What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

WTF ever happend to Johnny Johnson - RB NY Jets? (1 Viewer)

Sweet Love

IBL Representative
If you look at his career totals, I find it amazing he did not continue his career after 1994. According to the data below, he amassed 4000 total rushing yards by the time he was 27 (1994) and he never had a season with less than 666 yards rushing. He seemed to be pretty healthy in '94, so why did he never play again.

This was a time when the Jets had few RBs on the roster (just a young Adrian Murrell), but 1995 signaled a coaching change (echhh, the Kotite era). Did Johnny know how bad it would be under Kotite and just walk away from the game (that is a joke...I think)? I have been wondering about him for a while, so any insight would be helpful. Thanks!

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1990 pho | 14 | 234 926 4.0 5 | 25 241 9.6 0 |

| 1991 pho | 15 | 196 666 3.4 4 | 29 225 7.8 2 |

| 1992 pho | 12 | 178 734 4.1 6 | 14 103 7.4 0 |

| 1993 nyj | 15 | 198 821 4.1 3 | 67 641 9.6 1 |

| 1994 nyj | 16 | 240 931 3.9 3 | 42 303 7.2 2 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 72 | 1046 4078 3.9 21 | 177 1513 8.5 5 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Seasons among the league's top 10

Rushes: 1990-9

Yards from scrimmage: 1993-6

 
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:confused:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
 
Here's what happened for those that are interested . . .

________________________________________

SPORTS PEOPLE: FOOTBALL;49ers Sign Ex-Jet Johnson

Print Save Share

DiggFacebookNewsvinePermalink

Published: March 29, 1996

JOHNNY JOHNSON, a onetime Pro Bowl running back who did not play last season after being cut by the Jets in a salary-cap move, was signed yesterday by the San Francisco 49ers in hopes he can revive the team's running game.

"He's got himself in the type of condition and mental frame of mind that I think he's really going to contribute to our club," Coach GEORGE SEIFERT said.

Johnson, 27, signed a two-year, $3 million contract that included a $500,000 signing bonus. He last played in 1994, when he rushed for a career-high 931 yards and five touchdowns in his second year with the Jets, who released him before last season in a financial move.

Johnson spent his first three years in the league with the Arizona Cardinals, rushing for 926 yards in 1990 and going to the Pro Bowl. He was traded to the Jets in 1993.

Earlier this off season, the 49ers failed to land Giants running back RODNEY HAMPTON, who remained in New York after the Giants matched San Francisco's offer sheet. (AP)

________________________________________

49ers welcome Johnson as running back, he says team is a perfect fit.(Originated from Knight-Ridder Newspapers)

Source: Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service

Publication Date: 03/29/1996

Author: Judge, Clark

SANTA CLARA, Calif. _ First, 49ers Coach George Seifert appeared at the team's Santa Clara facility in a sport coat. Then, running back Johnny Johnson appeared, period.

There was nothing ordinary about Thursday afternoon, as the 49ers called off their hunt for a veteran running back by announcing the addition of Johnson, last seen carrying the football for the New York Jets in 1994.

``You are Johnny Johnson?'' asked Seifert in jest, turning to Johnson.

Johnson could have asked the same of Seifert, who normally shows up for news conferences wearing cardigan sweaters.

Yes, seeing was believing. Seven months after the club first thought about acquiring Johnson, it succeeded, with Johnson agreeing to a two-year, $3 million contract that includes an option for the second year.

Johnson's arrival ends a persistent push by the 49ers that began last August when the club explored acquiring him, and continued through mid-season, when the team unsuccessfully renewed its attempts.

A multi-purpose back who is a productive inside runner and an outstanding pass receiver, Johnson is expected to perk up a running game that sank to 23rd last season.

``I don't think there's a better offense that could be suited for my style,'' said Johnson, who gained 931 yards rushing in 1994 before being released by the New York Jets.

It is Johnson's style off the field, however, that has caused him trouble _ beginning with his 1989 suspension from the San Jose State football team and continuing with his failure to appear for three opening days of training camps in Arizona, twice because of holdouts.

