Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Wide Receivers are not running backs. Elite players do not fall off the face of the planet at 30 so I think this oft repeated argument is bogus. Let's examine.

WR production after 30 -

Jerry Rice:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 12.5
1,000 yard seasons - 8 (including best season - 1,848 yards, 15 tds in 1995 at the age of 32/33)
Jerry Rice (http://www.nfl.com/players/jerryrice/profile?id=RIC128880)

Chris Carter:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 7
1,000 yard seasons - 6 (including 1,274 yards, 9 tds in 2000 at age 34/35)
Cris Carter (http://www.nfl.com/players/criscarter/profile?id=CAR632736)

Art Monk:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 8
1,000 yard seasons - 2 of the 5 he had in his career (including 1,049 yards, 8 tds in 1991 at age 33/34)
Art Monk (http://www.nfl.com/players/artmonk/profile?id=MON230710)

Tim Brown:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 9
1,000 yard seasons - 6 (including 1,344 yards, 6 tds in 1999 at age 33 - last 1,000 yard season came in 2001 at age 35)

Marvin Harrison:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 6 and counting
1,000 yard seasons - 5 and counting (including 1,386 yards, 12 tds in 2006 at age 34)

Terrell Owens:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 4 and counting
1,000 yard season - 3 and counting (would have been 4 if not for getting Keyshawned; included 1,355 yards, 15 tds in 2007 at age 33/34)

Randy Moss:
Seasons played after turning 30 - 1
1,000 yard seasons - 1 (including 1,493 yards, 23 tds in 2007 at age 30)

So let's not bring up the age argument when talking about Chad Johnson. It is a phantom argument with no basis in fact. If we use historical precedent as a guide it is likely more accurate to say Johnson has 5-8 good/great years left and that he is actually in the midst of his 'prime'.

Lol, All people arguing production problems over 30 have been PWNED!!! Personally I was still trying to sort out my feelings on this one but that settles it.

With that said lets look at the facts. An elite Reciever might get 8 catches a game on average. On top of that he's usually getting hit by corners and safetys (though we all know how hard some safteys can hit) but still it's not like carrying the ball 20-30 times a game against D-Lineman and Linebackers, that in general hit harder, and on more then one occasion gang tackle.

Now a drop off in speed might be a concern but as other recievers have proven time and time again, as long as you can catch and understand route running then you can be an elite reciever.

My concern with Chad Johnson isn't the production. It's a possible shift away from the running game that will stunt the running games growth, sort of like New England lasat year. I mean seriously we'll have Cooley, Johnson, ARE, and Moss competing for catches. Not to mention the desire to use Portis and Sellers in the passing game. As long as we stick to the running game and add an O-lineman or two through the draft then I'm fine with the trade.

I think our roster is in decent shape for 2008, but we need depth for 2009 and beyond. We will likely lose Kendall, Jansen, Daniels, Griffin, Washington, Fletcher, and Springs within the next 2 years. That's about 1/3 of our starting lineup. Granted, players like Heyer, Alexander, and Blades could step it up, but it looks like we are going to need our picks. I'm sorry, but I'd have to blast the front office if they went ahead and traded 2 1st rounders for a 30 year old wideout. If they could land Roy Williams or Anquan Boldin for 2 1st rounders, I'd be on board.

Well if you look at the history of WR's in general I bet your wrong. You listed 7 WR's and there are how many that have played the game in that time span? I could go in and pick a ton in that span who's # that dropped off after 30. Its a crap shot and you think he is good for another 4 to 5 years (which I think he is) you just don't know when the body is going to turn on a player. I'm not saying your wrong I just don't think history is on your side in this situation.

I think the money argument offered above by some is better than the age argument. I'm sure you could find plenty of WRs who dropped off after 30, but I bet they wouldn't have the credentials of Chad Johnson. The guy has 6 straight 1,000 yard seasons, has averaged 1,340 yards and 8 tds over that span (and not all those years were with Carson Palmer either before someone makes that argument). So you can't just cherry pick some WR, you have to come with perennial Pro Bowl talent whose performance dropped off after 30. I bet you will be hard pressed to find your examples.

