Ocho Cinco In B&G

Beat me to the post, but yeah I heard that on Mike & Mike this morning also.

All they would go as far as saying is that "The Redskins have made "overtures" to the Bengals with regard to Chad Johnson". Much like the "overtures" they made with regard to Lance Briggs last spring.

Although I can see Washington re-negotiating current contracts with players to get under the cap and make room, I just cannot see the Bengals going through with any trade of Johnson, to anyone.

So don't rush right out and buy a burgundy and gold #85 jersey just yet.

Ocho-Cinco is under contract through 2011 in Cincinatti. By trading Johnson NOW, the Bengals organization will have to accept MILLIONS of dollars in "Dead Money". That is a lot of money that counts against the Bengals salary cap. And it just does not make good business sense to trade him this year.


Sandtrap - you nailed it - the Bengals are not going to trade Johnson and ruin their cap just because CJ is upset. It would cost the Bengals $8.8 million in cap hits to trade him right now - plus if they did trade him they would have to get a replacement which will cost even more money - it is just not practical for the Bengals to do this. Just because a player is unhappy does not mean a GM or owner is going to relent to his trade demand immediately. People need to start looking at salary cap ramifications before they start specualting that a player will be traded.

No way we get CJ without giving up our 1st round pic and possible a lower round pick as well. He is talented, but he will demand a large contract. He's 6'1, but we could really use someone a bit taller. He's a Diva and we have no reason to beleive he wouldn't make problems here. He's also 30 years old and may be in his prime now, but he probably only has 3-4 "good" years left in him.

why not keep our draft picks and just use those picks on a good, young, tall, cheap receiver?

for salary cap reasons, every chad johnson-type player we hire means we WON"T have talent at 3-4 other positions. i'd rather pay for 3-4 good players than one "star." and so would 31 other teams in the NFL. I guess snyder hasnt learned anything.


Stop it talk show host - you are making too much sense!

^Next paragraph in that Post article:

I know this is a CJ thread but please let's not get into the Briggs mess again. We have some pretty solid LBs last time i checked...fletcher, washington, mcintosh (who's supposed to be ready), blades.

Sandtrap - you nailed it - the Bengals are not going to trade Johnson and ruin their cap just because CJ is upset. It would cost the Bengals $8.8 million in cap hits to trade him right now - plus if they did trade him they would have to get a replacement which will cost even more money - it is just not practical for the Bengals to do this. Just because a player is unhappy does not mean a GM or owner is going to relent to his trade demand immediately. People need to start looking at salary cap ramifications before they start specualting that a player will be traded.
Why not Santana Moss and a 2nd round pick?

You don't need to pay for a placement... the ammo is certainly there, I just simply don't understand the cap logistics behind a move like this. Don't know if it's plausible or not. Anyone that knows the salary cap well, please feel free to chime in... I'm curious to the possibility of something blockbuster like this.

Why not Santana Moss and a 2nd round pick?

You don't need to pay for a placement... the ammo is certainly there, I just simply don't understand the cap logistics behind a move like this. Don't know if it's plausible or not. Anyone that knows the salary cap well, please feel free to chime in... I'm curious to the possibility of something blockbuster like this.

Lemme see if I can help....

The "Dead Money" I mentioned is the remaining portion of his pro-rated signing bonus.

If Johnson stays under contrat with the Bengals, he would get his signing bounus in (lack for better words) yearly installments. He gets a portion of that signing bonus each year.

Now if a player is traded BEFORE his contract expires, then the remaining amount of the signing bonus gets piled into one lump-sum and counts AGAINST the teams salary cap.

So if Johnson is traded, then you have FOUR YEARS of the remaining signing bonus that is (remaining signing bonus installment) X 4 yrs = 8.8 mill that instantly counts against the teams cap.

So as Bill B mentioned, by trading Johnson, the Bengals would incur and instantaneous 8.8 hit against thier cap with no player to show for it.

Hence the term "Dead Money"

Sure any team can propose a trade that would acquire Johnson, but are the Bengals going to allow it and voluntarily place themselves 8.8 million in the hole on the cap?

Now if Johnson was entering the FINAL year of his contract, that dead money hit is almost nil and a trade would be feasible for Cincy.