As he did in 1993, when Arizona traded him to the Jets, Johnson was called upon Thursday to address criticism that follows him to every stop, and he did so coolly _ admitting that ``not all of it is wrong'' but insisting most of it is inaccurate and undeserved.

``Once you get a label it's hard to break, no matter what you do,'' he said. ``I'm not saying I haven't done some of the stuff you've reported on, but a lot of it is unfair.''

For instance?

_When talks between the 49ers and Johnson broke down last fall, the club questioned whether Johnson wanted to play football again. ``That's ridiculous,'' Johnson said. ``That was never an issue. (When I was released last year) teams had been put together, and they knew pretty much what they wanted to do. The teams we could talk to were limited, and what we could work with were limited. It wasn't a situation where I didn't want to play; it was the fact that what we were working with was limited.''

_Johnson had to demonstrate to the 49ers he was committed, a suggestion underscored by a $750,000 workout bonus in the second year of the contract.

``As long as you guys are going to be out there,'' Johnson told reporters, ``there's always going to be that. There's constant negative stuff written about me. It seems like you guys _ and I mean the media types _ like to wait for someone to trip, and then here it comes all over again.

``As far as me proving something to the Niners, I didn't feel I had to prove anything. I believe my talents have spoken for themselves.''

_His departures from Arizona (1993 trade) and the New York Jets (1995 release) had nothing to do with his attitude.

``The Cardinals wanted to go in a different direction,'' he said. ``They wanted a different back, obviously. It was a time we both needed to step away. As far as the Jets were concerned, that was strictly salary.''

_Johnson was not unwanted last year when he sat out the season.

``We talked with teams, but everything was very limited,'' he said. ``It definitely was not a money issue going in. I was looking for certain factors in going to a team, and when it came to a team actually coming to us, we didn't see what we really were looking for.''

Agent Jim Sims, who accompanied Johnson on Thursday, said Cincinnati was prepared to offer $1 million after running back Ki-Jana Carter was hurt. But Johnson could afford to be choosy: Sims said Johnson collected ``close to a million dollars'' in 1995 from the Jets in a deferred signing bonus.

``That's the funny thing about all the negative stuff that's said to me,'' Johnson said. ``There are so many people in high places who want me around. The stuff that's being written or said can't be as accurate as a lot of you think it is.''

While he was away, Johnson said, he worked out at his Santa Cruz home, ``slept a lot and went to too many movies'' and saw enough of football to know he wanted to return. When the 49ers worked out Johnson earlier this month, they saw enough to know they wanted him back, too.

``The team feels good about this,'' offensive coordinator Marc Trestman said. ``There's a perception that we need help in that area (running game), and we feel that way, too.

``We need to have somebody who, when we line up, there is a legitimate threat that we can attack by running the ball. If we have Johnny Johnson in the right frame of mind and in shape, we might have that. From all that I hear, that is what we bought.''

As of late Thursday, Johnson still hadn't officially signed a contract. When that happens, Friday or Monday, the club will be compelled to make another move _ either releasing a player or restructuring a contract.

The 49ers are approximately $400,000 under the cap, and Johnson's addition would put them $186,000 over.

______________________________________

A new beginning

Last season the 49ers attempted to sign running back Johnny Johnson, who had been cut by the Jets. But Johnson refused to work out and ended up playing nowhere in 1995. Coach George Seifert was stunned by Johnson's attitude and seemed to want no part of the player's attitude.

Well, that just shows what desperate teams will do in desperate situations. The 49ers signed Johnson this week, though they have risked only $500,000. That's the signing bonus he got, along with $500,000 in salary this season and $2 million in 1997.

If Johnson is a bust and isn't around next year, he will have cost the team only $1 million. As for the rebuffs last season, Seifert said, "During the season I'm more emotional, and I might say things more emphatically. At that time (last season) Johnny and I visited, and he wasn't interested in playing for whatever reasons and those are personal to him. Since that time, he's been on a vendetta to get himself prepared to play. ...