Let's take it from 1990 and WRs with multiple Pro Bowl appearances (# of 1,000 yard seasons after 30 in parenthesis):
Andre Reed (2, noted decline in 1999 age 35)
Jerry Rice (see previous)
Andre Rison (1)
Sterling Sharpe (n/a career ending injury at age 29)
Tim Brown (see previous)
Gary Clark (0)
Michael Irvin (2)
Irving Fryar (4)
Chris Carter (see previous)
Herman Moore (0 - perhaps the best counter example available)
Isaac Bruce (2 - perhaps another)
Torry Holt (2 for 2)
Jimmy Smith (7)
Randy Moss (see previous)
Eric Moulds (1)
Terrell Owens (see previous)
Hines Ward (0)
Steve Smith (n/a not yet 30)
Donald Driver (3 for 3)I've probably spent too much time on this, but I think the point stands. It would stretch credulity to put some of the above with Johnson and, frankly, there are only a handful of guys over the past 15-20 years we probably could accurately compare him to. Isaac Bruce might provide the best counter example, but Jimmy Smith adds another example on the over 30 side. I'd say the point stands that elite receivers do not decline over 30 and that most continue to produce at a high level until around age 35, and some longer.

Dirtbag offers good reasons above for why this is, particularly the lower level of physical pounding a wide receiver takes vis-a-vis a running back.

I think our roster is in decent shape for 2008, but we need depth for 2009 and beyond. We will likely lose Kendall, Jansen, Daniels, Griffin, Washington, Fletcher, and Springs within the next 2 years. That's about 1/3 of our starting lineup. Granted, players like Heyer, Alexander, and Blades could step it up, but it looks like we are going to need our picks. I'm sorry, but I'd have to blast the front office if they went ahead and traded 2 1st rounders for a 30 year old wideout. If they could land Roy Williams or Anquan Boldin for 2 1st rounders, I'd be on board.

Let's remember though that the report is a conditional 1st in 2009 (and from what I hear they are near impossible conditions). I just don't want us running around thinking we're offering two 1st round picks, because that's not exactly true.

Dirtbag will love this....EXTREMESKINS.com - Dan & Vinny Duped Us / Danny please sell the team / #85 Offer Vent Thread (Merged) (http://extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=244967) (morons)



Lol, another mid-thread post turned into a new thread. I love it, opinion threads are great, so long as they're not on the Warpath.

Let's remember though that the report is a conditional 1st in 2009 (and from what I hear they are near impossible conditions). I just don't want us running around thinking we're offering two 1st round picks, because that's not exactly true.

Ahh. I didn't bother to read the link and relied on others' summaries of the trade offer. A 1st and a 3rd (or Betts) would certainly be more palatable.

Bad offer!! 2 possible first round picks for a player who's about to turn 30 and is a malcontent. No thanks!! Please Cincy, stick to your guns.

He's a malcontent cause of the losing team he's on. I would be also. As far as the 2 first rounders that's incorrect. It's this yrs 1st and next yrs 3rd for all of you who are saying CJ is not worth it and would destroy the team. It only becomes a first if he meets certain incentives....which most of you should not have a problem with concidering most of you believe he is a malcontent and would not reach those goals.

Cincy will make us an offer before the draft imo. Its obvious we are interested now maybe they are fishing for a better offer. If they dont get anything better they come back to us.

I really dislike the possibility of Chad going to either the Iggles or the Cowgirls. Acquiring Chad just to keep them off those two squads let alone how much he would help our team makes sense to me.

The last time the Eagles had a star receiver, they went to the Superbowl, and Chad might be what the Cowboys need to get over the post season hurdle. Romo would have no excuses then. If Chad's going to be in the NFC East, it better be with us or the division will be insanely difficult to come out of.

He's a malcontent cause of the losing team he's on. I would be also. As far as the 2 first rounders that's incorrect. It's this yrs 1st and next yrs 3rd for all of you who are saying CJ is not worth it and would destroy the team. It only becomes a first if he meets certain incentives....which most of you should not have a problem with concidering most of you believe he is a malcontent and would not reach those goals.

I admit that I misread it at first. If he were to reach the goals and we had to give up two first rounders I would be torn on the decision. I am all for a 1st and a 3rd rounder though. So if we can get him and have him produce slightly under what is required for a 1st rounder. That would make my day.