But with 4 years remaining on his current contract, and 8 Mill in dead money, I just do nor forsee the Bengals entertaining trade offers.

Is it possible for a player to "absorb" some of that cap hit himself by restructuring his contract?

If Chad was trying to get some gigantic contract with the Redskins... it may be worth it to restructure... Once again, I'm only ignorantly speculating. Where's Canuck when you need him.

This is the dumbest idea I've ever heard, which means that Snyder is almost certainly serious about it. Of course our reward for taking this idiot off of Mike Brown's hands is that he'll vote to opt out of the CBA and leave us in cap hell. It's all happening again God Dammit.

Lemme see if I can help....

The "Dead Money" I mentioned is the remaining portion of his pro-rated signing bonus.

If Johnson stays under contrat with the Bengals, he would get his signing bounus in (lack for better words) yearly installments. He gets a portion of that signing bonus each year.

Now if a player is traded BEFORE his contract expires, then the remaining amount of the signing bonus gets piled into one lump-sum and counts AGAINST the teams salary cap.

So if Johnson is traded, then you have FOUR YEARS of the remaining signing bonus that is (remaining signing bonus installment) X 4 yrs = 8.8 mill that instantly counts against the teams cap.

So as Bill B mentioned, by trading Johnson, the Bengals would incur and instantaneous 8.8 hit against thier cap with no player to show for it.

Hence the term "Dead Money"

Sure any team can propose a trade that would acquire Johnson, but are the Bengals going to allow it and voluntarily place themselves 8.8 million in the hole on the cap?

Now if Johnson was entering the FINAL year of his contract, that dead money hit is almost nil and a trade would be feasible for Cincy.

But with 4 years remaining on his current contract, and 8 Mill in dead money, I just do nor forsee the Bengals entertaining trade offers.


Thanks for the clarification Sandtrap. I think that trades are a lot harder than people think and just because an agent like Drew Rosenhaus is working vigourously for his client does not mean it will happen - the salary cap has really made it difficult to trade players who still have a lot of bonus money to burn off.

I go back to the Portis for Champ Bailey trade as a reason that makes people (including writers) think you can just trade for players easily. That deal was a big headline because it was players in their prime and rarely does a team trade a player who performs well in his prime - but if you really look at that deal and the numbers you can see why it was much more doable compared to a Chad Johnson trade. Portis had a very low rookie contract that did not have a big cap implication and Champ was entering the final years of his contract and there was not as big a cap hit to occur by trading him. Portis wanted big money and the Skins were willing to give it to him. Denver wanted an elite CB and Washignton did not want to give in to Champ's massive contract demands so everything aligned and worked out.

Personally, I look at CJ's age and contract demands and I would not go in that direction. Why not let the scouting department work its magic - they seem to have done a pretty good job on picks/undrafted FA's from looking at the Redskins draft history - Cooley, Landry, Sean Taylor, Samuels, McIntosh, Heyer, Lorenzo Alexander, Anthony Montgomery.

First round WRs are usually 50/50 gambles, but, then again, free agent wideouts aren't exactly sure-things. Brandon Lloyd anyone? Moreover, the upside and risk on lower 1st round draftees is far and away better than that of FA wideouts.

are you crazy comparing b loyd to CJ thats like comparing Tom Brady to Brad Johnson

Is it possible for a player to "absorb" some of that cap hit himself by restructuring his contract?

If Chad was trying to get some gigantic contract with the Redskins... it may be worth it to restructure... Once again, I'm only ignorantly speculating. Where's Canuck when you need him.


Rob - I think it depends on the contract that was signed - with Adam Archuleta and the way his contract was made with the Skins his bonus money was staggered - he got $5 million as a signing bonus and than his next $5 million bonus was a roster bonus if he was on the Redskins the following year. I think when we traded him to Chicago the Skins were able to not absorb the 2nd roster bonus because Archuleta agreed to decline the second bonus because the Bear's were willing to give him that bonus on his new contract with their team. This was a great move by our Front office in not only were we able to pry away a 6th round pick for a player that was not going to contribute to the team anymore, but we were able to lower the cap hit in the process compared to if we just cut Adam Archuleta outright.

With Chad Johnson his massive bonus has already been paid to him so the Bengals would be stuck with the dead money no matter what the Skins agreed to.