"He had a tremendous workout at the facility, and all the coaches raved about him. I visited with him the other day, and his physical condition is as good as I've ever seen it. He comes highly recommended as to how he performs on game day -- from (former Jets head coach and now 49ers defensive coordinator) Pete Carroll and (former Jet) Ronnie Lott."

Said Carroll: "I can see where he might have run into some problems with some personalities that didn't really want to get to know him and understand him a little bit. I found him to be a really good guy, easy to talk to, a guy that worked tremendously in games, was a real competitor, fought every inch of the way and (teammates) really thought of him as a leader.

"In years past, probably a good deal of his reputation came out of what he did in the offseason. He always kind of disappeared. He has changed his offseason ways. He's worked out like crazy, really pumped up strong, in great physical condition. I never saw him like that, ever. We might really see something special this year."

________________________________

NFL Notes: 49ers sign Johnson to bolster ground game

Associated Press

March 28, 1996

Johnny Johnson, a onetime Pro Bowl running back who didn't play last season after being cut in a salary cap move, was signed Thursday by the San Francisco 49ers in hopes he can revive the team's running game.

"We're excited about having him as a 49er. He's played some great football over the years for other clubs and in this area," coach George Seifert said of the former San Jose State star.

"He's got himself in the type of condition and mental frame of mind that I think he's really going to contribute to our club."

Johnson, 27, signed a two-year, $3 million contract that included a $500,000 signing bonus. He last played in 1994, when he rushed for a career-high 931 yards and five touchdowns in his second year with the New York Jets, who released him before last season.

Johnson spent his first three years in the league with the Arizona Cardinals, rushing for 926 yards in 1990 and going to the Pro Bowl. He was traded to the Jets in 1993.

The 49ers, whose running game was weakened by the 1995 free agency loss of Ricky Watters and a mid-year knee injury that sidelined fullback William Floyd, tried to sign Johnson last season but the sides never reached agreement.

At the time, management made clear its disappointment in Johnson but the club's overriding need for a power runner and the lobbying of defensive coordinator Pete Carroll, Johnson's former coach in New York, helped convince the 49ers to go after Johnson again.

The 49ers' failure to land Rodney Hampton, who remained in New York after the Giants' matched San Francisco's offer sheet, also was a factor.

"I was hoping the talks could reopen as they did and I was happy there was still an interest," Johnson said.

Johnson will likely compete with Derek Loville, last year's halfback, for the starting job. Loville's 3.3 yard rushing average was the lowest among 35 backs with at least 110 carries last season.

"I'm going to go in and work hard with all the other guys," Johnson said. "I like the things that they do and the way they use their backs. I don't think there's an offense that could be better suited for my style and that's very exciting. I feel good doing all three things, the blocking, rushing and receiving. It's going to be fun."

Johnson, whose attitude and commitment has been questioned at times, said he has a new appreciation for the game.

"It was hard watching games. It was a long year," said Johnson, who said he had chances to play last season but never found the right situation.

He said he has been working out and taking a more serious approach to football.

"I'm getting older and you kind of look at things a little different, like your health, how to prepare," he said. "A lot of times when you're younger it kind of goes in one ear and out the other."

________________________

Johnson's injury officially a worry

Mark Soltau, OF THE EXAMINER STAFF

Saturday, July 20, 1996

ROCKLIN, Placer County - It's official: Johnny Johnson's back is a major concern.

When the free-agent running back missed Thursday's afternoon practice because of tightness in his lower back, head coach George Seifert took it in stride. That's because Johnson, a former San Jose State star, looked good in the 90-minute, noncontact morning workout and has no history of back problems.

Things changed Friday. Johnson's sore back, diagnosed as an inflamed facet joint, was still tight and caused him to skip the morning practice. Shortly after, he returned to the Bay Area to have it examined by specialist Dr. Bob Millard in Menlo Park.

"It's something we don't have a handle on yet," Seifert said. "So they're going to do another evaluation and see if we can rectify the problem. I believe we can."

