases that were moved a little too late, or not at all, and little or no value was gained. The list of disgruntled athletes who eventually got what they wanted is unfortunately a long one, and neither of us need to explore it further. It will continue to be a practice certain athletes employ 'til the end of time. Why fight it?

The point is that Johnson's days in Cinci are over. The Bengals can fight it and risk getting less value for Johnson when they move him, and continue to let this guy verbally scar their organization, or they can suck it up, strike while the iron is hot and move him now. Theyve had a history or making bad decisions. This is a difficult one. Lets just hope they make the right one.

 

[Lash]

it's a 1st and a conditional third

the other thread on this topic, posters were saying (wrongly) that THE BENGALS WOULD NEVER GET a first and a second or two firsts even though experts in the business were cited as that is what it would take

now that they HAVE GOTTEN EXTREMELY CLOSE to what posters said theyd NEVER get, the same posters are saying there crazy for not taking it LOL

they will get two firsts or CJ isnt going anywhere

they are actually doing this right

 

[sholditch]

Honestly I don't even see that happening. All the talk aside, I think that Chad gets such a thrill playing and all the media attention he gets with his gags and checklists and whatnot, I just don't see him being able to resist taking the field. Also, he has the same agent as Briggs. Though their situations are different (Bangals need Chad more than Bears needed Briggs) the agent and tactics are the same, and I think ultimately the results will be the same. Chad will play, have a great season, and get a big extension/redo offer in the offseason, at which time he will either magically be excited to be a Bengal again, a la Briggs, or renew his pleas for a trade.

I just want to voice my opinion about your comment of the Bengals need Chad. I really don't think Chad makes Cincy a better football team. He does draw fans into the stadium and to Sportscenter but he isn't able to help the current Bengals win. I have a lot of respect for his talent and effort but the Bengals do not need two top ten WRs. They need a defense and offensive linemen, a healthy Rudi and possibly a head coach.

They're expected to get a decent DE or DT in the draft, they just got Odell reinstated, and should be able to pick up OL in the draft as well. Anyway, unless the Bengals get one or more of what you're talking about in a trade for Chad (not impossible) I bet he stays right where he is. If Henry didn't prove to be quite as Thuggalicious as he did, I would agree, but now that he's gone who do they line up opposite TJ? Also, all I was trying to say is that the main difference between his situation and Briggs's is that Briggs wasn't dealing from a particularly strong position, as the bears had Jamar Williams and Michael Okwo waiting in the wings at WLB. Chances are, one of them would have performed decently close to Briggs's level. There probably aren't any receivers on the Bengals that could do that.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

This is the reason you just can't give in to Chad.

From PFT:

LEVI WANTS OUT OF CINCY, TOO

Posted by Mike Florio on April 26, 2008, 12:25 p.m.

Receiver Chad Johnson isn’t the only guy who wants out of Cincinnati.

According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, tackle Levi Jones recently asked for a trade.

Per Schefter, Jones wants out because of disagreements with the coaching staff.

Jones, the tenth overall pick in 2002, is signed through 2012, at salaries of $3 million in 2008, $3 million in 2009, $3.75 million in 2010, $4.55 million in 2011, and $5 million in 2012.

Jones’ interest in leaving is another reason for the Bengals to dig in their heels on Chad Johnson. Once they let Johnson leave, any other player who has a stick in his butt will try to get out, too.

As to Jones, maybe the best way to get his rear end in line is to have Joey Porter (and six other guys) come to town and kick it again.

 

[Chachi]

Rosenhaus(sp) was just on ESPN. He said "sources" have told him the Bengals were offered 2 1st round picks for CJ and the Bengals said No. Rosenhaus made it clear this is not the Redskins and their 1 and possible 1. He made it perfectly clear there was an offer of 2 1st round non-conditional 1st round picks. Sounds like Dallas may have made an offer to me. If this is the case, I would not be surprised then pick #22 comes around to hear the Bengals changed their mind. Cincy can go on and try and make their stand but if they are offered 2 1st rounders for a guy who doesn't want to be there they would be wise to take the deal.