Johnson, projected to the starting halfback, sat out last season after being waived by the New York Jets because of his high salary and an attitude problem. In 1994, he led New York in rushing with 931 yards.

The 49ers tried to sign him last year after William Floyd sustained a season-ending knee injury Oct. 29 against New Orleans, but couldn't come to terms. They did after the season, Johnson signing a two-year deal for $3 million.

He looked good during early minicamp workouts, impressing Seifert with his attitude and condition. Seifert was hopeful Johnson could return to his form of 1990, when the rookie free agent ran for 926 yards for Phoenix and made the Pro Bowl. However, last month, Johnson missed most of another minicamp with back troubles.

"Injuries are something players go through," Johnson said. "It's an injury I'm going to have to work with and make better."

For now, Seifert has no alternative but patience. "It's something that we didn't expect and I'm sure Johnny didn't expect," he said. "It's unfortunate. It happens in this business. This is a problem. It's a glitch. It's something we're gonna deal with."

 
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:confused:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
It's not going to happen a lot. But you can snap the ball inside the one and get tackled inside the one. And since the ball isn't 18 inches long, you could technically have a 99 yard play.
 
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:confused:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
It's not going to happen a lot. But you can snap the ball inside the one and get tackled inside the one. And since the ball isn't 18 inches long, you could technically have a 99 yard play.
Nope, that would be 98 yards. They don't go by actual ball placement. (I'm pretty sure, anyway)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:boxing:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
It's not going to happen a lot. But you can snap the ball inside the one and get tackled inside the one. And since the ball isn't 18 inches long, you could technically have a 99 yard play.
In reality, yes, but the official scorer will count that as a play that starts as "1st and 10 at the 1" and "tackled at the 1". You can't have "1st and 10 from the 0" or "tackled at the 0" in the official scorebook. They go by the next yardmark.
 
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:goodposting:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
It's not going to happen a lot. But you can snap the ball inside the one and get tackled inside the one. And since the ball isn't 18 inches long, you could technically have a 99 yard play.
In reality, yes, but the official scorer will count that as a play that starts as "1st and 10 at the 1" and "tackled at the 1". You can't have "1st and 10 from the 0" or "tackled at the 0" in the official scorebook. They go by the next yardmark.
:shock:
 
JJ symbolized the old loser Jets - 99 yd run and the team couldn't score a TD!
It is impossible for any run to travel 99 yards and not result in a TD.
:goodposting:
The field is 100 yards long, but you can never start a drive on the 0 yard line. It is 99 yards from the 1 yard line to the opposite end zone, so if a play from scrimmage results in a 99 yard gain, it will result in a TD. INT returns, fumble returns, and kick returns can all exceed 99 yards because they can begin in an end zone, but if an offensive play EVER gets 99 yards, it results in a TD. No exceptions.By the same token, it's impossible for a punt to net 99 yards- 98 is the best it could do, because you can't punt from the 0 yard line.
It's not going to happen a lot. But you can snap the ball inside the one and get tackled inside the one. And since the ball isn't 18 inches long, you could technically have a 99 yard play.
Nope, that would be 98 yards. They don't go by actual ball placement. (I'm pretty sure, anyway)
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
 
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
Mostly true. It is possible for a player to get credit for more than a 99-yard play on offense on a lateral as it the play would be scored from the point the player caught the lateral. Same thing for a fumble recovery. So it could happen that a player could get credit on offense for a 109-yard play.
 
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
Mostly true. It is possible for a player to get credit for more than a 99-yard play on offense on a lateral as it the play would be scored from the point the player caught the lateral. Same thing for a fumble recovery. So it could happen that a player could get credit on offense for a 109-yard play.
Well, now we're simply arguing semantics, but that would technically still just be a 99-yard play... 109 of those 99 yards credited to Player A, and -10 of those 109 yards credited to Player B. The length of the play is the distance between the starting LoS and the ending LoS. A fumble recovery would be a 109-yard "play", but that's not a play from scrimmage, it's a return (which as I said can already be up to 109 yards). Whenever a turnover occurs all distinction between "offense" and "defense" is discarded. I believe (but am not certain) that this also applies to offensive fumble recoveries- which should mean that if the QB fumbles and his teammate recovers, the defense could feel free to paste the QB (as long as he was near the action, thanks to the Chad Clifton rule), since he was technically considered a potential blocker instead of a QB. The entire upshoot of which is that offensive fumble recoveries are not offensive plays.Not that any of this really means a blessed thing. As I said, it's entirely semantics.
 
What if you are on your own 1-yard line, and you get a half the distance to the goal penalty?

Will they mark it at the half yard line?

If you ran for 99 yards, and they mark it at the 99 1/2 mark, just shy of the goal line, would the stats say 98 yards rushing?

 
What if you are on your own 1-yard line, and you get a half the distance to the goal penalty?Will they mark it at the half yard line?If you ran for 99 yards, and they mark it at the 99 1/2 mark, just shy of the goal line, would the stats say 98 yards rushing?
If you get 99 yards you have to get a TD. If you went from your own half inch line to the opponent's half inch line it would only be a 98 yard play.
 
David,

Thanks for providing the information on Johnny J. According to the "record books" it looks as though he just walked away, but obviously there was an interesting story throughout. The crazy part is that his only competition was Derek Loville (winner of Chase's trivia yesterday BTW). His career could have been a lot different if he was able to beat him out and play in a premier role for a good team. Instead, he never stepped on the field again :mellow:

 
I think we forget too easily that pro football is a brutal sport and that a RB is essentially in a violent car wreck just about evert time that he's tackled. While we admire the competitive spirit of guys like CuMar who can't just walk away from the game, the fact is that it's hard not to understand a guy who is fighting injury to just say, "Screw this" and walk away.

 
SSOG said:
David Yudkin said:
SSOG said:
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
Mostly true. It is possible for a player to get credit for more than a 99-yard play on offense on a lateral as it the play would be scored from the point the player caught the lateral. Same thing for a fumble recovery. So it could happen that a player could get credit on offense for a 109-yard play.
Well, now we're simply arguing semantics,
yeah because you weren't doing that before :confused:
 
SSOG said:
David Yudkin said:
SSOG said:
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
Mostly true. It is possible for a player to get credit for more than a 99-yard play on offense on a lateral as it the play would be scored from the point the player caught the lateral. Same thing for a fumble recovery. So it could happen that a player could get credit on offense for a 109-yard play.
Well, now we're simply arguing semantics,
yeah because you weren't doing that before :bs:
Do I detect a note of anti-semantism, here? :confused:
 
SSOG said:
David Yudkin said:
SSOG said:
Yup, that's why "4th and inches" is always listed as "4th and 1", and why there's never a play that covers __ and a half yards.The longest offensive play possible in the NFL is 99 yards, and any offensive play (or "play from scrimmage") of 99 yards will result in a touchdown. The longest play of any type possible is a 109 yard return, and any return of 109 yards will always result in a TD.
Mostly true. It is possible for a player to get credit for more than a 99-yard play on offense on a lateral as it the play would be scored from the point the player caught the lateral. Same thing for a fumble recovery. So it could happen that a player could get credit on offense for a 109-yard play.
Well, now we're simply arguing semantics,
yeah because you weren't doing that before :D
Do I detect a note of anti-semantism, here? :cry:
Every one knows that you can "chew" your way 99 yards down the field, guy. :ph34r:
 
Johnny Johnson ... still a classic name (and laugh session) in our 16 year old fantasy league.

'96 sounds about right, Johnson was just signed by the 49ers. With his first round pick, one of our owners states "and with my Super Sleeper pick, rb Johnny Johnson". We all looked at him and started busting out laughing. He was dead serious.

Every draft since, someone always yells out "with my Super Sleeper pick ..." and we all start cracking up. Good stuff to hear this name one more time.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top